A hopeless theology?

[OldWiseGuy]

God's eternal purpose is being worked out in a temporary, transitional material world. It, and we, are a means to an end, That end is the restitution of all things, or the constitution of God's new and improved kingdom.

Our sufferings could be compared to God's own suffering at the loss of such a large part of his original kingdom. Our health, material wealth, reputation, friendships, etc. are really our earthly kingdom. When we suffer loss we can understand how God felt as well.

He will save us from (out of) these sufferings, for a greater purpose, that to be part of a kingdom that will never again suffer loss.

So in our sufferings we really should understand God much better. I also don't think that God allowed Christ to suffer more than he himself already has. In fact I believe it greatly grieved God to sacrifice his son. But that great a sacrifice was needed to atone for the sins of Lucifer that did so much damage.

 

[TrueMyth]

Only the indwelling of God's spirit could have prevented Adam from sinning.

Adam had that in the garden. Or are you suggesting that he had a sinful nature in the garden?

 

[TrueMyth]

But Pharoh desired to bring the Hebrews back into captivity, and God put a stop to that. God superceeded the will of Pharoh.

I believe that anything that happens is directly caused by God or is allowed by God. God is never out of control, and He has the ability to step in and change anything anytime He wishes. Why he does or does not act is beyond our understanding.

This is a perfect example of a fallacy which I often see among the Calvinist-type crowd. They see one example in the Bible (bliz brings up Pharoh; tyler brings up the destruction of Jerusalem) and infer from this that God causes all actions. God is the efficient cause for all that happens, since His will sustains and created the universe, just as His will created and sustains human free will. However, God is not necessarily the immediate cause for all that happens. To infer that He is from a few examples where He stepped in is a logical fallacy called Hasty Generalization.

As far as the OP goes, we see this at work: God in the Bible causes certain natural disasters to occur. The only conclusion logically supported by this evidence is that a natural disaster may be caused by God; it is an incorrect inference to say that a natural disaster always will be caused by God. All that is required for God's sovereignty to be maintained is to say that God possesses the means and right to intervene-- it is not necessary to say that He always will. This approach almost makes Him desperate: always intervening, always stepping in. The best fathers are those that let their children make decisions and mistakes for themselves, all along guiding them in the direction they ought to go and stepping in and taking over when the situation threatens to spiral out of control if left alone. A father which felt the need to meticulously control and minutely manage his children's lives would be no good father, and he would certainly do irreparable damage to the children

 

[TrueMyth]

I agree about your conclusions about the word evil. That's why I put it in quotations and used in in reference to what humans think of as evil. There is certainly a difference between moral evil and what human beings percieve to be moral evil. But anyways, I definitely do see where you're coming from. I suppose that it depends on your theology, but I just can't see how you can attribute the existence of moral evil to anything but God. Again, I quote the same verse from Lamentations: "Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that good and bad come?" Where could evil have come from if it had not been the will of God? If evil existed despite God's opposition to it, then that would mean there is something greater than God that is able to oppose Him. It's not that I'm saying that God is some guy that runs around without standards, saying "I'll do evil here, then I'll do good there." It's that God ultimately uses evil to bring about greater good, namely the glorification of Himself. He uses the existence of evil to show us His highest love in allowing us to choose Him. This brings Him glory! If we had not had the choice to choose evil, then how could we attempt to glorify Him as anything other than robots?

Moral evil has no existence, anymore than dark or cold has existence. Darkness is the absence of light, as cold is the absence of heat. Evil is the absence of good. It is not as if there are two things floating in the ether-- one Evil and one Good, and God created both. God is Goodness Itself, and anything outside of that is nothingness. One does not choose evil-- that is impossible, for to do so is to choose nothing. One chooses self, which is against the proper relationship between creature and Creator, Perfect Goodness and imperfection. That is not "evil"-- it is "not good". There is no such thing as evil; there is only the presence or absence of good.

In so far as such a thing exists (at least in our language, if not in reality), it comes from our free will. In choosing self, we choose against God and Goodness. The only way this is God's fault is if He forces/compels/irresistably draws us to choose self. I think this is what oldwiseguy believes, so I would be very curious to see what his take is on that.

 

[Teke]

Moral evil has no existence, anymore than dark or cold has existence. Darkness is the absence of light, as cold is the absence of heat. Evil is the absence of good. It is not as if there are two things floating in the ether-- one Evil and one Good, and God created both. God is Goodness Itself, and anything outside of that is nothingness. One does not choose evil-- that is impossible, for to do so is to choose nothing. One chooses self, which is against the proper relationship between creature and Creator, Perfect Goodness and imperfection. That is not "evil"-- it is "not good". There is no such thing as evil; there is only the presence or absence of good.

In so far as such a thing exists (at least in our language, if not in reality), it comes from our free will. In choosing self, we choose against God and Goodness. The only way this is God's fault is if He forces/compels/irresistably draws us to choose self. I think this is what oldwiseguy believes, so I would be very curious to see what his take is on that.

I don't think the "malice of absence" myth suffices the reality.

 

[TrueMyth]

I don't think the "malice of absence" myth suffices the reality.

I'm confused... are you fer me or agin me?

(Oh, and if so, why?)

 

[Sojourner<><]

Since God doesn't change, He doesn't have motives. The same plan from the beginning doesn't change.
He created everything good (Gen. 1). It is satan who seeks to take what is good that God created, and create evil from it. God created from nothing, but that which is created, seeks to do evil with that good that God created.

For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I [am] the LORD; and [there is] none else.
I have not spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth: I said not unto the seed of Jacob, Seek ye me in vain: I the LORD speak righteousness, I declare things that are right.
Is. 34:18,19


The Eternal Purpose
And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:
To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly [places] might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,
According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:
Eph. 3:9-11

We are perfected in suffering.

Yea doubtless, and I count all things [but] loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them [but] dung, that I may win Christ,
And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith:
That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;
If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.
Phl. 3:8-11

So yeah, everything happens according to His will. It is up to each one of us how we respond to that.

I'm not so sure that all suffering is sharing Christ's suffering. God ordained suffering through the effects of the curse because of sin. Christ later said:

"Blessed [are] they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when [men] shall revile you, and persecute [you], and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake." Mat 5

To lump all suffering together into this category would be a mistake.

 

[TrueMyth]

I googled "Malice of Absence", and I came up with the supposed confrontation between Albert Einstein and the big, bad atheist professor (interestingly, he pops up huffing and puffing in many oh-so-intellectual Christian forwards). I certainly hope you aren't refuting the position articulated based solely on its cheap and tawdry presentation (again, interestingly, this pitiful attempt to rally the ignorant faithful by no means originated there-- it has been explicated by St. Augustine and alluded to by Plato).

We see evidence that evil has no existence by itself, since no one can want evil by itself. Evil is always a privation or excess (or some other twisting) of some good. Psychopaths murder because they seek sexual pleasure or power/control. Adultery is undertaken for the desire for sexual pleasure, adventure, love, or some other good. Even when people supposedly desire evil and seek to do it only, they can be shown to desire something else which is good-- power, fame, control, etc. When I hate my brother, I hate him not for the sake of hate itself, but because he has wronged my rights or he has wronged someone else's rights or I am just a bad man. Then, I am hating him for love of justice or proper shame. Sure, hate is heady and intoxicating; the drug, however, is not hate itself but the feeling of being right, of having a just cause and reason. Even in the absenc of all this, and a person hates out of habit, there is the love of self to the point of desire not to change at all costs.

We also can see logical evidence of it when we ask "What properties does Evil as an entity possess?" We see analogies of this in God: when we say He is Goodness, we say that He contains all that is good and none of that which is evil. So, we might say that Evil possesses all that which is evil and none of that which is good. But if it exists, is this not a good? Even if it is not, we still have to ask if it possesses properties such as personality, order, unlimited action, etc. All of these are goods-- how can Evil contain them? Evil cannot exist, for this is a good; Evil cannot be pleasant, for this is a good; Evil cannot be ordered and meticulous, for this is a good. In short, it cannot be conceived without contradiction: it is self-referentially contradictory.

In stating that evil has no ontological existence, no one who is responsible and intelligent is stating that it is meaningless. Just as we feel cold and we feel the effects of darkness, we also feel fear and hatred and lust and pain. It is wholly meaningful, even if it does not exist ontologically. It exists existentially (or perhaps phenomenologically), which means it must be dealt with and explained. However, it cannot be desired, for you cannot desire what does not exist.

 

[Teke]

I'm not so sure that all suffering is sharing Christ's suffering. God ordained suffering through the effects of the curse because of sin. Christ later said:

"Blessed [are] they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when [men] shall revile you, and persecute [you], and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake." Mat 5

To lump all suffering together into this category would be a mistake.

According to scripture

For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin. Heb. 4:15

Suffering brings us closer together, that is why it is God ordained for us to suffer in our struggle or wrestling in the flesh.

For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected [the same] in hope, Rom. 8:20

 

[Teke]

I googled "Malice of Absence", and I came up with the supposed confrontation between Albert Einstein and the big, bad atheist professor (interestingly, he pops up huffing and puffing in many oh-so-intellectual Christian forwards). I certainly hope you aren't refuting the position articulated based solely on its cheap and tawdry presentation (again, interestingly, this pitiful attempt to rally the ignorant faithful by no means originated there-- it has been explicated by St. Augustine and alluded to by Plato).

We see evidence that evil has no existence by itself, since no one can want evil by itself. Evil is always a privation or excess (or some other twisting) of some good. Psychopaths murder because they seek sexual pleasure or power/control. Adultery is undertaken for the desire for sexual pleasure, adventure, love, or some other good. Even when people supposedly desire evil and seek to do it only, they can be shown to desire something else which is good-- power, fame, control, etc. When I hate my brother, I hate him not for the sake of hate itself, but because he has wronged my rights or he has wronged someone else's rights or I am just a bad man. Then, I am hating him for love of justice or proper shame. Sure, hate is heady and intoxicating; the drug, however, is not hate itself but the feeling of being right, of having a just cause and reason. Even in the absenc of all this, and a person hates out of habit, there is the love of self to the point of desire not to change at all costs.

We also can see logical evidence of it when we ask "What properties does Evil as an entity possess?" We see analogies of this in God: when we say He is Goodness, we say that He contains all that is good and none of that which is evil. So, we might say that Evil possesses all that which is evil and none of that which is good. But if it exists, is this not a good? Even if it is not, we still have to ask if it possesses properties such as personality, order, unlimited action, etc. All of these are goods-- how can Evil contain them? Evil cannot exist, for this is a good; Evil cannot be pleasant, for this is a good; Evil cannot be ordered and meticulous, for this is a good. In short, it cannot be conceived without contradiction: it is self-referentially contradictory.

In stating that evil has no ontological existence, no one who is responsible and intelligent is stating that it is meaningless. Just as we feel cold and we feel the effects of darkness, we also feel fear and hatred and lust and pain. It is wholly meaningful, even if it does not exist ontologically. It exists existentially (or perhaps phenomenologically), which means it must be dealt with and explained. However, it cannot be desired, for you cannot desire what does not exist.

Evil is a recreation of what God created good. IOW it seeks to make that which is good into evil.

God created from nothing. And all He created He said was good. The devil. also a created being, sought to take that which God created and twist to evil.

It is the same with all things of creation. They can be for good or evil. Since this is mans domain which God gave him to govern, he is responsable for what he does with all that God has given him.

But [if] ye turn unto me, and keep my commandments, and do them; though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the heaven, [yet] will I gather them from thence, and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set my name there. Neh. 1:9

See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil; Deut. 30:15

It's a choice.

 

[TrueMyth]

Evil is a recreation of what God created good. IOW it seeks to make that which is good into evil.

It's not a recreation-- it's a parasite. It depends on good for what form of existence it has. If good did not exist, evil would not either. Outside of God there is nothing. God (and good) could exist quite handily without evil.

Evil only has existence contingently; it is contingent upon good. Its existence, such as it is, is solely the twisting or improper use of some good. Therefore, any choice made for evil is made with a wrong idea of some good.

God created from nothing. And all He created He said was good. The devil. also a created being, sought to take that which God created and twist to evil.

OK... but this still doesn't make God the author of evil, nor does it make evil exist independently...

It is the same with all things of creation. They can be for good or evil. Since this is mans domain which God gave him to govern, he is responsable for what he does with all that God has given him.

But [if] ye turn unto me, and keep my commandments, and do them; though there were of you cast out unto the uttermost part of the heaven, [yet] will I gather them from thence, and will bring them unto the place that I have chosen to set my name there. Neh. 1:9

See, I have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil; Deut. 30:15

It's a choice.

Yep, sure is. And that's the only place evil is-- in the possibility contained in free choice. It is only a contingent possibility; it can never be purely actualized.

 

[Teke]

It's not a recreation-- it's a parasite. It depends on good for what form of existence it has. If good did not exist, evil would not either. Outside of God there is nothing. God (and good) could exist quite handily without evil.

It's a philisophical guess. We know nothing exists outside of God and the heavens and earth He created.
God put us in a temporal form which relates to things like time, being within that. And so we relate good and evil, the knowledge of good and evil is within that form He fashioned us in from His likeness. So just as there is the possiblity of evil coming from good, so is it with us.

OK... but this still doesn't make God the author of evil, nor does it make evil exist independently...

I agree. God is not the author of evil. And nothing exists independently except God.

A Schoonenberg quote comes to mind,
"It depends on what one understands by metaphysics. If one means the projection of an ideal world behind or above the one in which we live — a sort of rationalized mythology — then metaphysics is indeed an unreal discussion, having not even the revealing character of myth. If one means the rationalizing of mystery, then it is even less serviceable for theology.

Metaphysics can, however, also be the expression of the mystery that our real world does not conceal behind it, but is itself."
Piet Schoonenberg

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Adam had that in the garden. Or are you suggesting that he had a sinful nature in the garden?

Adam, and all mankind, was created for the very purpose of demonstrating sin.

 

[TrueMyth]

Adam, and all mankind, was created for the very purpose of demonstrating sin.

Interesting claim. But what purpose can be achieved in demonstrating sin? Perhaps, to further God's glory. Fair enough. But why did God choose this method to do so? Therein lies the rub, for in the situation you propose, God creates a being which not only has a will, but has desires and feelings, and then purposefully forces it to commit evil.

Alternatively, let us suppose God creates a being with a will, desires, and feelings, and because He desires its free surrender, He allows it to reject Him. However, He loves it so much that He miraculously finds a way to reconcile its sin to Himself, who is Holiness. Both ways proposed further God's glory. There is no higher furthering of God's glory in the way you propose; in fact, it is entirely possible that it diminishes it.

For, we must ask, if His own glorification is the end and purpose of all God's actions, we must ask why He gave humans will, desire, and feeling. To give them with one hand while forcibly molding them with the other is hardly glorifiying. Rather, it is more glorifying for God to give these gifts and allow their full expression. For:

Free will is what makes evil possible. Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata-- of creatures that worked like machines-- would hardly be worth creating. The happiness which God designs for His higher creatures is the happiness of being freely, voluntarily united to Him and to each other in an ecstasy of love and delight compared with which the most rapturous love between a man and a woman on this earth is mere milk and water. Ad for that they must be free. (C. S. Lewis, Mere Christianity)

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Interesting claim. But what purpose can be achieved in demonstrating sin? Perhaps, to further God's glory. Fair enough. But why did God choose this method to do so? Therein lies the rub, for in the situation you propose, God creates a being which not only has a will, but has desires and feelings, and then purposefully forces it to commit evil.

Alternatively, let us suppose God creates a being with a will, desires, and feelings, and because He desires its free surrender, He allows it to reject Him. However, He loves it so much that He miraculously finds a way to reconcile its sin to Himself, who is Holiness. Both ways proposed further God's glory. There is no higher furthering of God's glory in the way you propose; in fact, it is entirely possible that it diminishes it.

For, we must ask, if His own glorification is the end and purpose of all God's actions, we must ask why He gave humans will, desire, and feeling. To give them with one hand while forcibly molding them with the other is hardly glorifiying. Rather, it is more glorifying for God to give these gifts and allow their full expression. For:

God has an anger issue that he is working out. He can only punish the demons by restraining them. He created us to act out the fulness of sin, something the demons can influence but cannot do directly as they are spirit. As humans we are the perfect vehicle for sin, and for painful punishment, and for redemption.

 

[Zeena]

Adam had that in the garden. Or are you suggesting that he had a sinful nature in the garden?

Adam did not have the Life of God in the Garden, like Christians..

He was innocent, yes, for he had yet to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, but he did not eat from the Tree of Life then.. Ergo, he had no life but his own!

Otherwise, how could he have sinned.. heh

 

[Zeena]

God has an anger issue that he is working out. He can only punish the demons by restraining them. He created us to act out the fulness of sin, something the demons can influence but cannot do directly as they are spirit. As humans we are the perfect vehicle for sin, and for painful punishment, and for redemption.

Actually, demons can and do take possession of people (not Christians) daily..
Anyone who is not saved is a child of the devil, and they always do his bidding :o

They can still 'speak' into the life of a believer..
Which is why Christ hid us in Himself, for they cannot speak into the Life of God

 

[TrueMyth]

God has an anger issue that he is working out. He can only punish the demons by restraining them. He created us to act out the fulness of sin, something the demons can influence but cannot do directly as they are spirit. As humans we are the perfect vehicle for sin, and for painful punishment, and for redemption.

God has an anger issue, eh? Assuming Freud's in heaven, maybe He should talk to him...

Seriously, I have no idea what that sentence is supposed to be about. For that matter, I have no idea what pretty much anything you said is supposed to prove.

1. Why can God only punish demons by restraining them?

2. Are you saying demons cannot sin? If they can only influence, then what did they do before humans came along?

3. Why does being a spirit limit one's ability to sin?

4. Why are we the perfect vehicle for sin?

5. Why does God find it necessary to demonstrate sin? Or painful punishment?

Or maybe I'm not sure I want to hear the answers you might provide...

 

[Godsloved]

Demons are disembodied spirits. They use to have bodies in earth's earliest ages. But when Lucifer fell with 1/3 of the angels from 3rd to 2nd heaven, they corrupted those demons who were beings (not men) on earth. God saw that it was so utterly corrupted, He made the earth desolate in Gen. 1.2, then some time later restored creation in the 6 days that summarize his restoration, making man in His image. Day 2 was not called a good day like the other days because when the two firmaments were split up came some of those demons who try to inhabit creatures, starting with the serpent in the garden. Later they inhabited men, which caused the giants.

 

[Zeena]

Nephilim

eg;David & Goliath

Genesis 6:1-7

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, That the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives of all which they chose. And the LORD said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years. There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown. And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.