Who is responsible?

[Peds nurse]

Imagine that a car manufacturing company, made the standard cars that we all drive today. It is equipped with a manual that tells the driver how to use the car efficiently. Although the car is equipped to engage in speeds of 120 miles per hour, the manual cautions the driver of the hazards of driving at such speeds.

Question for debate. Should the manufacturing company be held liable for people getting into accidents and sometimes causing death by driving at speeds not recommended?

I think we can translate this to the spiritual realm. Why should God be held accountable for people who make faulty decisions with their life, sometimes hurting or killing others?

[William]

[Replying to post 45 by bluethread]

Stop byfurcating my posts so that you can mischaracterized them and then...

I will stop you right there dude. If you are going to complain that I have done these things, at least offer the courtesy of letting the reader know exactly where I am supposed to have actually done these things you blame me of doing.

What is the difference between one who blames a deity and one who does not, aparts from the obvious fact that one blames a deity and the other does not?

I corrected you on that already. I myself was not suggesting anything of the sort. What I was saying is that essentially there is no difference, and explained why that was the case.

Those who do not blame the particular deity they believe in, are most often pointing the finger at humans...as well as other beings they call 'demons'.

To someone like me who understands that we are all aspects of GOD consciousness, pointing the finger at each other is the same as pointing the finger at GOD.

I further explained that the idea was to get over the need to blame anyone and get on with accepting personal responsibility.

You seemed to have missed that bit in your hurry to falsely chastise me, but I am confident the astute reader would have picked up on it.

[bluethread]

God did not give us thought to rebel. His gave us thought so that we would choose Him, that we would love and trust Him and walk with Him. It is how it all began in the garden...walking with God. Love can not be demanded. It has to be chosen.

He also, permitted us to choose to have the ability to imagine alternative realities(ra', translated as "evil" in the KJV), so that we can innovate and avoid being micromanaged.

[bluethread]

Sorry, repeated post.

[bluethread]

Sorry, repeated post.

[shnarkle]

Imagine that a car manufacturing company, made the standard cars that we all drive today. It is equipped with a manual that tells the driver how to use the car efficiently. Although the car is equipped to engage in speeds of 120 miles per hour, the manual cautions the driver of the hazards of driving at such speeds.

Question for debate. Should the manufacturing company be held liable for people getting into accidents and sometimes causing death by driving at speeds not recommended?

I think we can translate this to the spiritual realm. Why should God be held accountable for people who make faulty decisions with their life, sometimes hurting or killing others?

Let's say then that no law enforcement occurs for dangerous speeding, even in school zones. Kids sometimes get run over. The government doesn't condone speeding, but for whatever reason it does nothing to stop it even though it easily could. The citizens complain saying that it's the government's fault in addition to the speeder's. They say the government should intervene because it has the power to stop the bad acts and prevent suffering.

What do you make of this?

Could the government stop the speeding from occurring? It seems that they could only discipline those that do speed.

They can tear up the roads and freeways, they can outlaw cars that go more than 5 mph. They can require that all engines be governed to not exceed 5 mph.

So if we move this to the human condition than to stop wrong doing all people should have the intelligence of an ant? That is, not smart enough to do wrong...a lobotomy?

My post wasn't speaking to one's intelligence. Removing the ability to speed doesn't remove one's intelligence.

[William]

[Replying to post 49 by Peds nurse]

If you are saying that it is God is responsible for making us thinking people who can choose to follow His directions or be rebellious of them...okay.

"Okay" what? Okay as long as it follows beliefs that you yourself support?

Or okay that the individual uses their ability to think for themselves, and understand that GOD accepts responsibility for [his] part in the whole and allows for individuals to find the way out in their own time, because GOD is not bound to the restraint of time thus patience is no object.

Where are these alleged 'directions' thinking people 'can choose to follow' or not?

God did not give us thought to rebel. His gave us thought so that we would choose Him, that we would love and trust Him and walk with Him.

Is that The Truth?

IF it is, then no one has rebelled against GOD. Perhaps rebelling against false ideas of GOD is possible, but that is here nor there - and indeed - can be expected, because GOD gave us thought so that we would choose Her, that we would love and trust Her and walk with Her.

It is how it all began in the garden...walking with God. Love can not be demanded. It has to be chosen.

No one 'walked with GOD' in the garden. According to the story, the GOD was 'a voice in the garden' and only showed itself having form after the fact.

In relation to Love, if it cannot be demanded then all that is demanded cannot be Love.

One cannot have it both ways and remain without contradiction Peds.

Clearly the story itself illustrates a commandment which cannot have been from Love, because 'Love does not command' and knowledge of good and evil is not something autonomous entities can do without, and one does not make 'robots' who have no need for such knowledge.

Thus, if one WANTS autonomous entities for companionship - to 'walk with' as you said - then one has to have them up to speed on understanding actions reactions and consequence.

Thus one has to arrange things 'just so' in order that the ignorant have as much chance of entering into the knowledge with as much choice as they can, without being forced.

This was achieved, but the reader is left with the distinct impression that the GOD in question somehow expected far more from the pair than [he] actually got, and [he] was very annoyed by all accounts - perhaps because [he] wasn't expecting the outcome that happened, being that the pair where infused with [his] essence (breath) and were not behaving as 'a chip off the old block' which in turn reflected badly on that creator.

Do the pair represent some hidden aspect of their creator - so deeply hidden perhaps, that their creator was unaware of it's existence until it manifested through the pair?

Oh - every parents dilemma!

The theme threads itself throughout the stories re the Abrahamic ideas of GOD - a parental figurehead LEARNING what it is like to be a parent, and not always making the best choices. It is of course forgivable, unless one is of the opinion the Entity is blameless. THEN problems arise.

I will be the first to say that Christians often times make it difficult to see or do God's work in the world. We can be a rather judgmental, hard nosed and stiff necked people.

No one has to be a Sherlock Holmes to figure that one out.

However, I believe that it is His great love in me, that spurs me to love His creation dearly. That is a place to start.

Love is able to see where blame can be allocated and get over it - rise above the temptation - get on with the necessity of simply accepting not all is perfect or was meant to be perfect in that sense humans often think of perfection...like having a blameless GOD.

The real point of the Garden story is that the pair behaved badly and used the newly acquired knowledge in a despicable manner. They blamed circumstance and others. Eve blamed the serpent and Adam blamed the woman and the GOD.

The GOD knew differently.

The GOD knew The Truth. But the GOD did not respond to that knowledge by doing the right thing. The GOD blamed the serpent and the woman and the man, and even the innocent beast of the field. Indeed, one can understand the 'fall' if one also understands the creators initial reaction. If the GOD understood Love - as is your claim here - then the GOD would understand that [he] was attached to outcome, as though [he] knew how that outcome would play out and when it didn't, [he] 'threw [his] toys out of the cot' as the saying goes, and made everyone suffer, disproportionately at that.

Hardly a true response of any True Love, Peds, but definitely something human parenting is guilty of doing in relation to their children.
One, of course, expects far more better reactions from a supposed Parent-GOD.

Now, of course - it is just a story and The Truth is far different that that, but it does serve as a great metaphor for the way humans use their own children, and if we are ever to crawl out of the mud of our present type-zero position as a species and evolve thoughtfully into a type-one species, we are going to have to readjust accordingly, accept responsibility, don't hide the fact that if we have a creator, then the creator also shares in that responsibility, and basically...well... grow up.

The story of the garden is a reflection of human parenting, not a reflection of any actual creator GOD. Of course, you and anyone else are welcome to believe it is literally The Truth of how we all ended up here on this planet, and go with that, but it is metaphor nonetheless and beneath all the stories of our world the presence of First Source is so perfectly hidden from our world.

But the story isn't about First Source, it is about The Earth Entity, and She hasn't always been the best example of GOD or Parent, but that is understandable enough since She had to make it up as She went along. No hard feelings. Enough finger-pointing. Time for self responsibility.

Time to stop being victims of circumstance and time to rise to the occasion as Victors.

And really, isn't that the real message Jesus brought to the world, even that his message has since been distorted?

As usual, you, the reader decides.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 45 by bluethread]

Stop byfurcating my posts so that you can mischaracterized them and then...

I will stop you right there dude. If you are going to complain that I have done these things, at least offer the courtesy of letting the reader know exactly where I am supposed to have actually done these things you blame me of doing.

What is the difference between one who blames a deity and one who does not, apart from the obvious fact that one blames a deity and the other does not?

I corrected you on that already. I myself was not suggesting anything of the sort. What I was saying is that essentially there is no difference, and explained why that was the case.

Those who do not blame the particular deity they believe in, are most often pointing the finger at humans...as well as other beings they call 'demons'.

You did it again, right there. You seperated my comments so you can portray my question as a commentary on what you said. I was asking a direct question, like what is the difference between A and B, apart from the obvious fact that A is A and B is B. I am not asking you what you are suggesting. Now, here you say that essentially there is no difference. Then you note a difference. Is there a difference or isn't there? Do those who blame a deity point the finger at humans and/or 'demons' less often than those who do not blame a deity? If so, on what do you base this assertion.

To someone like me who understands that we are all aspects of GOD consciousness, pointing the finger at each other is the same as pointing the finger at GOD.

I further explained that the idea was to get over the need to blame anyone and get on with accepting personal responsibility.

You seemed to have missed that bit in your hurry to falsely chastise me, but I am confident the astute reader would have picked up on it.

Here is where you bloviate about your views, which are not really relevant at this point, since they do not address the question regarding the differences between those who blame a deity and those who do not. Whether they blame humans and/or 'demons', is not part of my question, unless that is a significant difference between those who blame deities and those who do not. Are you saying that is a significant difference? If so, on what do you base that assertion?

[jgh7]

Let's say then that no law enforcement occurs for dangerous speeding, even in school zones. Kids sometimes get run over. The government doesn't condone speeding, but for whatever reason it does nothing to stop it even though it easily could. The citizens complain saying that it's the government's fault in addition to the speeder's. They say the government should intervene because it has the power to stop the bad acts and prevent suffering.

What do you make of this?

Could the government stop the speeding from occurring? It seems that they could only discipline those that do speed.

I'm not a fan of analogies to begin with as they often serve more to complicate matters than their intended goal of simplifying them.

But the main idea here is that skeptics could object saying God is responsible in addition to individuals who commit heinous acts because God has the power to stop them and chooses not to. But then the counter to that is that God gave us free will.

I don't find the argument of free will to be a good one. As humans, we limit free will with our laws and take steps to actively prevent heinous acts from occuring. No one objects to us doing this, and in fact they object to us not doing this. So why is it different for God?

As a Christian, I don't have any objections to the way God chooses to run things. But I find apologetic arguments that attempt to justify His choices in regards to this topic to be lackluster.

[William]

[Replying to post 57 by bluethread]

You did it again, right there. You seperated my comments so you can portray my question as a commentary on what you said. I was asking a direct question, like what is the difference between A and B, apart from the obvious fact that A is A and B is B. I am not asking you what you are suggesting. Now, here you say that essentially there is no difference. Then you note a difference. Is there a difference or isn't there? Do those who blame a deity point the finger at humans and/or 'demons' less often than those who do not blame a deity? If so, on what do you base this assertion.

Your criticisms of my answers are unnecessary in their current format, with in mind my other posts in this thread go into more detail and your questions can be answered simply by you reading them.

In saying that, I feel I have answered adequately and the reader can decide for themselves if this is the case or not.

Here is where you bloviate about your views, which are not really relevant at this point, since they do not address the question regarding the differences between those who blame a deity and those who do not. Whether they blame humans and/or 'demons', is not part of my question, unless that is a significant difference between those who blame deities and those who do not. Are you saying that is a significant difference? If so, on what do you base that assertion?

You have indeed failed to appreciate the full context of my posts and your wanting to focus on this question is irrelevant to the larger context I am addressing.

If you have something to say about it, just spit it out. Is there something you wish to correct me on to do with those who don't blame GOD and those who do? If not, and you are seeking clarity, then as I suggested, read the context of my other posts in this thread. If so, then - say so.

[Peds nurse]

Let's say then that no law enforcement occurs for dangerous speeding, even in school zones. Kids sometimes get run over. The government doesn't condone speeding, but for whatever reason it does nothing to stop it even though it easily could. The citizens complain saying that it's the government's fault in addition to the speeder's. They say the government should intervene because it has the power to stop the bad acts and prevent suffering.

What do you make of this?

Could the government stop the speeding from occurring? It seems that they could only discipline those that do speed.

I'm not a fan of analogies to begin with as they often serve more to complicate matters than their intended goal of simplifying them

Actually, I quite agree...I am honestly not very good at analogies or debating, BUT my heart was in the right place to honestly try and make a point of not to blame God for the things people do that are horrific.

But the main idea here is that skeptics could object saying God is responsible in addition to individuals who commit heinous acts because God has the power to stop them and chooses not to. But then the counter to that is that God gave us free will.

true enough

I don't find the argument of free will to be a good one. As humans, we limit free will with our laws and take steps to actively prevent heinous acts from occuring. No one objects to us doing this, and in fact they object to us not doing this. So why is it different for God?

I attempted to make that point before, and I don't think it was received very well.

As a Christian, I don't have any objections to the way God chooses to run things. But I find apologetic arguments that attempt to justify His choices in regards to this topic to be lackluster.

I don't only not have a problem with the way God does things, I feel under qualified to even have a complaint.

Best wishes for a spectacular day/evening