God's folded arms

[Mark Quayle]

If God decided he was going to divinely assassinate all would-be perps who target five year olds for rape and murder, I would have no problem with that - but where should he draw the line at whom not to kill? Should he kill all rapist-killers of those who target girls of a certain age or lower? Or those of any age? Rapist-killers only, or all killers of girls, or both rapists and killers of girls, regardless of whether they do both? And what about boys, should their predators also be killed? What is the standard for whether or not God should let someone live? Why is that the standard? By whose authority is it the standard?

That is actually to the point I said earlier (not sure if it was on this thread, lol). I say both: "As a little, so a lot", and "As a lot, so a little". I do not understand how it is any more logically convincing to use hyperbolic (or extreme) examples of catastrophe or cruelty or other suffering, than to use the smallest suffering, to logically prove the unjust-ness of God who caused it all.

So, why draw the line at all? Either he is, or he is not --it has nothing to do with amount or degree, or even with the KIND of injustice.

 

[Sketcher]

With respect, this is extremely silly.
Your god is supposed to have infinite powers (within what is logically possible).
I am asked to believe in one breath that he knows the number of hairs on every persons head, and in the next that he is incapable of manipulating the physical world in order to prevent people inflicting huge suffering on others and in the next that he can organise a parking space right outside the food store if you just pray hard enough.

Can you see why this concept of an omniscient omnipotent being is not coherent?
It's like his properties and limitations bend and flex to suit whatever narrative is being justified.

If God is all-powerful it would be trivially easy for him to prevent suffering.
You could even remove the free will element entirely from the conversation by limiting it to childhood leukaemia or trees falling on animals in the forest leaving them to die slow painful deaths.
God we are told, can cure the sick, part oceans and raise the dead, but when the conversation turns to awkward topics, suddenly he has all these limitations and reasons why he can't help.

I don't think it's consistent at all.

I don't claim that he can't help. I acknowledge that very often he doesn't help, even though he could. But since there is no one higher than he, that this is a silly reason to not follow him. You may well not believe he exists; but for those who believe that he does exist and is mean-spirited or indifferent, rebelling against him is all the more nonsensical. If God is God and is as bad as some people say he is, then the logical thing to do is to be on his good side and avoid his wrath, because he cannot be overthrown. And if he's not as bad as they say he is, then it's more nonsensical than that, because it's not giving this same God credit for the great generosity he has also given to many. And why is this relevant here? Because you are positing for the sake of this question that God exists, so we have to answer it from the assumption that he does.

 

[Taodeching]

Are you asking from a Christian view point? --God is First Cause, or he is not Omnipotent.

Are you asking from a human view point? Atheistic? Logically, no other explanation works to solve the chain of causality.

No, I say have said "I have no idea what your talking about" sorry about being less then clear.

 

[Aussie Pete]

A couple of observations if I might:
1) Someone putting their life on the line to selflessly die to save or protect another is indeed an act of heroism.
Someone offering to be murdered in an act of substitutionary atonement is not analogous because it's a deliberate avoidable scenario and is capricious in nature. God could have chosen to forgive mankind without murdering himself/his son. (He's the boss right?..)

2) I've always felt claims of God's great sacrifice (John 3:16 etc) are overblown. He gave him up on a Friday and got him back on a Sunday. It's basically like a Blockbuster rental. Where is the sacrifice?
What exactly did God lose?

I know people who have lost children and I've watched them grieve for decades. THAT is real loss.
They would have been very happy to get their child back after a weekend.

There are things that God cannot do because of His nature. He cannot lie, for example. If He did, he would cease to be God.

God cannot just overlook sin. It's a debt that we owe God. He is not obliged to forgive us. He could just as easily left us to rot in our own hell. Humanity has made a big enough mess as it is, even with Christians praying and interceding for God to help.

God is not capricious. Would you die to save Hitler? Stalin? How about Charles Manson? Or Osama bin Laden? Jesus died for all men, including the worst.

If you don't understand the sacrifice that God made, nothing I can say will help you.

 

[Albion]

The classic theodicy here is to invoke human free will as the reason for all the needless suffering. But of course, God could easily stop the crime without impinging on anyone's free will (he's a god after all). So that doesn't work.

Absolutely it "works." If God prevented all the evils that men do, it WOULD mean that he was interrupting free will and re-inventing human nature which, since Adam's fall, has been either totally or partially depraved, depending on how we look at the matter.

 

[Clare73]

Right now somewhere in the world, a five-year-old girl is minutes away from being brutally raped and murdered.
God knows that this will happen (he is omniscient and therefore knows all facts about the past present and future).
He could stop it (he is all-powerful).
But instead, he folds his arms and watches it happen.

The classic theodicy here is to invoke human free will as the reason for all the needless suffering. But of course, God could easily stop the crime without impinging on anyone's free will (he's a god after all). So that doesn't work.

Another common response is that there is some greater good that comes out of five-year-olds being brutally raped and murdered. We just don't understand it. This is a dangerous argument because it supposes that the only way for the universe to get from its current state to the state of greater good MUST involve the rape and murder of a five-year-old.
This would imply either that God is not powerful or clever enough to get to the state of greater good without the rape and murder of a five-year-old, or that it's specifically the rape and murder of a five-year-old that God wants. (There are no other options as the two conditions are mutually exclusive if God is omnipotent)

So it follows that God must WANT the rape and murder of the five-year-old to take place as he is capable of stopping it but chooses not to.
How do you square that with the claim of God as benevolent?

Are you just now realizing that the world is filled with this kind of evil, 24/7?

Books have been written on "Why Bad Things Happen to Good People".
Perhaps you should avail yourself of one.

 

[Albion]

Well, how do you look at it? Do you consider yourself depraved, totally or partially? If so, what kind of depravity do you get up to?

Traditionally, it is thought that our nature is both good and bad.

We are fallen from grace, thanks to the sins of Adam and Eve, but human nature still has been made in the "image and likeness of God," meaning that good impulses exist as well as sinful ones.

 

[mmarco]

God could have made a universe in which all living creatures had free will but were not inclined to sin.

God has created creatures who have free will and are not inclibed to sin: the angels.
However, if God had created a universe in which all living creatures were not inclibed to sin, we would not exist. God , in His infinite love, has chosen to created also creatures like us, who are inclined to sin with the purpose to save us from our sins and lead us to the eternal and holy life.

In other words, my answer to the question: "Could God have created me as a better person?" is: God has created better people than me, but those people are not me and God, in His infinite love, has chosen to create also me.

So you agree that an all-powerful god who allows so much suffering cannot be 'good'?

You are certainly wrong; I have suffered in my life, and through suffering I have become a better person. The existence of suffering and death in the world make us understand that our earthly life is extremely uncertain and this uncertainty induces many people to look for a superior good, the true Good. If there were no suffering and no death in the world, people would be much more superficial, materialist and edonist.
Besides, our earthly life , and therefore every suffering, lasts only a finite time, while eternal life in heaven is eternal; eternity is infinitely much more than a whole earthly life. You must consider this problem from the eternity perspective.
If a child dies here on earth and goes to heaven for eternity, he has gained much more than what he has lost.

 

[FreeinChrist]

ADVISOR HAT

This thread had a clean up. As a reminder, the only non-Christian allowed to post in threads in this particular forum is the OP.

Also, while questioning is allowed, blasphemy is not. ​

 

[TedT]

God knows that this will happen (he is omniscient and therefore knows all facts about the past present and future).
He could stop it (he is all-powerful).
But instead, he folds his arms and watches it happen.

You want a two bit reply to a ten dollar question? For a full understanding you have to know HIS purpose for our creation, the necessity for our free will, how we all fell into sin and what kind of sin it was, the meaning and necessity of election and damnation, why the judgement was postponed and what causes that postponement to end, the purpose of our lives here on earth and how that helps HIM fulfill HIS original purpose....in 20 sound bites or less.

I could easily list each answer in a sentence or two but that would not convey the understanding you would need to make sense of the answers. If you want a full answer I'm ready to work with you. If you just want to hate GOD, then probably not.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Right now somewhere in the world, a five-year-old girl is minutes away from being brutally raped and murdered.
God knows that this will happen (he is omniscient and therefore knows all facts about the past present and future).
He could stop it (he is all-powerful).
But instead, he folds his arms and watches it happen.

The classic theodicy here is to invoke human free will as the reason for all the needless suffering. But of course, God could easily stop the crime without impinging on anyone's free will (he's a god after all). So that doesn't work.

Another common response is that there is some greater good that comes out of five-year-olds being brutally raped and murdered. We just don't understand it. This is a dangerous argument because it supposes that the only way for the universe to get from its current state to the state of greater good MUST involve the rape and murder of a five-year-old.
This would imply either that God is not powerful or clever enough to get to the state of greater good without the rape and murder of a five-year-old, or that it's specifically the rape and murder of a five-year-old that God wants. (There are no other options as the two conditions are mutually exclusive if God is omnipotent)

So it follows that God must WANT the rape and murder of the five-year-old to take place as he is capable of stopping it but chooses not to.
How do you square that with the claim of God as benevolent?

I'm not sure there is a perfectly good answer that satisfies the problem of theodicy.

A maltheistic perspective doesn't work, because we have God revealed to us in Jesus Christ as perfect love poured out for all people.

A powerless God perspective doesn't work, because we confess God to be El Shaddai, the Most Strong One.

I don't know that reason can navigate these waters.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[1watchman]

Right now somewhere in the world, a five-year-old girl is minutes away from being brutally raped and murdered.
God knows that this will happen (he is omniscient and therefore knows all facts about the past present and future).
He could stop it (he is all-powerful).
But instead, he folds his arms and watches it happen.

The classic theodicy here is to invoke human free will as the reason for all the needless suffering. But of course, God could easily stop the crime without impinging on anyone's free will (he's a god after all). So that doesn't work.

Another common response is that there is some greater good that comes out of five-year-olds being brutally raped and murdered. We just don't understand it. This is a dangerous argument because it supposes that the only way for the universe to get from its current state to the state of greater good MUST involve the rape and murder of a five-year-old.
This would imply either that God is not powerful or clever enough to get to the state of greater good without the rape and murder of a five-year-old, or that it's specifically the rape and murder of a five-year-old that God wants. (There are no other options as the two conditions are mutually exclusive if God is omnipotent)

So it follows that God must WANT the rape and murder of the five-year-old to take place as he is capable of stopping it but chooses not to.
How do you square that with the claim of God as benevolent?

WOW! This sounds like one who is 'blind' to the Word of God, for He is a loving God who, as He said: "...is not willing that any should perish", etc. As our Bible teaches: "God is love". The bigger picture in Holy Scripture is that our Creator-God knows 'the end from the beginning' which also means he knows who will one-day receive His "...so great salvation" and who never will and will perish. God is seeking the best for His children, but many only want their own ways. We should NEVER imply that God is reckless and mean-spirited. Study His Word, friend, and I strongly urge you to be humble before God!

 

[TedT]

The bigger picture in Holy Scripture is that our Creator-God knows 'the end from the beginning' which also means he knows who will one-day receive His "...so great salvation" and who never will and will perish.

Yes HE knows that NOW...but did HE know before HE created us? We are told that HE desires the death (in hell) of no one and takes no pleasure in their death so why would we believe HE knew before they were created who would end in hell and who would be saved??

All HE had to do to keep hell empty for eternity was to not create those whom HE knew would be damned so...why create them?

The fact HE created some people who will end in hell is the proof that our understanding of HIS omniscience is wrong. It is a mistake because love could not do this to its creation. And it is mind boggling to think that any Church, let alone all of them, could accept this pagan Greek definition of omniscience out of idolatry of all things Greek above the clear scripture that GOD is love.

We should strive to learn the truth about what HIS being all knowing means for us...and drop the current blasphemy.

 

[TedT]

I don't know that reason can navigate these waters.

That GOD created us to be able to become HIS Bride if we chose by our free will by faith, not proof, to trust HIM sets all the rest into inevitable motion which ends HIS story of us with the judgement of those who rejected HIM and the marriage of those who did trust HIM to the Lamb.

 

[1watchman]

One needs to study the ways and mind of our God, Ted (that comes from studying the Holy "word of God". He gave man a choice today as He did in the "garden at Eden" and man failed. God ALWAYS knows the end from the beginning, and He allowed Satan to test man, and gives man liberty to choose eternal life and the blessings of God, rather than make man as robots to always do as directed. We ARE His children, and as any good Father, He wants us to learn to obey and honor and love Him ---else He would have made us some kind of mechanical robot. Let me suggest you begin reading in John 3; John 14; and all the Gospels in the four New Testament books. I will pray for you.

 

[TedT]

With respect, this is extremely silly.
Your god is supposed to have infinite powers (within what is logically possible).
I am asked to believe in one breath that he knows the number of hairs on every persons head, and in the next that he is incapable of manipulating the physical world in order to prevent people inflicting huge suffering on others and in the next that he can organise a parking space right outside the food store if you just pray hard enough.

His infinite powers are constricted by various things such as (but not limited to): HE will not do anything evil. He will not break anyone's free will.

Sinners living on earth do NOT have a free will but are enslaved to the addictive power of evil so when HE interferes with their will, HE is breaking their sinful will, not their free will.

The earth is a prison planet with a reform hospital within it of those who can be redeemed from evil once they accept that the evil of the reprobate unbelievers is eternal and growing...which necessitates they see and experience the evil of the weeds so they mature in holiness. All evil on earth proceeds from the evil hearts and desires of the people on earth though the time and the experience of that evil by others is pre-programmed by GOD.

 

[aiki]

Right now somewhere in the world, a five-year-old girl is minutes away from being brutally raped and murdered.
God knows that this will happen (he is omniscient and therefore knows all facts about the past present and future).
He could stop it (he is all-powerful).
But instead, he folds his arms and watches it happen.

Does He? And does He always?

If God constantly intervened to eradicate the evil consequences of evil choices humans make, would they be truly free moral agents? What would your life be, do you think, if God altered the effect of every evil choice you made, conforming the result to His will? If every time you indulged a lustful thought, or fudged on the truth, or acted selfishly, or lost your temper, God interrupted to halt the thought or act, negating your sinful choice in favor of His own holy will and way, what would your life be like?

The classic theodicy here is to invoke human free will as the reason for all the needless suffering. But of course, God could easily stop the crime without impinging on anyone's free will (he's a god after all). So that doesn't work.

Oh? How so? If God did as you describe here, how would we really be free?

Another common response is that there is some greater good that comes out of five-year-olds being brutally raped and murdered. We just don't understand it. This is a dangerous argument because it supposes that the only way for the universe to get from its current state to the state of greater good MUST involve the rape and murder of a five-year-old.
This would imply either that God is not powerful or clever enough to get to the state of greater good without the rape and murder of a five-year-old, or that it's specifically the rape and murder of a five-year-old that God wants. (There are no other options as the two conditions are mutually exclusive if God is omnipotent)

Sometimes, God is simply allowing sin to run its course to illustrate to us just how "exceedingly sinful" sin is. We get a glimpse of why God HATES sin, the sin with which we are often quite comfortable, by letting sin bear its death-bringing "fruit" fully.

In a world of genuinely free creatures it is possible that God cannot intervene at every turn to negate the effects of the choices of these creatures and maintain genuine creaturely freedom. If this is even possible, it defeats your objection here.

So it follows that God must WANT the rape and murder of the five-year-old to take place as he is capable of stopping it but chooses not to.
How do you square that with the claim of God as benevolent?

God wants genuine freedom for His creatures. Such freedom is vital to the love He wants them to express to Himself and toward each other. But, this freedom to choose God necessarily entails the freedom not to choose God. The knife sharp and strong enough to carve wood is necessarily also capable of piercing and cutting human flesh; one simply can't have a knife of the former sort without also having a knife of the latter sort. So, too, with God making us genuinely free moral agents. We can't be made capable of freely choosing to love God without also being capable of hating Him. And when free creatures spurn God, the Source of all light, truth and life, they unavoidably turn to darkness, falsehoods and death. God no more wants the latter circumstance than a maker of a wood-carving knife wants the knife he's made to create beautiful carvings to be used to wound and kill one of his fellows.