Morphic Tide
Well-known member
"Done their best" is not the original point of contention. Your original comparison was that I am saying God must be evil for not averting people screwing themselves over, when the entire point is that I find God destestible for not averting people's actions screwing over other people.
And the guy who could remove the saws with the snap of a finger has no blame for letting it through? Who had previously done exactly such a thing before, in the case of stripping Man of their common language over the tower? The point here is specifically that God is both able and in some circumstance willing to, and by most measures we're far past what caused Him to do so in the past.
It certainly does a lot to tell how sensible the definition is for people who do not currently agree with it. You can reject utilitarianism or secular humanism or anything like that all you want, but the cold fact of the matter is that a moral system needs persuasive value to perpetuate itself and here you're not only doing much on that, but actively rejecting that there's any need to persuade.
And the ones unknowingly fighting for it to come to pass? The ones subjected to it with no say in its rise? The ones with no awareness there was any exceptional malfeasance to resist in the first place? "It happened because people didn't resist", then when I point out people did you shift the goalpost to "not hard enough", then "not enough of them" when I point out fatalities.
...You are at this point effectively justifying it by "the strong do what they will, the weak suffer what they must". Literally "it's fine because they couldn't fight hard enough", entirely ignoring the supposedly-present utterly limitless actor to whom these events are in several respects a deliberate insult.
It isn't that "it's too hard", it's that the Nazis made it vastly moreso with Him idly letting that happen to cause numerous good men to facilitate atrocities by manufactured ignorance. There were people who were put to death over the orders they had no awareness of exceptional horrors in outcome of, on a legal basis that had never been seen before to boot. Unless your use of "Free Will" as a justification extends to the hypothetical of outright accidental goods done by the mad, I do not see how this works.
I ask again, what reason does a good man in 1935 Germany have to put together a group with every member's life on the line to oppose the Nazi party who pulled Germany out of the Weimar clusterfuck? Who ended the child prostitutes, Communist revolts, rebuilt the economy from scratch, and revived military significance to correct the abomination of a conditional surrender directly responsible for the intensity of economic woes?
The Nazis spent far longer with a stellar name than they did in a state where a handful of good men had reason to avert the atrocities they were building up to. Eugenics was normal, national supremacy was barely worth mention, anti-Jewish policies had been such a worn-out trope that you had sizable demonstrations of Jews for Hitler. This takes it out of the hands of "Good Men" and puts it firmly in His, as the only one expecting where it was going.
