Posted by cav on July 12, 2005 at 05:03:03:
In Reply to: However- posted by Dave on July 11, 2005 at 23:16:40:
No need to worry about being out of the closet. Everyone here is open to discussions like this...in fact if we all agreed with each other there really wouldn't be any point in posting at all. But just a personal request, it took me awhile to figure out what exactly you were responding to since you posted under Timo but in response to the greater topic, so since I'm just disoriented like that, could you include a quote or something to reference what you are responding to?
In any case, I read it a few times and realize what you mean. I'd have to say that I don't think there is any such proof. And thus I don't think any human can take that burden on themselves. This is the great mystery of faith. We can research all the facts, we can study all the cases and examples, but in the end we will always reach some point where we must decide if we beleive it or not. Sadly, many people who profess Christian faith don't even understand this.
I have studied apologetics for a long time and I can run a philosophical proof that God exists. I can run an argument that forces one to abandon the claim that Jesus was simply a good man. But I can't pose any argument that God is good. But I know it to be true. As for the reason why, I would only pose this: Any two people in a room will see things from different perspectives, and if there is some barrier to one person's site, say a wall or veil, that person won't be able to see what is seen by the other unless they move to a different position. My experience teaches me beyond doubt that God is good. But even this is based in faith.
This is the mystic connundrum. They claim to understand something that cannot be communicated in words...it often looks irrational.
As for tsunami victims...I can't make any blanket statements other than as an ecologist, I know nothing happens by random chance. This is simply the term for a set of variables that are too complex to discern. But my orignial point does hold true here. If we aren't using preservation of life as an indication of fairness or justness, then who died in the tsunami makes no difference in determining if God is good. The tsunami was a natural phenomena that was inevitable in the physics of the earth...lack of preparation on the part of generations of people in that region (no tsunami warning system, no advisories to the public that tsunamis could occur and what to watch for, all of which does exist in other regions and now does in the Indian ocean) does not indicate whether God was good or bad or punishing anyone. He purposed the tsunami to happen, and he knew every life that was taken or spared by it...I beleive that when all is laid out everything will make sense. No randomness, no chance, only purposeful action in nearly infinite levels of complexity.
: The burden of "proof," if you want to call it that, is on those who claim God is an infinite yet personal being who cares tenderly about our finite needs here on this tiny planet (including the "need" to live).
: Let's face it: when an earthquake off the coast of Indonesia sent a tsumani racing across the Indian Ocean last year, wiping out hundreds of thousands of Asian and African peasants (along with a few Westerners), the determining factor as to who survived and who didn't appears to have been random chance; those who happened to be away from the beach when it hit survived, while many of those who were in the wrong place at the right time did not.
: I use the word "appears," by the way, because we really don't know the answer(s) to the questions posed by theodicy. But given that all we have to go on, really, is what our senses tell us, I still maintain that the burden of persuasion (in case you don't like the word "proof") lay with those who claim that, despite the gulf of darkness which separates us from knowledge of the Divine, we can still say for certain that God is personal, and that He cares for us.
: Wow. Guess I'm out of the closet now.
: Dave