Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
"the question" and "it" are referring back to the OP?You've forgotten the question of the OP that you didn't address?
Not too hot on analogy either, then?I specifically don't want the instructions in fairy tale, so that's a bad translation you've got going.
It's not a story for small children.
But your response reveals your presumption - that story as teaching is always at a small child level.
You clearly haven't read the story without removing your blinkers.
Not too hot on analogy either, then?
Clearly it does address exactly that question.Nonsense. I accept that stories are a good way to impart lessons, even to adults. It's that this particular story does not answer the question you claim it does.
Imposing all those questions is exactly NOT allowing the story to speak for itself, speaking to the topic it wants to address.I have read it more times than it is worth reading. It doesn't answer the question. In fact, it adds more questions: how can omniscient being feel regret? Why would a benevolent and omnipotent being choose such a destructive method for ridding the world of evil? Couldn't God foresee this situation arising, allowing him to act earlier to prevent it?
Clearly it does address exactly that question.
It presents exactly the scenario of ultimate evil, and runs the thought experiment "what if God just wiped it all out" through to its answering conclusion.
Imposing all those questions is exactly NOT allowing the story to speak for itself, speaking to the topic it wants to address.
again imposing a different question on the text ("what is God like" or "how would God address this") rather than let the story answer its own question.It addresses it poorly
And in doing so it depicts an incompetent and malevolent deity who apparently knows no better way of addressing evil than by wanton destruction.
you areWho is "imposing" such questions on the story?
It's a perfectly good analogy to illustrate why its not appropriate to demand an answer in an inappropriate genre.I prefer my parables to at least specially address the content of the question they are supposed to address.
again imposing a different question on the text ("what is God like" or "how would God address this") rather than let the story answer its own question.
you are
A story addresses it as a story. My assertion all along is that that needs to be left as a story, not translated into some less good medium. So long as people keep demanding the answer translated into a non-narrative form they aren't really accepting that stories themselves are good pedagogy, despite protestations like "Nonsense. I accept that stories are a good way to impart lessons, even to adults."A different question? The question is, if I'm not mistaken, why doesn't God intervene to prevent evil in the world. You claim that the story of the Flood addresses this. Time to be specific: in what way does this story address that question?
A story addresses it as a story.
My assertion all along is that that needs to be left as a story, not translated into some less good medium. So long as people keep demanding the answer translated into a non-narrative form they aren't really accepting that stories themselves are good pedagogy, despite protestations like "Nonsense. I accept that stories are a good way to impart lessons, even to adults."
Of course - thats a truism.Obviously. But that's not the question I'm asking. I'm asking you to distill the answer the story gives to this question. What does it tell us?
Stories that have pedagogic value impart some sort of lesson.
Of course - thats a truism.
And the best stories teach a lesson that way precisely because story is the right way of teaching the lesson.
A demand to distill the lesson assumes that (a) the lesson is something independent of the pedagogy (b) that only happens to be taught via story and can equally or better be put in some other form.
"there must be a lesson"You're obfuscating now. If the story is to have any pedagogic value, there must be some lesson it imparts. What's the lesson?
"there must be a lesson"
and
"that lesson can be properly formulated as a propositional statement"
are not equivalent. If they were, we wouldn't need stories to teach the lesson.
It's a perfectly good analogy to illustrate why its not appropriate to demand an answer in an inappropriate genre.
Hello all,
It seems that every day we read of some new shocking brutality that ISIS has committed against one of their victims. If the reports are true, they engage in torture, murderous executions, the sexual slavery of women and children, and many other awful brutalities. My question, however, revolves around ISIS and an understanding of theology. Does the existence of a group like ISIS cause you to doubt/question God or does/did it even drive you to outright atheism? We could consider the following points:
1) Obviously, God has refused to intervene to stop ISIS
2) God created all the ISIS members (genetically speaking) and knew what they would do prior them even being born
3) And, of course, God could easily rescue the ISIS' victims of murder/sexual slavery and has not done so
4) When we come to Christian theology, Jesus Christ died on the cross for everyone (this would include ISIS members) and offers them forgiveness if they obey his commands - is this justified?
In short, what theological conclusions can you draw from the existence of a group like ISIS?
Were the infants, children, and animals who drowned all "evil people"?
I have read it more times than it is worth reading.
It doesn't answer the question. In fact, it adds more questions: how can omniscient being feel regret?
Why would a benevolent and omnipotent being choose such a destructive method for ridding the world of evil?
Couldn't God foresee this situation arising, allowing him to act earlier to prevent it?
And so on... The story makes God look incompetent and malevolent.
That the story is an answer to the question.
ebia said:It's a perfectly good analogy to illustrate why its not appropriate to demand an answer in an inappropriate genre.
ebia said:All real learning is ambiguous.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?