Good and Evil

[Feldon]

Then that makes god accountable for everything.

Accountable to whom?

 

[Feldon]

Because the bible says that death entered the world through Adam's sin. Why were other things sinning and death not being the result? And how bad would it suck to be the guy whose sin condemned everybody to being set on fire... and people are all like, "what the heck did you do? Seriously???" "Oh, I ate a magic fruit." "You condemned us all to being set on fire for a trillion years for eating a magic fruit..." "Yeah, I don't really have this whole God's justice thing figured out yet. I was thinking bad heartburn or something for the fruit, but no, he's planning on setting us all on fire unless he kills hiimself for us."

It's never alleged that Adam "invented" sinning. He was the first man to sin, and death was a foreign concept within Eden. But before Adam ate the fruit, the snake sinned. Right? Because otherwise, God wouldn't have punished it.

 

[BL2KTN]

So death didn't enter the world (not just Eden) like the bible says?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Accountable to whom?

Accountable to himself. It's called personal accountability. We expect it out of people, why shouldn't we expect that from God? Why does he get a pass?

Have you heard the phrase, "The buck stops here"?

 

[Faith Unites]

God is not responsible for the privation of good. That is the responsibilty of the thing. If God has allowed free will He is not responsible for something that chooses to operate outside of that good. That is a choice made by the thing itself. God exists on one end of the spectrum and nothingness (to be outside of God) lies on the other end. In order for nothing to exist something besides God must first be created. If the thing that is created has free will it can then choose to perverse the good and in turn it creates that nothingness (separation from the essence of God). IMHO

 

[PsychoSarah]

God is not responsible for the privation of good. That is the responsibilty of the thing. If God has allowed free will He is not responsible for something that chooses to operate outside of that good. That is a choice made by the thing itself. God exists on one end of the spectrum and nothingness (to be outside of God) lies on the other end. In order for nothing to exist something besides God must first be created. If the thing that is created has free will it can then choose to perverse the good and in turn it creates that nothingness (separation from the essence of God). IMHO

This makes god absolutely responsible, as it allowed people the freedom to create suffering. It still allowed suffering to happen.

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

This makes god absolutely responsible, as it allowed people the freedom to create suffering. It still allowed suffering to happen.

God is responsible for the existence of suffering in the ultimate sense that He created creatures who have the capacity to cause human suffering. This is not controversial.

God allows human beings to suffer.

Does this trouble you Sarah?

 

[PsychoSarah]

God is responsible for the existence of suffering in the ultimate sense that He created creatures who have the capacity to cause human suffering. This is not controversial.

God allows human beings to suffer.

Does this trouble you Sarah?

It doesn't actually, although it would when people try to present god as incapable of evil.

 

[Received]

In a sense, following Jeremy's reasoning, God can't really create nothingness; that would be a possibility only of individual freedom, given that nothingness is what negates the thing created, perverts it, twists it. God creates the thing; the self is responsible for how it uses the thing, either by preserving it or by negating it, both of which are possible only with freedom.

 

[PsychoSarah]

In a sense, following Jeremy's reasoning, God can't really create nothingness; that would be a possibility only of individual freedom, given that nothingness is what negates the thing created, perverts it, twists it. God creates the thing; the self is responsible for how it uses the thing, either by preserving it or by negating it, both of which are possible only with freedom.

Except there is no logical need to make people capable of evil or suffering to begin with.

 

[Received]

Except there is no logical need to make people capable of evil or suffering to begin with.

So you're saying there's no point in making people free?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

So you're saying there's no point in making people free?

There's no point in creating people if you're going to make them incapable of reaching your impossible standards, then punish them for not doing so.

That is sadistic.

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

It doesn't actually, although it would when people try to present god as incapable of evil.

Why would it trouble you if people tried to present God as incapable of evil?

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

Except there is no logical need to make people capable of evil or suffering to begin with.

what do you mean "logical need"?

 

[Received]

There's no point in creating people if you're going to make them incapable of reaching your impossible standards, then punish them for not doing so.

That is sadistic.

Which is why deities like that only exist in the minds of people.

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

There's no point in creating people if you're going to make them incapable of reaching your impossible standards, then punish them for not doing so.

That is sadistic.

Why do you think God created people who could not live up to His standards?

 

[woodpecker]

There's no point in creating people if you're going to make them incapable of reaching your impossible standards, then punish them for not doing so.

That is sadistic.

Hi goldenboy89,......God in His love created YOU in His image, not to be a God like Him, but a being in His image to love and provide for, how is that sadistic?

God created a beautiful place, Eden, for you and I to live, how is that sadistic?

God did not create us to be robots, but created us to love Him freely, not forcefully.

To love your creator is to obey your creator, why, because an all mighty God knows what is best for you.

Eve and Adam chose to obey a fallen angel called Lucifer, disguised as a serpent Eve and Adam believing God did not really know what was best for them, and was deceived by evil temptation.

And sense that time God has always provided a way out of our sinful nature, how sadistic is that? It's not sadistic......its pure Love, pure grace, pure mercy.

If you have not chosen Christ as your savior...well, you have chosen the sadistic one, Satan, The Lord of all that's evil.

 

[Eudaimonist]

If you have not chosen Christ as your savior...well, you have chosen the sadistic one, Satan, The Lord of all that's evil.

And that can be done with full honesty in one's doubt that Christianity has the truth of things. THAT is what is sadistic and evil.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Jeremy E Walker]

And that can be done with full honesty in one's doubt that Christianity has the truth of things. THAT is what is sadistic and evil.


eudaimonia,

Mark

But Mark, surely you forget that God knows whether or not one's rejection of Christ is based upon honest intellectual misgivings or not?

In the event that, let's say, you for example happen to be such a person who honestly doubts the truth-claims of Christianity and this is the real reason why you do not place your faith in Him, then I will happily tell you that God will deal with you according to the knowledge and light you had.

The same goes for those who have never heard about Christ.

You see, the Bible teaches that those who do not have the Law i.e. the Law of Moses, but by nature do what the Law requires are indeed a law unto themselves showing that the Law is written on their hearts.

So those gentiles who lived and died without ever being a part of the theorcratic nation of Israel who nontheless lived righteously, were a law unto themselves and by the way they lived, showed that they desired to live righteously before God and man and were judged to have fulfilled the law.

Now I will not be presumptuous Mark, but I have spoken with some unbelievers who have confessed that their unbelief was ultimately due to them not liking the idea of being morally accountable to God, not to any intellectual doubt or misgiving. I do not know if this is descriptive of your situation or not. Nor will I presume. But we can both agree that if God exists, He knows why you reject Him and that, as Abraham said, He will judge justly.

 

[BL2KTN]

Hi goldenboy89,......God in His love created YOU in His image, not to be a God like Him, but a being in His image to love and provide for, how is that sadistic?

God created a beautiful place, Eden, for you and I to live, how is that sadistic?

God did not create us to be robots, but created us to love Him freely, not forcefully.

To love your creator is to obey your creator, why, because an all mighty God knows what is best for you.

Eve and Adam chose to obey a fallen angel called Lucifer, disguised as a serpent Eve and Adam believing God did not really know what was best for them, and was deceived by evil temptation.

And sense that time God has always provided a way out of our sinful nature, how sadistic is that? It's not sadistic......its pure Love, pure grace, pure mercy.

If you have not chosen Christ as your savior...well, you have chosen the sadistic one, Satan, The Lord of all that's evil.

So let me get this straight...

You're saying that a dirt-man and a rib-woman lived in a garden and were tricked by a talking snake, who was actually evil incarnate, into eating a magic fruit that placed an invisible, undetectable darkness in the invisible, undetectable spirit/soul/ghost of every human being after them. You're saying that to save ourselves from this invisible, undetectable darkness in our invisible, undetectable spirit/soul/ghosts, we can telepathically ask a two-thousand year old Jewish man who was his own father, plus the Canaanite war god Yahweh mixed with the Caananite chief god El, who himself also came back to life, to forgive us. You're saying that because the Canaanite war god Yahweh loves us, he will forgive us this way, and thus not set us on fire for trillions of years like he intended. You're saying that in spite of every shred of scientific, archaeological, and psychological evidence, this is true.

Does that about get it?