From: tensmekl@infonode.ingr.com (Kermit Tensmeyer)
Subject: Re: Different Mormon God
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:13:33 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.145047.9753@nuchat.sccsi.com> kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>In article <30464@nntp_server.ems.cdc.com> pwhite@ems.cdc.com writes:
>>In article <1992Nov17.155449.11947@nuchat.sccsi.com>, kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
	<< Stuff deleted >>
>>of the way God has set up the universe, but it's not going to change the
>>facts. If it really is the way the Christians say it is, it is prudent
>>for the non-Christian to decide what he is going to do about it.
>
>This is true.  *IF*, as you say, things are the way the Christians say it
>is.  But *are* things that way?
>
>Maybe.  But I have no reason to believe so, and many reasons to believe
>not.
>
>>Lets take an example from gravity. I can say that gravity is very 
>>unfair to me if I step off a cliff or a bridge. However, it works
>>very well when I want to walk around my house or drive my car.
>>It's not too smart for me to say, "Well, since the law of gravity
>>is unfair in certain circumstances, I'm not going to believe in it."
>
>I don't think you quite get the picture.  I am not questioning whether
>or not the *rules* are fair, I'm questioning whether or not YOUR GOD
>is fair, based on what the rules are.  See the difference?
>
>If your God is fair, just, and kind, then the rules will *also* be fair,
>just, and kind.  But they aren't.  Rather, they're unfair, unkind, and
>unjust.  Indeed, they're quite uncaring.  There seems to be no correlation
>between how a person gets treated by the laws of the universe (e.g.,
>gravity) and how good, kind, and loving that person is.


  Not necessarly, but if the rules are fair, then the same rules or laws
  are applied to everybody equaly, right?

  If God were to be "kind" (what ever _that_ means), he might tell you
  about the rules.

  I think a natural Law that God lives by, is that the consequeces are
  tied to the causes. Each cause is followed by a result. Each individual
  may _choose_ an action but they are bound by the result.

  It may also be (and represents _my_ idea of God) that a perpeective
  of this life alone is insufficent to sent the entire picture.

  I believe that God is sufficently powerful to right any wrongs, maybe
  not immediatly but eventually.
>
>>God is a very wonderful person. I'm glad that we can know him because
>>of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. 
>
>Your God is presumably a free agent, able to choose any configuration of
>the universe it pleases.  Yet your God has chosen one in which the very
>creations it professes to love are not only given the ability to suffer,
>but are in essence *required* to suffer (at least to some degree).  Since
>your God could (if it is as powerful as most Christians believe) have
>chosen AND IMPLEMENTED a universe in which his creations do not suffer, I
>have no reason to believe that your God "loves" any of us humans.


 Supposed the growth and long-term benifits of a life which includes suffering
 out weights the type of bland life in which no suffering or joy were
 allowed. It would not be the a type of existence, worth living.

 Mormons on the other hand, maintain that this type of existence, was
 proposed as one alternative by God, and that we choose this type
 of existence, weighing in the costs and the potiential benefits.

>
>>Peter White
>
>Kevin Brown					kevin@nuchat.sccsi.com
-- 
         Kermit Tensmeyer                         | Intergraph Corporation
   klt@kt8127.b23a.ingr.com                       | Deep in Dixie
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:21646 alt.atheism:21741