God and smallpox

Discuss arguments for existence of God and faith in general. Any aspect of any orientation toward religion/spirituality, as long as it is based upon a positive open to other people attitude.

Moderator:Metacrock

Post Reply
The Pixie
Posts:852
Joined:Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm
God and smallpox

Post by The Pixie » Thu Sep 01, 2016 6:48 am

Metacrock has made a few posts recently about the PoE; they have inspired me to start this thread.
Smallpox is believed to have emerged in human populations about 10,000 BC.[4] The earliest physical evidence of it is probably the pustular rash on the mummified body of Pharaoh Ramses V of Egypt.[9] The disease killed an estimated 400,000 Europeans annually during the closing years of the 18th century (including five reigning monarchs),[10] and was responsible for a third of all blindness.[6][11] Of all those infected, 20–60 percent—and over 80 percent of infected children—died from the disease.[12] Smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300–500 million deaths during the 20th century.[13][14][15] As recently as 1967, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that 15 million people contracted the disease and that two million died in that year.[5]

After vaccination campaigns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the WHO certified the global eradication of smallpox in 1979.[5] Smallpox is one of two infectious diseases to have been eradicated, the other being rinderpest, which was declared eradicated in 2011.[16][17][18]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox

Mankind has now effectively wiped out smallpox; with that in mind, I ask these questions:

Has mankind managed to do something God cannot?

Was it morally wrong for mankind to wipe out smallpox?


I think the answer to the first one is "yes", but then I do not think he exists. Part of Metacrock's defence of the PoE seems to be that God is not really all that powerful, so I will be interested to see how Christians here answer this. Assuming any of them even can.

I think the answer to the second is "no". Eradicatinging smallpox was morally right because doing so greatly reduced suffering in the world. But again, I think that because I do not believe in God. If you do believe in God, then you might think that God had a good and moral reason for allowing smallpox to flourish through most of human history. If it was morally right for God to allow smallpox to flourish, then it would be morally wrong (if well intentioned) to eradicate smallpox.

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts:10046
Joined:Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location:Dallas
Contact:

Re: God and smallpox

Post by Metacrock » Thu Sep 01, 2016 9:25 am

The Pixie wrote:Metacrock has made a few posts recently about the PoE; they have inspired me to start this thread.
Smallpox is believed to have emerged in human populations about 10,000 BC.[4] The earliest physical evidence of it is probably the pustular rash on the mummified body of Pharaoh Ramses V of Egypt.[9] The disease killed an estimated 400,000 Europeans annually during the closing years of the 18th century (including five reigning monarchs),[10] and was responsible for a third of all blindness.[6][11] Of all those infected, 20–60 percent—and over 80 percent of infected children—died from the disease.[12] Smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300–500 million deaths during the 20th century.[13][14][15] As recently as 1967, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that 15 million people contracted the disease and that two million died in that year.[5]

After vaccination campaigns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the WHO certified the global eradication of smallpox in 1979.[5] Smallpox is one of two infectious diseases to have been eradicated, the other being rinderpest, which was declared eradicated in 2011.[16][17][18]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox

Mankind has now effectively wiped out smallpox; with that in mind, I ask these questions:

Has mankind managed to do something God cannot?

Was it morally wrong for mankind to wipe out smallpox?


I think the answer to the first one is "yes", but then I do not think he exists. Part of Metacrock's defence of the PoE seems to be that God is not really all that powerful, so I will be interested to see how Christians here answer this. Assuming any of them even can.

I think the answer to the second is "no". Eradicatinging smallpox was morally right because doing so greatly reduced suffering in the world. But again,
but you still can't give me a basis or claiming anything as oral without God.
I think that because I do not believe in God. If you do believe in God, then you might think that God had a good and moral reason for allowing smallpox to flourish through most of human history. If it was morally right for God to allow smallpox to flourish, then it would be morally wrong (if well intentioned) to eradicate smallpox.
It does not follow that the reason would entail not developing medicine. You claim to perpetrate deep theology on such matter but still can't give me a reason to be moral.


On my argument here:

http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2016/08/g ... -evil.html

I prove there is no gratouitus evill Thus my nornal free will defense beats this.
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

User avatar
met
Posts:2813
Joined:Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: God and smallpox

Post by met » Thu Sep 01, 2016 2:00 pm

Well, the principle behind what you're saying might still be sound, Px, but since 'mankind eradicated smallpox' only by noticing a solution that was there all along, the example here might be dubious.

Kind of like, the logic of the old joke about "get your own dirt" might apply to this...
The “One” is the space of the “world” of the tick, but also the “pinch” of the lobster, or that rendezvous in person to confirm online pictures (with a new lover or an old God). This is the machinery operative...as “onto-theology."
Dr Ward Blanton

The Pixie
Posts:852
Joined:Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: God and smallpox

Post by The Pixie » Thu Sep 01, 2016 2:49 pm

Metacrock wrote:but you still can't give me a basis or claiming anything as oral without God.
Interesting opinion. Why not start a thread on it?
It does not follow that the reason would entail not developing medicine. You claim to perpetrate deep theology on such matter but still can't give me a reason to be moral.

On my argument here:

http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2016/08/g ... -evil.html

I prove there is no gratouitus evill Thus my nornal free will defense beats this.
You cannot answer the questions, can you? No surprise there.

The Pixie
Posts:852
Joined:Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: God and smallpox

Post by The Pixie » Thu Sep 01, 2016 2:50 pm

met wrote:Well, the principle behind what you're saying might still be sound, Px, but since 'mankind eradicated smallpox' only by noticing a solution that was there all along, the example here might be dubious.

Kind of like, the logic of the old joke about "get your own dirt" might apply to this...
And another one who cannot answer the questions.

I know, I know, there were very tricky.

Jim B.
Posts:1445
Joined:Fri Aug 23, 2013 2:36 am

Re: God and smallpox

Post by Jim B. » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:03 pm

The Pixie wrote:Metacrock has made a few posts recently about the PoE; they have inspired me to start this thread.
Smallpox is believed to have emerged in human populations about 10,000 BC.[4] The earliest physical evidence of it is probably the pustular rash on the mummified body of Pharaoh Ramses V of Egypt.[9] The disease killed an estimated 400,000 Europeans annually during the closing years of the 18th century (including five reigning monarchs),[10] and was responsible for a third of all blindness.[6][11] Of all those infected, 20–60 percent—and over 80 percent of infected children—died from the disease.[12] Smallpox was responsible for an estimated 300–500 million deaths during the 20th century.[13][14][15] As recently as 1967, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that 15 million people contracted the disease and that two million died in that year.[5]

After vaccination campaigns throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, the WHO certified the global eradication of smallpox in 1979.[5] Smallpox is one of two infectious diseases to have been eradicated, the other being rinderpest, which was declared eradicated in 2011.[16][17][18]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox

Mankind has now effectively wiped out smallpox; with that in mind, I ask these questions:

Has mankind managed to do something God cannot?

Was it morally wrong for mankind to wipe out smallpox?


I think the answer to the first one is "yes", but then I do not think he exists. Part of Metacrock's defence of the PoE seems to be that God is not really all that powerful, so I will be interested to see how Christians here answer this. Assuming any of them even can.
Haven't we already been over this?

"Cannot" has a number of different meanings. For instance:

I cannot speak Finnish.
I cannot allow my daughter to go to that party.
I cannot play in the NBA.
I cannot travel faster than the speed of light.
I cannot be younger than I currently am.
2 plus 2 cannot equal 3.

There are probably more than that. If God 'cannot' do something because doing it would prevent a greater good, that would be a logical constraint on God's choices. Kinda like the fact that he 'cannot' create a rock so heavy, he 'cannot' lift it.
I think the answer to the second is "no". Eradicatinging smallpox was morally right because doing so greatly reduced suffering in the world. But again, I think that because I do not believe in God. If you do believe in God, then you might think that God had a good and moral reason for allowing smallpox to flourish through most of human history. If it was morally right for God to allow smallpox to flourish, then it would be morally wrong (if well intentioned) to eradicate smallpox.
Except that humans are not structuring reality. If we eradicate all natural evils within our tiny sphere of influence, that wouldn;t carry the (possibly) cosmic consequences of GOd eradicating even the possibilty of natural evils. What if consciousness carries with it the possibility of suffering. The only logical way to eliminate that possibility would be for God to create a world without consciousness. What kind of metric can we use to assess that kind of trade-off? Remember the analogy of God being like the mother who knows her fetus carries the possibility of a horrible disease? What if the nature of conception carries that possibility. Would it be better to have never been born if that is the logical constraint the mother is under?

User avatar
met
Posts:2813
Joined:Mon Jun 16, 2008 1:05 pm

Re: God and smallpox

Post by met » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:32 pm

The Pixie wrote:
met wrote:Well, the principle behind what you're saying might still be sound, Px, but since 'mankind eradicated smallpox' only by noticing a solution that was there all along, the example here might be dubious.

Kind of like, the logic of the old joke about "get your own dirt" might apply to this...
And another one who cannot answer the questions.

I know, I know, there were very tricky.
What the hell are you talking about? :o


In a free-willed, theistic universe, the path of history has no necessity--at least not in our perspective--and what happens must be assumed to depend a lot on human CHOICES ... i.e. IF the answer to smallpox (along with many other things) was there all along, but, as a group, humans emerging into so-called "civilized" states CHOSE to put most of our energy into onto-political, military and/or psychosocial forms of action--creating, maintaining and justifying inequailities,and genociding, exploiting, enslaving and manipulating each other for millennia--instead of looking (much earlier) for "common good" types of solutions that might have led to a completely different and less tragic history of development, AND IF, in the end it turned out that there was a fairly 'natural" solution (to that and many other problems) which might even have been implemented much earlier by a wiser species, how then is that God's fault?

So, that doesn't completely eradicate the natural evil, but it does seem to put a dent in those statistics your article cited. And it's likely similar with many, many other examples you might have raised. (And, you see? The implications of the concept of "free will" in FWD may go far deeper than you realize ....)

Now also, to state the obvious for you since that seems to be necessary, WHY, after all, would God have provided any potential solution at all, if it were a sin to implement it?
The “One” is the space of the “world” of the tick, but also the “pinch” of the lobster, or that rendezvous in person to confirm online pictures (with a new lover or an old God). This is the machinery operative...as “onto-theology."
Dr Ward Blanton

User avatar
Metacrock
Posts:10046
Joined:Tue Jan 22, 2008 8:03 am
Location:Dallas
Contact:

Re: God and smallpox

Post by Metacrock » Thu Sep 01, 2016 10:50 pm

The Pixie wrote:
Metacrock wrote:but you still can't give me a basis or claiming anything as oral without God.
Interesting opinion. Why not start a thread on it?
we did you never could give it

It does not follow that the reason would entail not developing medicine. You claim to perpetrate deep theology on such matter but still can't give me a reason to be moral.

On my argument here:

http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2016/08/g ... -evil.html

I prove there is no gratouitus evill Thus my nornal free will defense beats this.
You cannot answer the questions, can you? No surprise there.

I just did :roll: :roll: :roll:
Have Theology, Will argue: wire Metacrock
Buy My book: The Trace of God: Warrant for belief

The Pixie
Posts:852
Joined:Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: God and smallpox

Post by The Pixie » Fri Sep 02, 2016 2:52 am

Jim B. wrote:Haven't we already been over this?

"Cannot" has a number of different meanings. For instance:

I cannot speak Finnish.
I cannot allow my daughter to go to that party.
I cannot play in the NBA.
I cannot travel faster than the speed of light.
I cannot be younger than I currently am.
2 plus 2 cannot equal 3.

There are probably more than that. If God 'cannot' do something because doing it would prevent a greater good, that would be a logical constraint on God's choices. Kinda like the fact that he 'cannot' create a rock so heavy, he 'cannot' lift it.
Are you saying that that is the case? Let us assume you do.

Allowing smallpox to flourish is promoting the greater good
Therefore eradicating smallpox is preventing the greater good
Therefore eradicating smallpox is morally wrong

Would you agree?
Except that humans are not structuring reality. ...
Ah, right. So it is morally right to allow smallpox to flourish if you are structiring reality, and it is morally right to do the exact opposite if you are not structuring reality.
... If we eradicate all natural evils within our tiny sphere of influence, that wouldn;t carry the (possibly) cosmic consequences of GOd eradicating even the possibilty of natural evils. ...
Ah, so now we move from eradicating smallpox all the way to eradicating even the possibilty of natural evils.

By the way, do you think these natural evils are present (or potentially present) in heaven?
... What if consciousness carries with it the possibility of suffering. The only logical way to eliminate that possibility would be for God to create a world without consciousness.
And now you are implicitly claiming that the only way God could eradicate smallpox was to also eradicate consciousness.

Interestingly, mankind managed to eradicate smallpox without also eradicating consciousness.

The Pixie
Posts:852
Joined:Thu Apr 28, 2016 12:54 pm

Re: God and smallpox

Post by The Pixie » Fri Sep 02, 2016 2:56 am

met wrote:In a free-willed, theistic universe, the path of history has no necessity--at least not in our perspective--and what happens must be assumed to depend a lot on human CHOICES ... i.e. IF the answer to smallpox (along with many other things) was there all along, but, as a group, humans emerging into so-called "civilized" states CHOSE to put most of our energy into onto-political, military and/or psychosocial forms of action--creating, maintaining and justifying inequailities,and genociding, exploiting, enslaving and manipulating each other for millennia--instead of looking (much earlier) for "common good" types of solutions that might have led to a completely different and less tragic history of development, AND IF, in the end it turned out that there was a fairly 'natural" solution (to that and many other problems) which might even have been implemented much earlier by a wiser species, how then is that God's fault?
God can do miracles - or so most Christians claim. He could, if he chose to, eradicate smallpox as easily as he could, say, resurrect Jesus. He chose not. That was his free will decision, and has nothing to do with the free will of mankind.
So, that doesn't completely eradicate the natural evil, but it does seem to put a dent in those statistics your article cited. And it's likely similar with many, many other examples you might have raised. (And, you see? The implications of the concept of "free will" in FWD may go far deeper than you realize ....)
So what is your point? Mankind could have found a cure earlier, so that absolves God?
Now also, to state the obvious for you since that seems to be necessary, WHY, after all, would God have provided any potential solution at all, if it were a sin to implement it?
Because God does not exist.

Post Reply