Fine tuning specifics: Reasons for God (Introduction)

by Balance_Maintained , U.S.A., Wednesday, May 03, 2017, 00:20 (2762 days ago) @ dhw

TONY:(quoting) "No one can comprehend what goes on under the sun. Despite all their efforts to search it out, no one can discover its meaning. Even if the wise claim they know, they cannot really comprehend it."
DAVID: There were two or more writers of Genesis according to scholars.
TONY: There were undoubtedly many writers that contributed to the bible. However, they are considered divinely inspired writings (by those that believe in them), and as such are considered to have one author: God. Much like a single author using multiple publishers. It doesn't matter who does the printing, the author hasn't changed.

DHW: The quote is from Ecclesiastes, not Genesis, but in any case I very much doubt that it required more than one person to put together those three little sentences. I’m surprised you are focusing on the author(s) rather than on the content of the message, but since both of you have such fixed views about the truth, perhaps you would prefer to ignore that. (Yes, Tony, I am tweaking your beards! )

Well, we all three definitely fit into the category of the first two sentences. Fortunately the three of us at least openly admit that we do not comprehend.

Dhw: I have the utmost respect for people with religious beliefs, provided those beliefs are not harmful.
TONY: Harmful is a funny topic. Harmful to whom and under what circumstances? If the bible is to be believed, Armageddon would likely destroy millions of people, topple governments, and generally destroy society as we know it, much as the flood did in Noah's time. However, in the long term, if it would mean an end to the evils that plague mankind, would you still consider it harmful?

DHW: Your example does not illustrate the point I was making, which concerned religious belief, not your God’s actions or Armageddon. The short answer to your own question, though, is that the story of Noah’s flood has always appalled me, because I cannot believe for one moment that every single man, woman and above all child – apart from Noah and his family – deserved to be wiped off the face of the earth. As for the point that I was making, you really don’t need me to explain, but I will because you have questioned it. Any religious belief that leads a person to cause physical or mental damage to others is what I mean by “harmful”. For example, I am opposed to a belief that drives someone to plant a bomb or crash a truck or plane in the hope that God will reward him for killing infidels. I have no doubt that you will feel the same way.

Here in the U.S., and in much of the so-called civilized world, it is considered harmful to spank a child. Now, the bible says that sparing the rod spoils the child and that a father that does not discipline his son actually hates him. So, the question is, do you consider something like spanking to be 'harmful'? And before this gets derailed, I am not talking about beatings. Just good old fashioned spankings.

--
What is the purpose of living? How about, 'to reduce needless suffering. It seems to me to be a worthy purpose.