If god is everything, doesn't that make him evil as well as good?

[RichardHresko]

http://members.aol.com/Patriarchy/pr...n/sendevil.htm

Interesting article that acknowledges divine creation of evil but suggests that, ultimately, good comes from it.

Anarcho-Calvinism??? This has to be a joke. But of course this organization has to be in California. Where else?

Once again, the basic problem is that merely stringing together a bunch of verses without careful, thoughtful work at interpretation will lead to things like this. There is no scintilla of evidence that there is any attempt to understand the nature of evil, or of God. No evidence that any thought went into what it means when the Bible says that God sends evil. It's just a cut-and-paste collage.

[hellsapoppin]

So say you.

[RichardHresko]

So say you.

I read the site. It strings together a number of verses without any analysis in order to try to validate a fairly common apocalyptic vision of the world. Res ipsa loquitur.

[hellsapoppin]

That's OK, RH. You are entitled to your opinion. Doesn't mean that anyone else is wrong, though.

For a god to be always present and all knowing, to have determined who is going to be saved even before he creates the world, to stand by and allow people to succumb to a lie, and to then blame people for falling victim to a crime that he created all clearly proves that this same god is evil and the exclusive cause of all evil.

As I wrote before, in some jurisdictions if you know that a crime is going to take place and you fail to stop it or inform the authorities, you would be in big trouble. So how any god can claim to be innocent of the crime he set up has no logic whatsoever. But if you still feel he is ever so innocent, fine and dandy.

[Redzeppelin]

That's OK, RH. You are entitled to your opinion. Doesn't mean that anyone else is wrong, though.

Quite so - I fully agree.

For a god to be always present and all knowing, to have determined who is going to be saved even before he creates the world, to stand by and allow people to succumb to a lie, and to then blame people for falling victim to a crime that he created all clearly proves that this same god is evil and the exclusive cause of all evil.

As I wrote before, in some jurisdictions if you know that a crime is going to take place and you fail to stop it or inform the authorities, you would be in big trouble. So how any god can claim to be innocent of the crime he set up has no logic whatsoever. But if you still feel he is ever so innocent, fine and dandy.

This is true only if your presuppositions about God's relation to Time are correct. How do you know if they are? Who says that God experiences reality as we do - in a linear fashion - where the future lies along a continuum that we've yet to reach. Some theologians make the (correct, in my opinion) assertion that the future does not exist to be known - by anyone, including God, because saying that God has an exhaustive knowledge of what doesn't exist is illogical (like the silly conundrum of "If God is all-powerful, can He create a rock so big He can't lift it?"). As such, I don't believe that God "knows the future" as we conceptualize "knowing the future."

If God exists "in time" like we do, how could He process the millions of prayer request that go up every second?

Seriously - the idea that God "knew" what would happen contradicts the description of Him given in the Bible - in that God as He is described (all-good, "love," compassionate, merciful and just) could not logically "set up" humanity for its own failure. God knew that creating beings with freewill entailed a potential for the rebellion and suffering that resulted, but I contest that idea that He "knew" what hadn't had a chance to happen yet. Yes God can "read" the human heart with incredible accuracy - but we have freewill, and can always choose against our nature or tendency. It's tough, but possible.

As well, if God was evil, then He certainly wouldn't bother to let those who criticize Him exist for long; to think that He would, would be to attribute some form of "fairness" to Him - wouldn't it?

[hellsapoppin]

``Who says that God experiences reality as we do ``

Who says he doesn't?


``freewill ... tough but possible``

Not so for an abortion victim.


``fairness``

This same god laughs at the aggrieved. Perhaps he likes to hear the truth.

[Redzeppelin]

``Who says that God experiences reality as we do ``

Who says he doesn't?

That's not really a response, you know.

Logic says that God doesn't experience reality as we do because we are confined to 3-4 dimensions, whereas God - by very fact of His spiritual and eternal nature, exists in a much different way. The banal examle I gave of God having to attend to the myriad prayers as they are offered in real time is one example of the illogical idea that God experiences reality exactly as we do.

``freewill ... tough but possible``

Not so for an abortion victim.

And God - in His goodness, mercy, and justice, welcomes that child into heaven, no questions asked.

``fairness``

This same god laughs at the aggrieved. Perhaps he likes to hear the truth.

Got a citation for that? Charges are one thing and support for those, quite another.

[hellsapoppin]

``That's not really a response, you know.``

Others have already pointed out that your god is vengeful, that he is jealous, and he kills whomever he pleases. Such attributes are definitely those of humans and of animals. It is a fair inference that he experiences everything as we humans do as well.

BTW, his incessant demand for praise is a (shall we say) highly human fault.


``heaven``

The Kingdom is here on earth. See Revelations Ch 21.


``laughing at the aggrieved``

See Romans 9 for a very haughty comment about mercy upon whom he pleases.

[Redzeppelin]

``That's not really a response, you know.``

Others have already pointed out that your god is vengeful, that he is jealous, and he kills whomever he pleases. Such attributes are definitely those of humans and of animals. It is a fair inference that he experiences everything as we humans do as well.

1. But we were talking about the issue of God's "foreknowledge" and human freewill - issues of time. That is specifically the aspect of God's existence we were discussing - not his attributes or alleged behaviors.
2. Vengeance, "jealousy" and killing are not exclusively human traits - and you speak as if they were things God should not do - why would you suggest such a thing? If we humans can find "just" reasons for enacting vengeance, for experiencing jealousy, and for taking a human life, you don't think the supreme being of the universe also can't have a good reason for doing so?

BTW, his incessant demand for praise is a (shall we say) highly human fault.

What if I suggested to you that God's command (not "demand") for praise is something that the believer benefits from, not God. God is not made better, happier, or more complete because we little clay things say nice statements about Him. Because God created us, He knows what's good for us - and what is good for us is to acknowledge the source of our lives, our blessings,and our salvation. Many Christians will attest to the beneficial results of incorporating praise into ones life - it alters perspective, makes us focus on our blessings, and reminds us that our God is a great God, who is in control of everything. Besides, if God is who the Bible claims Him to be, isn't He justified in expecting praise from those to whom He has given everything?

``heaven``

The Kingdom is here on earth. See Revelations Ch 21.

Clever, but incorrect. Revelation 21 deals with the "made new" earth after the final judgment.

``laughing at the aggrieved``

See Romans 9 for a very haughty comment about mercy upon whom he pleases.

Well, then there's a bit of hyperbole in the term "laughing" because my Bible has nothing of the sort in Romans 9. God may take mercy on whomever He pleases - to what standard of mercy would you like to hold Him? If God is perfect in His justice (He really couldn't be God and be imperfect in any way, could He?), then His taking mercy "on whom He pleases" is just.

[Ozymandias]

Think back on one of the oldest stories of the bible in Eden. What was the sin that was committed by Adam and Eve that separated them from God? It was obtaining the knowledge of the difference between good and evil.

They created the world of duality, or rather the perception of duality which did not exist prior to the eating of the fruit of that tree.

Literally one cannot live in paradise if they accept the judgement of what is good and what is evil. It was this action and knowledge that put distance between them and their creator.

[hellsapoppin]

``issues of time ... not his attributes or alleged behaviors``

Maybe you were restricting the exchange of ideas to these limited circumstances. Nobody else was.


``things God should not do``

This same god calls himself ''love''. Does a loving father commit such atrocities and then pretend to be ever so loving???


``praise is something that the believer benefits from, not God``

That's your belief, not mine.

In the many years I lived in NY, I knew of many people detained in Hitler's death camps. All had previously been devout believers of biblical teaching. most wound up cursing this same god for abandoning them in their time of need. Praise does nothing but flatter this god's ego.


``final judgment``

Precisely. AFTER the Judgment Day takes place, that's when the elect will get their reward. They will not go to heaven as this same god will leave it and live there.


``hyperbole``

Again, so say you. You are entitled to your belief. But it does not mean that anyone else is wrong. In that part of the New Testament your god is exceedingly haughty. And, as always, he is displaying vile attributes that he condemns in humans!

AMAZING!!!

[Whifflingpin]

hellsapoppin: "Others have already pointed out that your god is vengeful, that he is jealous, and he kills whomever he pleases."

This may be a misinterptretation of some of my posts.
To clarify: in discussing the Old Testament, you seem to be saying that God is described as bad so reject God; whereas I am saying, God is described badly so reject the description.
(Redzeppelin and RichardHresko argue that the description is correct, and God, by definition, is not bad, so we have to accept that what might be bad for a human to do is not bad when God does it.)

[hellsapoppin]

``we have to accept that what might be bad for a human to do is not bad when God does it``


See

http://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot....od-killed.html


according to the Bible, this same god who claims to be ''all loving'' and of unceasing mercy killed over 2 million people

don't know how anyone can claim that this is a good sign but if that is what you wish to believe, so be it

[Redzeppelin]

Think back on one of the oldest stories of the bible in Eden. What was the sin that was committed by Adam and Eve that separated them from God? It was obtaining the knowledge of the difference between good and evil.

They created the world of duality, or rather the perception of duality which did not exist prior to the eating of the fruit of that tree.

Literally one cannot live in paradise if they accept the judgement of what is good and what is evil. It was this action and knowledge that put distance between them and their creator.

The Knowledge of Good and Evil was knowledge that only God could possess because evil is so dangerous, so toxic that only God as Supreme uncreated being could be exposed to evil and not be contaminated by it. Just as we try to protect our children from certain types of knowledge that they are not ready for, God did the same.

``issues of time ... not his attributes or alleged behaviors``

Maybe you were restricting the exchange of ideas to these limited circumstances. Nobody else was.

Perhaps.

``things God should not do``

This same god calls himself ''love''. Does a loving father commit such atrocities and then pretend to be ever so loving???

You are not really dealing with the complexity of what I'm suggesting. A loving father may - at times - have to do things that his children might call "mean." The father who consequences his child does so out of love - the overly permissive father who allows all under the guise of "love" warps his child.

I understand that your response will say there is a big difference between the example I gave and God's actions. Fair enough - but there is also a big difference between a human father and an all-knowing, all-powerful being.

I won't argue that there are some pretty sad, ugly things that happen in the OT. What I'm contending is that those who wish to condemn God for His behavior do so with only a partial command of the facts - PERIOD. Here on earth we accept the truism that justice is blind - ie that justice can never really know the complete truth. God does know the complete truth - His knowledge is the complete register of all reality. If He destroys, He has a reason that will be consistent with His character - whether or not you agree. Putting God on trial is like a child complaining about not being able to go to Disneyland for vacation who doesn't understand the desperate financial position his parents are in. We do not have a command of all the facts.

``praise is something that the believer benefits from, not God``

That's your belief, not mine.

In the many years I lived in NY, I knew of many people detained in Hitler's death camps. All had previously been devout believers of biblical teaching. most wound up cursing this same god for abandoning them in their time of need. Praise does nothing but flatter this god's ego.

Right - but what's the basis of your belief?

God's "ego" (if he has one in the sense that we use it) cannot be "flattered" by mere human beings. God is self-sufficient - He requires nothing. God's sense of His identity cannot be victim to the myriad problems we humans experience in our desire to be loved - God needs nothing from us. He does not ask us for things because He needs them - He asks us for things that He knows are good for us.

``final judgment``

Precisely. AFTER the Judgment Day takes place, that's when the elect will get their reward. They will not go to heaven as this same god will leave it and live there.

Sorry - I'm lost as to how your response rebuts in any way point I made about the salvation of aborted children.

``hyperbole``

Again, so say you. You are entitled to your belief. But it does not mean that anyone else is wrong. In that part of the New Testament your god is exceedingly haughty. And, as always, he is displaying vile attributes that he condemns in humans!

AMAZING!!!

You're still not really dealing with my argument. Your 2nd and 3rd sentence merely state a matter of reality - but it deals in no way with what I said.

"Haughty" - no. Paul simply tells us that God possesses - as Supreme Being - certain prerogatives in terms of whom He saves and whom He doesn't. What you're ignoring is the issue of character. Even our legal system recognizes the issue of character (hence "character witnesses"). God's character, as the Bible describes, points to the reality that things that may appear very wrong, or inappropriate to us may not necessarily be wrong or inappropriate because God's character vindicates His actions. That he does not always give us the complete rundown of all the facts behind His decisions means that we will - on faith - assume that God is just in all that He does.

[hellsapoppin]

``He requires nothing.``


Then why demand so much praise???

I know you said it benefits people (your opinion but one that has no actual basis, in my opinion). But time can be better spent without such a useless waste of energy.


``we have to accept that what might be bad for a human to do is not bad when God does it``

One last thought on this sentence = in it you have admitted that god is evil.


I'll re-read and post re the rest of your note tomorrow.