drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Evil
Dec 10, 2008 11:53:27 GMT -5
Post by drakim on Dec 10, 2008 11:53:27 GMT -5
But, to PLAN to make man fall, that's not what I would see as the ultimate good action. Even if it ultimately brought about more good than evil, it DID bring about evil and suffering. Surely, God, supreme ruler and omnipotent creator, could have thought of a design for the world that didn't include all this suffering?
Either, we have to say God is just that mysterious (and mysterious seems to equal evil) Or, that God simply isn't creative enough or powerful enough.
|
|
j3frea
New Member
For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain!
Posts: 43
|
Evil
Dec 10, 2008 13:27:03 GMT -5
Post by j3frea on Dec 10, 2008 13:27:03 GMT -5
I said that "God planned for man to fall" not "God planned to make man fall". I realise that to you the difference is probably negligible however it is a distinct difference. I hope someone else can say this in a better way than I can: "God did not cause man to fall but He allowed it and was sovereign in it".
From the paragraph before this I knew that these were the conclusions that you would reach (although I don't understand how mysterious is equated with evil). To the first point my response is that God is mysterious but in no way evil. To the second point my response is: this is the same as the old Epicurean dilemma I mentioned a while ago: 1. If God is willing to prevent evil, but is not able to: Then He is not omnipotent. 2. If He is able, but not willing: Then He is malevolent. 3. If He is both able and willing: Then whence cometh evil?
And as you know I hold to the third category. God is powerful and creative etc... enough. This was obviously the way that brought Him the most glory and that is all I can say. I sincerely hope that someone can give a more thorough response in this regard.
|
|
drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Evil
Dec 10, 2008 15:20:49 GMT -5
Post by drakim on Dec 10, 2008 15:20:49 GMT -5
I said that "God planned for man to fall" not "God planned to make man fall". I realise that to you the difference is probably negligible however it is a distinct difference. I hope someone else can say this in a better way than I can: "God did not cause man to fall but He allowed it and was sovereign in it". Well, he set up the conditions necessary to make man fall. To me, it's like leaving a child in a room full of unsecured guns. Sure, you aren't responsible for the actions of the child, but still... I was making joke based on that each time I hear about God doing something obviously evil, it's simply because I don't understand God and that he is "mysterious". thus, I have to conclude that mysterious is just an alias for being evil. Imagine the perfect builder who is the nicest person in the world! 1. If the builder is willing to make a perfect house, but is not able to: Then he is not the perfect builder 2. If the builder is able, but now willing, then he isn't the nicest person in the world 3. If he is both willing and able, then whence cometh his imperfect product?
|
|
|
Evil
Dec 11, 2008 1:38:03 GMT -5
Post by Ryan Dozier on Dec 11, 2008 1:38:03 GMT -5
So what are you geting at exactly?
WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY EVIL?
#3 Simply because God has chosen to use imperfect products for His perfect plan. His plan is stated in Romans chapter 9. God will glorify Himself through the vessels of destruction and the vessels of mercy.
|
|
drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Evil
Dec 11, 2008 4:44:20 GMT -5
Post by drakim on Dec 11, 2008 4:44:20 GMT -5
So what are you geting at exactly? That no loving parent would ever leave his child to hurt itself. Especially not if it's just to glorify himself. Hurting others for self gain? Using an imperfect product is not a sensible action by a perfect God. And besides, that means he is not willing to deal with evil, and thus not all loving.
|
|
j3frea
New Member
For to me, to live is Christ and to die is gain!
Posts: 43
|
Evil
Dec 12, 2008 5:33:44 GMT -5
Post by j3frea on Dec 12, 2008 5:33:44 GMT -5
I think that you need to understand that we are still His creation - we don't have some sort of privileged position as a child would with regards to its parents.
You see, your mindset isn't changing as the discussion progresses; in the first paragraph you responded with the parent being passive in the injury. Now though, you have already reverted to your original understanding of an active cause of injury.
Perhaps this stems from what has already been talked about: God is not all loving to the exclusion of His other attributes - it is true to say "God is love" but it is not true to say "God is only love". He has other attributes like holiness, perfection and he even hates!
What I think is important to stress is that God's glory is the chief end of everything.
|
|
drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Evil
Dec 12, 2008 8:07:43 GMT -5
Post by drakim on Dec 12, 2008 8:07:43 GMT -5
I think that you need to understand that we are still His creation - we don't have some sort of privileged position as a child would with regards to its parents. I understand what you mean, but I don't agree at all, that's the basic problem. I mean, if I were arguing that murdering old people because they weren't useful anymore was a good thing, surely I couldn't just tell you that "you simply have to understand that it's the right thing to do". Surely for you, it's justification enough that God wills it, after all, you believe in him and is his servant. This is simply not true for me, and thus, I won't accept such a justification. The "good" and "evil" I know and have used all my life does not fit at all with this, and I need more than a "that's just the way it is" argument to convince me otherwise. It seems as if you think I'm trying to become a Christian. Why would I change my mindset unless I got a reason to do it? All you have done thus far is say that God actually has the right to hurt people, so it's okay. I don't agree with that. I don't think God would have the right to hurt people at will, even if he made them. It's a basic condition which I am not in tune with. And I keep hearing "hurry up and change then", as if we had established that your position is already true and that I'm trying to accept Christianity. I didn't come here wanting to be a Christian, but struggling with the finer points of Christianity. I came here with the intent to learn every bodies point of view, so I can myself establish the most reasonable conclusion. Then God is not all loving, just a bit loving. I liked Jesus better than the God the father. Jesus didn't ever strike back because it was his right. He washed the feet of people despite being the supreme creator of the universe. He was humble and all loving. The God you describes is more the "I'm a loving God, but if I get a good reason, I WILL strike you and your loved ones down, so beware!" And who decided that? God?
|
|
drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Evil
Feb 17, 2009 9:54:45 GMT -5
Post by drakim on Feb 17, 2009 9:54:45 GMT -5
The point is that the idea that God's plan is somehow flawed is erroneous. From the start God planned for man to fall - this was not some sort of accident and although He "does not desire that any should perish", it was part of His plan. There are no mistakes in this design which is quite comforting to me - I know that even though it may get rough and bumpy at times but it is all part of His sovereign will. I don't know how to explain it any better... I would be careful to insist that every single thing that happens is part of God's plan to glorify himself. If that was the case, then what if I came over to where you live and burned down your house? Surely an evil action, but it happened, and thus was part of God's plan. Right from the moment of creation, God intended for me to burn down your house. It's nothing you should be mad at me for, it's part of God's plan to glorify himself.
|
|
|
Evil
Feb 17, 2009 12:12:01 GMT -5
Post by Ryan Dozier on Feb 17, 2009 12:12:01 GMT -5
I will respond soon. I am unable presently. However, this subject deals with God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. I recommend reading this article to understand the Biblical position on evil. Here is the link www.sgbcsv.org/literature/ProblemOfEvil.pdfI will reply back soon.
|
|
drakim
Full Member
Two hands working do more than a thousand hands clasped in prayer
Posts: 177
|
Evil
Feb 18, 2009 11:29:33 GMT -5
Post by drakim on Feb 18, 2009 11:29:33 GMT -5
I will respond soon. I am unable presently. However, this subject deals with God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. I recommend reading this article to understand the Biblical position on evil. Here is the link www.sgbcsv.org/literature/ProblemOfEvil.pdfI will reply back soon. From what I get from this PDF, God uses evil as an tool to further his glorification. But this doesn't really answer anything at all. I can simply rephrase the problem of evil like this to show it: Why does God, who can do all things, use evil to glorify himself when it causes suffering? This does not fit into the image of an benevolent being. As God is omnipotent, he can glorify himself with anything, and does not need evil as a tool.The only possible answer I see is to say that since God is omnipotent, he is allowed to use evil and cause suffering, while still remaining benevolent, simply because he is omnipotent. But that basically means we have to throw out our very understanding of these words. Up is down and black is white. We have resorted to saying that "Evil exists in this world despite the loving God because God is omnipotent and can do whatever he d**n wills without being questioned for it". It's more of a "shut up" response to the problem of evil rather than an explanation.
|
|