Did God Create Ebola?

[pogi]

You did not answer my question about Cluster Headaches. 

I'm still waiting for you to answer my questions on posts 94 and 96 first.

[MormonFreeThinker]

My birth was a natural event too, does that mean that I was not created by God?  

 

That misrepresents what I am saying.  I said that Ebola was created by natural processes without any divine intervention, it was nature alone. I already explained the reasons for that idea. 

The reason is that Ebola does not seem to have free will, Ebola only causes suffering, and nothing good can be said about Ebola. 

Another reason is that the spirit does tell us that it is wrong to kill lions, bears, tigers just for fun, but we do not feel the same way about Ebola. 

Humanity wants Ebola to go away. 

 

Can you now answer my question about Cluster Headaches please? 

 

 

 

What is so wrong with death anyway?  Why must death be evil? 

 

There is a difference between death and suffering. God does not directly cause our suffering. 

Edited October 21, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[pogi]

Death, pain and suffering has existed for millions of years before the Fall. 

 

Even if that is the case, you don't seem to be concerned with the death, pain and suffering of other creatures.  You seem to be only conserned with human death, pain and suffering.  You also seem to think that God's creations in no way can cause us to experience death, pain and suffering for humans.  Well, I have demonstrated otherwise.  

[pogi]

 God does not directly cause our suffering. 

 

God does not directly cause Ebola to enter it's host either, but he still created Ebola.  God does not cause people to be exposed to the suns rays, but he does make us susceptible to them.  He does not cause our cells to multiply out of control leading to severe pain in cases, but he does creae the source of the damage (sun) and the nociceptors and neurotransmitters in our nervous system to experience the pain.  He did not cause Adam to eat the fruit which was promised would bring death, but he still made the fruit. 

Edited October 21, 2014 by pogi

[Sevenbak]

That is not what I learned in seminary, God does not punish people.  God allows suffering, but he does not cause it. See the difference? D&C 5:19 is talking about the people that do not repent, but Ebola can affect faithful LDS.

What seminary did you go to?  I was always taught that God sends rain on the just and the unjust together, and that standing in holy places will be required of us when the judgments of God come upon all people, righteous and wicked alike.

 

Here's a couple more references that may help.

 

D&C 97:

23 The Lord's scourge shall pass over by night and by day, and the report thereof shall vex all people; yea, it shall not be stayed until the Lord come;

24 For the indignation of the Lord is kindled against their abominations and all their wicked works.

25 Nevertheless, Zion shall escape if she observe to do all things whatsoever I have commanded her. 

 

D&C 45:

31 And there shall be men standing in that generation, that shall not pass until they shall see an overflowing scourge; for a desolating sickness shall cover the land.

32 But my disciples shall stand in holy places, and shall not be moved; but among the wicked, men shall lift up their voices and curse God and die.

 

 

He even called it "The Lord's scourge"!   Yep, sure sounds like God is in charge of even those evil diseases. 

 

[MormonFreeThinker]

23 The Lord's scourge shall pass over by night and by day

 

I think you should read the new gospel topics essays. The scriptures are not always literal. 

https://www.lds.org/topics/race-and-the-priesthood?lang=eng

 

D&C 97 is speaking figuratively, not literally. God allows suffering, but does not cause suffering. God allows consequences, but does not punish. See the difference? 

 

So do you always take the scriptures literally? Do you believe in a literal "eternal lake of fire" and Hell? 

Edited October 21, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[LOSTONE]

Who is going to create the cure for Ebola I have to ask in more concerns than who created ebola.

[Sevenbak]

 

D&C 97 is speaking figuratively, not literally. God allows suffering, but does not cause suffering. God allows consequences, but does not punish. See the difference? 

 

 

You have got to be kidding me!!!

 

God does not punish?  God does not cause suffering?  Again, which seminary taught you these things?  Who are you to decide to downgrade the scriptures to be figurative when the Lord talks about his punishments?

 

There are sooooo many.  Should I take all of them figuratively?    How about Section 1 of the D&C, the preamble, if you will, of the Lord's word (and wrath) in these last days?  I suggest a careful reading.

 

 

Or how about Section 19?  Is this also figurative?  Do you really believe the Lord does not punish?  I could go on and on.

 

I'll only quote one here, because you should take the time to look up and read the references above, and many others.

 

D&C 84, 96-98  "I the almighty, have laid my hands upon the nations, to scourge them for their wickedness.   And plagues shall go forth, and they shall not be taken from the earth, until I have completed my work."

 

 

If you choose to not take the scriptures literally, it is at your own peril.  And if you choose the figurative route, I've love to know what you understand that figurative wrath of God to be, and what gives you or anyone else the right to diminish His words.  The prophets, ancient and modern have warned us.  We either choose to believe it or not.  I choose to believe.

[CV75]

Who is going to create the cure for Ebola I have to ask in more concerns than who created ebola.

There are many:

 

http://online.wsj.com/articles/ebola-vaccine-push-ramps-up-1413762856

http://www.bbc.com/news/health-29680393

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2014/10/21/357833298/ebola-vaccine-could-start-testing-in-africa-by-january

http://time.com/3528417/ebola-vaccine-tests-who/

[Robert F. Smith]

I do not believe God did not create HIV, Malaria, Ebola.  How does he disagree with me?  He wrote, "I prefer to think that HIV was not concocted in God’s laboratory. I do not like the idea of him crafting the Yersinia pestis that would wipe out at least a third of Europe. The malaria parasite and its mosquito vector were not his magnum opus" That is clear. 

For Greg Smith to either agree or disagree with you, he would have to at least be familiar with what you think, here or elsewhere, and then respond to it.  It is rather you who pretend to either agree or disagree with him.  You have the relationship backward.

 

Moreover, you haven't thought carefully about the vast array of microorganisms on this planet and what their place may be in the larger scheme of things.  Instead, you have made apriori value judgments, without at least bothering to make a reasonable case for your hard and fast views.  A number of people on this thread have called your attention to the implications of your views, but you have tended to ignore them.  These are things that Greg Smith does not do (whether we agree with him or not).

[MormonFreeThinker]

You have got to be kidding me!!!

 

God does not punish?  God does not cause suffering?  

 

Do you believe in a literal lake of fire and eternal hell? 

God does not directly punish, we punish ourselves. God rarely punishes people, one example is Korihor. I do believe the wicked are going to pay for their sins in the next life, but it is irrelevant to the topic, because Ebola affects the good and the bad. 

 

"Floods, earthquakes, violent storms, or other cataclysmic occurrences in nature frequently destroy property, cause injuries, or take lives. While God has at times calmed the storms, the forces of nature are, for the most part, allowed to function unhindered. Suffering of this kind may be permitted by God since he has the power to temper the elements, but he seldom causes the suffering as a purposeful act." 

https://www.lds.org/new-era/1975/04/what-is-the-purpose-of-suffering?lang=eng

 

"The car’s brakes fail; the electrical wire shorts and overheats; the altimeter jams—a crash occurs, a fire flares, a plane is down, and suffering or death results. Why? Did God cause it? Was it a punishment for past sins? I think not. Danger is simply inherent in this life." 

https://www.lds.org/new-era/1975/04/what-is-the-purpose-of-suffering?lang=eng

 

God does not directly cause Ebola to enter it's host either, but he still created Ebola.  

 

In the Theory of Evolution, God was not required for the creation of Ebola.

Edited October 22, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[ERayR]

In the Theory of Evolution, God was not required for the creation of Ebola.

 

In the theory of evolution God is not required at all.

[pogi]

In the Theory of Evolution, God was not required for the creation of Ebola.

 

ERayR captured my exact same thought that came to mind after reading this.  

 

I have no problem with the idea that God created all life through evolution.  I have real problems with your idea that evolution creates all life, but that God only takes credit for that process when it creates life that is beneficial to humans or amusing to them in the slightest way and then blames evolution for the rest.. 

 

I also find it strange that you strain at the idea that God created Ebola, but have no problem swallowing the idea that He "allows" for it when he has the ability to stop it even when the righteous are suffering.  You are looking at it all wrong.  It is not about placing blame.  We chose this life with all that it entails. 

[MormonFreeThinker]

In the theory of evolution God is not required at all.

 

True, but just because God is not required in the Theory of Evolution, it doesn't mean he did not intervene in the creation on animals. 

 

"The fourth advantage ties into the third: LDS doctrine ought not, it seems to me, lead us to expect that we can prove God’s existence from the material world. For moral agency to be effective in a telestial mortal experience, we must be genuinely free to believe in or disbelieve in God’s existence, his commandments, and host of other ideas. A physical world that one cannot plausibly explain save by divine action would create an intellectually compulsive case for God’s existence. It is just such a case that young-earth creationists hope to establish. But I think that LDS doctrine does not anticipate that this ought to happen, which is partly why I do not find it unexpected that humans exhibit evidence of common descent. (This factor also suggests that such evidence may not be completely probative, since it must appear that we have a plausible origin that does not require God if we are to be free to choose faith or doubt. On the other hand, I do not think God deliberately deceives us either, and so that evidence must mean something.) I have said more about this advantage elsewhere, and will not belabor it here" 

http://www.mormoninterpreter.com/endless-forms-most-beautiful-the-uses-and-abuses-of-evolutionary-biology-in-six-works/

 

 

 idea that evolution creates all life, but that God only takes credit for that process when it creates life that is beneficial to humans or amusing to them in the slightest way and then blames evolution for the rest.. 

 

It is a very nice idea, you explained it very good, thank you. 

[pogi]

True, but just because God is not required in the Theory of Evolution, it doesn't mean he did not intervene in the creation on animals. 

 

I see, God is not required for evolution.  He was only required for the creation and organization of the perfect conditions, laws and elements necessary for evolution to happen, but nature would work it's magic without him.  Got it.  He had the foresight to know his creation (organization) would bring forth all forms of "evil" life.  He knew that these forms of life would bring pain, suffering and death to man and he made it so anyway and chooses not to intervene even though he can.  Can you not see God's involvement in the creation of everything?  Using your limited perspective, I don't see how your version of creation makes God any more merciful, but if it helps you sleep better at night...

Edited October 22, 2014 by pogi

[pogi]

It is a very nice idea, you explained it very good, thank you. 

 

A chemist mixes a bunch of chemicals together and places them in specific conditions of temperature and moisture content.  The chemist knows that this combination will make something beneficial to man and something harmful to man.  He mixes the chemicals anyway.  Who is responsible for the harmful product?

 

One man makes a bomb, another man has the power to intervene and prevent the suffering but chooses to watch instead.  Who is to blame for the suffering?

 

Do you see how your limited perspective of blame placing gives you no good options? 

Edited October 22, 2014 by pogi

[MormonFreeThinker]

A chemist mixes a bunch of chemicals together and places them in the perfect conditions temperature and moisture content to make something incredibly beautiful and useful for man.  It turns out one of it's by-products is harmful to man.  Who is responsible for the bi-product?

 

One man makes a bomb, another man has the power to intervene and prevent the suffering but chooses to watch instead.  Who is to blame for the suffering?

 

Do you see how your limited perspective of blame placing gives you no good options? 

 

I understand what you are saying, but do you agree with the LDS.org article? 

 

"Floods, earthquakes, violent storms, or other cataclysmic occurrences in nature frequently destroy property, cause injuries, or take lives. While God has at times calmed the storms, the forces of nature are, for the most part, allowed to function unhindered. Suffering of this kind may be permitted by God since he has the power to temper the elements, but he seldom causes the suffering as a purposeful act."

https://www.lds.org/new-era/1975/04/what-is-the-purpose-of-suffering?lang=eng

[pogi]

I understand what you are saying, but do you agree with the LDS.org article? 

 

"Floods, earthquakes, violent storms, or other cataclysmic occurrences in nature frequently destroy property, cause injuries, or take lives. While God has at times calmed the storms, the forces of nature are, for the most part, allowed to function unhindered. Suffering of this kind may be permitted by God since he has the power to temper the elements, but he seldom causes the suffering as a purposeful act."

https://www.lds.org/new-era/1975/04/what-is-the-purpose-of-suffering?lang=eng

 

God created the conditions and knew what the results would be, and we agreed to them. 

Edited October 22, 2014 by pogi

[MormonFreeThinker]

God created the conditions and knew what the results would be. 

but we do not know if he created the laws of physics. 

 

Still, God does not directly cause most earthquakes.  

[thesometimesaint]

but we do not know if he created the laws of physics. 

 

Still, God does not directly cause most earthquakes.  

 

God doesn't play dice with the universe.

Albert Einstein

 

Who are you to tell God what he can't do with his dice?

Attributed to Niels Bohr

[MormonFreeThinker]

God doesn't play dice with the universe.

Albert Einstein

 

Who are you to tell God what he can't do with his dice?

Attributed to Niels Bohr

 

"God does play Dice" - Michio Kaku 

Edited October 22, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[pogi]

but we do not know if he created the laws of physics. 

 

It doesn't mater if he created the laws or if he simply uses them like he uses the elements.  The point is that he created the conditions and knew what the results would be. 

 

 

"God does play Dice" - Michio Kaku 

 

Do you really believe that?  When you know what the results will be with every roll, dice kind of looses it's meaning. 

[MormonFreeThinker]

Do you really believe that?  When you know what the results will be with every roll, dice kind of looses it's meaning. 

 

They are talking about quantum mechanics. 

[Guest]

He created man, man's actions brought about mortality, brought about diseases and death.

[ERayR]

He created man, man's actions brought about mortality, brought about diseases and death.

 

Pa Pa that is a true statement but it doesn't answer the question.  Did God create the bad things like Ebola?  If you say no then how to you reconcile the scriptures that say he created all things?