daveh@tekcrl.UUCP (Dave Hatcher) (10/24/85)
>In article <388@pyuxn.UUCP> pez@pyuxn.UUCP (Paul Zimmerman) writes: >>In article <171@l5.uucp>, Laura Creighton writes: >> >>> It does not require omnipotence to design a world where there are no >>> earthquakes or no common cold. I figure, either God is not omnipotent, >>> or he/she/it is evil. >> >>That's not an exclusive or, Laura. Certainly He could be both (not omnipotent >>and evil). In fact, He is. >> >>Be well, >>-- >>Paul Zimmerman - AT&T Bell Laboratories >>pyuxn!pez >I guess I was not clear. I meant this an an exclusive or. >IF (God is omnipotent) THEN (God is evil) /* else there would be no earthquakes */ >ELSE (God could be other than evil) /* maybe God hates earthquakes as well*/ ELSE IF (God is love and "ALL" is in that love) /* We humans are trying to define earthquakes as evil*/ We humans want to see every thing that harms us as evil. But the growth of the earth is not evil. Im quite sure God is very happy with the way his creation is growing. The possibilities for the directions of growth are endless. How can letting that growth happen not be love. We humans are not the center of life. But we also are not separate from it. And infact, fooling ourselfs that we are separate from life is producing a poisoned earth. If we can start seeing that love, and start treating "ALL" with the respect of love, we as a human race will begin to improve our own kind. So LIVE and enjoy that LOVE that we are a part of, so others may LIVE to LOVE also. If we start seeing love in others, we will start treating them with love.
rlr@pyuxd.UUCP (Rich Rosen) (10/26/85)
> We humans want to see every thing that harms us as evil. But the growth > of the earth is not evil. Im quite sure God is very happy with the way > his creation is growing. The possibilities for the directions of growth > are endless. How can letting that growth happen not be love. [DAVE HATCHER] By the same token, how can doing the types of harm that Paul Zimmerman keeps referring to NOT be hate/evil? I wonder if Dave (and others like him) realize what they are doing. The first sentence above is quite true. "We humans want to see every thing that harms us as evil". We seek to put that label on all things that harm us, and we often impute purpose/intent/deliberateness where there is none. Dave is quite right. But isn't Dave doing the same thing? Couldn't his whole set of statements be turned around to say "We humans want to see things that benefit us as good." Imputing purposefulness, intent, deliberate willful action, to the force of "good", THE SAME WAY WE MIGHT DO FOR EVIL! Think about that next time you thank god for "good" or blame Satan for evil. Please? -- "Mrs. Peel, we're needed..." Rich Rosen ihnp4!pyuxd!rlr