God and the Problem Of Evil.

[AZMark]

Maybe this might help…

The Book of Job, a work dating vaguely between the years 600 and 300 B.C., deals ostensibly with the theme of the righteous man who is unjustly afflicted by God.

Driven to extremity by sufferings unjustly visited upon him, Job demands a confrontation with God, who with great bluster replies to him out of a whirlwind. But the answer given so dramatically by God is in reality no answer at all. What sense is there, to God’s thundering about morning stars, flowing seas, crocodiles, and so on, and what is the point to his asking Job where he was when he created the world? After all, poor Job was only too conscious of the bewildering mystery of things, for he had experienced it quite painfully.

God, however, evades the issue by telling Job something he knew quite well, namely, that God is almighty, and then goes on boasting about what his great might can do. For all the impressive noise, the inflated majesty, and the parading of the panorama of nature, God was just blustering. Job had asked him a perfectly legitimate question, one of most agonizing urgency to the questioner, and yet he did not offer a real explanation; nor did God apologize for his conduct, which any sensible mind would regard not only as unseemly but also immoral. Were a human being to destroy another’s family by fire and practice bacteriological warfare on him, such a person would assuredly be called to account; but God just replies that he is almighty and that is the end of the argument. Moreover, God seems angry with Job for having asked the question, and he reproaches the poor man with thunderous divine eloquence.

Job is not in the wrong, but rather it is God who is in the wrong. God is great, powerful, but quite the unconscious bully who has been coasting along on his own self importance until he found himself in a position in which one of his creatures could stand up to him and utter a legitimate criticism of him. He is a jealous God who demands of Job and all humans’ complete obedience to his will and law. God is also a cheat, for in contravention of his promise to abide by the covenant, he cheats David, who in the Eighty-ninth Psalm complains bitterly of this fact.

The moral superiority of Job, the created man, over God the Creator introduces a truly Gnostic paradox into the myth. Obviously, there is something radically wrong with God, whereas there is much that is right with Job. It is Job who is the real hero of the story, and as a representative of humanity, as against so-called divinity, he represents the small but potentially vital element of consciousness of the human spirit confronted with the huge, materially powerful, but spiritually unaware almightiness of the Creator.

[vivalostwages]

@missyzilly

I read the whole bible only once niv. I just started The King James version. And I just downloaded a program to teach myself Hebrew so I can read the Torah. I have alot to learn. I have been truly humbled by your knowledge . Thank you . I really thought I had a superior understanding of the bible…lololol WOW. I no nothing.

I recommend Robert Price’s The Reason Driven Life and Ken Daniels’ Why I Believed if you want to learn things about the bible, and other matters, that will never be covered in church meetings.

[Trinopus]

@AZMark

. . . The Book of Job . . .

Job is not in the wrong, but rather it is God who is in the wrong. . . .

Obviously, there is something radically wrong with God, whereas there is much that is right with Job. . . .

I’m so very glad to know that someone else reads it that way too! I’ve heard so many sermons on Job, always upholding the “Divine Right of Kings,” and how God knows better than we do, etc. But I always saw the story as a grotesque comedy, with Satan hauling God around by the nose, and poor Job suffering for it.

(And, yes, as a matter of fact, we can draw forth Leviathan with a hook!)

[vivalostwages]

@Trinopus

I’m so very glad to know that someone else reads it that way too! I’ve heard so many sermons on Job, always upholding the “Divine Right of Kings,” and how God knows better than we do, etc. But I always saw the story as a grotesque comedy, with Satan hauling God around by the nose, and poor Job suffering for it.

(And, yes, as a matter of fact, we can draw forth Leviathan with a hook!)

The story of Job always bothered me, too. He suffers for no other reason than that the two cosmic beings had a bet going. The fact that he was later given a new family and a bunch of new animals does not negate the fact that his original family and critters were destroyed.

[Dob]

Of course if you believe in God and they infinite universe (quantum immortality) theory then there is no “evil” really and everyone is truly happy… you just dont perceive it that way because the universe in which you are alive has people suffering and dieing.

But in their universe, they are just perfectly happy and are unaware of how their other “selfs” are suffering in your universe.

Problem solved.

[Trinopus]

How does that solve the problem? Okay, sure, suffering is purely local. The “same persons” who are in agony in this universe are not in agony in other universes.

Still, there is a measure of agony here, observed by billions, that no-one has yet managed to justify, if there also exists a God possessed of the attributes commonly described. (Omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent.)

If there is room for improvement – and I think we can all see very clearly ways in which our universe might be improved – then it ain’t perfect.

Blaming human “free will” is the classic explanation, and, as this thread has shown, that isn’t satisfying to at least a few of us. The sin of Adam doesn’t seem to balance out when weighed against the agony of children and other innocents. (And what about the agony of animals? They aren’t descended from Adam; how does God justify the horrible things that happen to non-human critters?)

Problem solved? No… Not for most of us.

[Dob]

Do you object to agony in a movie? The agony isn’t “real” to anyone, but its being observed by billions, does that make it evil?

[pchaos]

@AZMark

Maybe this might help…

The Book of Job, a work dating vaguely between the years 600 and 300 B.C., deals ostensibly with the theme of the righteous man who is unjustly afflicted by God.

Driven to extremity by sufferings unjustly visited upon him, Job demands a confrontation with God, who with great bluster replies to him out of a whirlwind. But the answer given so dramatically by God is in reality no answer at all. What sense is there, to God’s thundering about morning stars, flowing seas, crocodiles, and so on, and what is the point to his asking Job where he was when he created the world? After all, poor Job was only too conscious of the bewildering mystery of things, for he had experienced it quite painfully.

God, however, evades the issue by telling Job something he knew quite well, namely, that God is almighty, and then goes on boasting about what his great might can do. For all the impressive noise, the inflated majesty, and the parading of the panorama of nature, God was just blustering. Job had asked him a perfectly legitimate question, one of most agonizing urgency to the questioner, and yet he did not offer a real explanation; nor did God apologize for his conduct, which any sensible mind would regard not only as unseemly but also immoral. Were a human being to destroy another’s family by fire and practice bacteriological warfare on him, such a person would assuredly be called to account; but God just replies that he is almighty and that is the end of the argument. Moreover, God seems angry with Job for having asked the question, and he reproaches the poor man with thunderous divine eloquence.

Job is not in the wrong, but rather it is God who is in the wrong. God is great, powerful, but quite the unconscious bully who has been coasting along on his own self importance until he found himself in a position in which one of his creatures could stand up to him and utter a legitimate criticism of him. He is a jealous God who demands of Job and all humans’ complete obedience to his will and law. God is also a cheat, for in contravention of his promise to abide by the covenant, he cheats David, who in the Eighty-ninth Psalm complains bitterly of this fact.

The moral superiority of Job, the created man, over God the Creator introduces a truly Gnostic paradox into the myth. Obviously, there is something radically wrong with God, whereas there is much that is right with Job. It is Job who is the real hero of the story, and as a representative of humanity, as against so-called divinity, he represents the small but potentially vital element of consciousness of the human spirit confronted with the huge, materially powerful, but spiritually unaware almightiness of the Creator.

I agree, Job is the hero here. But there is little proof that God wrote the bible. So what we have is a bible that is inspired by the Holy Spirit, but written by men who interpret God’s actions.

If God wrote his own version of the Bible, He probably would have interpreted both the facts and the actions of Job differently.

Also, the Bible fails to answer the question of “who created God?” And we are never really told of His essential nature. We are forced to decipher parables and metaphors and decide on God’s nature.

However, we don’t even know something as basic as His height, or even whether He’s a Man or a Woman. But somehow from the Bible we are suppose to figure out something as esoteric as what He believes is right and His role in the Universe. The story of Adam and Eve talks about Man’s arrogance and Adam’s violation of God’s law.

Another issue which the Bible really doesn’t address is God’s role. Is He just God to mankind or is He God to all creation. If He is God to all creation, then most of His actions are explainable. In other words, God does not act solely to make Man happy. He is there to balance the interests of all that He created.

By the way, I personally believe that God always existed. Also, I believe that the Bible was meant to merely help Mankind on it’s spiritual quest. God never intended the Bible to be the sole source of information about Good and Evil.

If you look at the Bible as an aide to Man’s spiritual quest, then Good and Evil are always interacting and it’s the quest that is important and not any final answer about God and the existence of evil.

[Czarcasm]

@pchaos

I agree, Job is the hero here. But there is little proof that God wrote the bible. So what we have is a bible that is inspired by the Holy Spirit, but written by men who interpret God’s actions.

If God wrote his own version of the Bible, He probably would have interpreted both the facts and the actions of Job differently.

Also, the Bible fails to answer the question of “who created God?” And we are never really told of His essential nature. We are forced to decipher parables and metaphors and decide on God’s nature.

However, we don’t even know something as basic as His height, or even whether He’s a Man or a Woman. But somehow from the Bible we are suppose to figure out something as esoteric as what He believes is right and His role in the Universe. The story of Adam and Eve talks about Man’s arrogance and Adam’s violation of God’s law.

Another issue which the Bible really doesn’t address is God’s role. Is He just God to mankind or is He God to all creation. If He is God to all creation, then most of His actions are explainable. In other words, God does not act solely to make Man happy. He is there to balance the interests of all that He created.

By the way, I personally believe that God always existed. Also, I believe that the Bible was meant to merely help Mankind on it’s spiritual quest. God never intended the Bible to be the sole source of information about Good and Evil.

If you look at the Bible as an aide to Man’s spiritual quest, then Good and Evil are always interacting and it’s the quest that is important and not any final answer about God and the existence of evil.

The Bible you claim doesn’t give the whole story because it is written by Man is the same Bible you use to claim that these men were inspired by the Holy Spirit when they wrote it. Is there any chance at all that they got that part wrong too?

[pchaos]

If that statement is true, then I believe that Christians are guided by the Holy Spirit.

Besides Jobs desire to follow God’s guidance, I believe that John the Baptist was one of the greatest men that ever lived. There was a time when people believed that John might be the Messiah. But he didn’t want to hear any of that talk, he didn’t want any of the glory. He knew that Jesus was the Messiah and John stated emphatically that he wasn’t worthy of putting the sandals on Christ’s feet.

Humility the Bible teaches humility. It teaches that the spiritual quest is everything.
I don’t know why God permits evil. I only know that without evil, good would not exist and good people would not exist.

[Aji_de_Gallina]

Free will.
There can be no love without freedom not to.
Of course it sucks. It’ll be one tof the first things I’ll ask if I get to heaven

How much evil would be acceptable? I think that if the only evils in the world were death (at over 80) and teenage acne, we’d have the same thread.

[Czarcasm]

@pchaos

If that statement is true, then I believe that Christians are guided by the Holy Spirit.

Besides Jobs desire to follow God’s guidance, I believe that John the Baptist was one of the greatest men that ever lived. There was a time when people believed that John might be the Messiah. But he didn’t want to hear any of that talk, he didn’t want any of the glory. He knew that Jesus was the Messiah and John stated emphatically that he wasn’t worthy of putting the sandals on Christ’s feet.

Humility the Bible teaches humility. It teaches that the spiritual quest is everything.
I don’t know why God permits evil. I only know that without evil, good would not exist and good people would not exist.

How about responding to the question I just asked?

[jackdavinci]

Evil is an illusion. There is no evil, only avoidance of pain, willingness to take extreme actions to avoid or extinguish pain, and errors in judgement in how best to achieve that.

[Stealth_Potato]

@Aji_de_Gallina

Free will.
There can be no love without freedom not to.

Forgive me if this has been brought up in earlier pages of this thread – I’ve only skimmed most of it, having just dropped in after an absence of a couple years (what’s up folks, good to see so little has changed, hi Opal!) – but I have to ask, what does “free will” mean to you, and how does it affect the question or the answer? From where I’m standing, “free will” is just another word for “randomness.” Otherwise, I have no earthly idea what you or anyone else means by it.

[monavis]

@Voyager

You think God needed to test Moses’ faith at that time? Remember, Moses risked everything in Egypt. And, why would God care? The only answer is as a demonstration of his power to the assembled masses. Now to some extent they should be convinced also, but they weren’t, clearly in order for the priests who wrote the story to send a message to the doubters, just like in the last Narnia book.
But the argument isn’t that absolute evidence destroys faith, it is that any direct evidence destroys faith. And I thought that the risen Jesus was the absolute underpinning of Christianity.

What natural constant defines logic? All the stuff you talk about is based on evidence - incomplete evidence in the cause of causality, since when we look far enough we see that at the quantum level the universe does not exhibit causality.
Logic is not based on any of this. A & ~A being false is not determined from experimental evidence.

Revelation in the sense of God chatting with a prophet supposedly? Sure. Revelation in the sense that God talks to all people in a cloud in all languages at once? Maybe not proof, but it sure is evidence.

An all knowing being would already know Moses’s faith was weak so why test what one already knows?

[monavis]

@Pleonast

No, my contention is that interpreting the Bible as if it is always literally true is wrong-headed.

I haven’t put much thought to whether these things are literally or metaphorically true, because the answers don’t really affect my faith.

You’ll find many non-literalists don’t really care if this or that Bible story is literally true. We’re more motivated by what we should being doing now to follow God’s will than determining the exact meaning of some part of the Bible.

No disagreement from me.

Among Christians, it’s only a minority that really harps about a literal interpretation, and that’s a reaction to mainstream Christianity (in the US, at least) being unconcerned about literal truth. Most Christians are more concerned about living life as good people, helping their communities, observing the milestones of the year and one’s life, etc.

It simply doesn’t matter if Jesus really walked on water or not. It’s not an essential part of their faith in God and the answer won’t change how they live their lives.

No one can in truth really know the will of God, just what some other human said was God’s will. I know many atheists who live better lives than many believers. Some people are helped by their beliefs, some use it to try to control others,and like the Pharisee’s of Jesus time think it makes them better than others.

[monavis]

@Pleonast

Well, as a Methodist, this is fairly easy to answer: Wesleyan Quadrilateral–Scripture, Tradition, Reason, Experience. In practice, it’s complicated.

Ultimately, everyone has to decide for themself.

Well, my denomination doesn’t really have any authority that’s not an outcome of a large consensus of members, so that question doesn’t really apply to me. I’d vote with my feet if I was unhappy with any pronouncements, because I don’t really accept any human between me and God.

The simplest answer is: there’s no reason to expect it be “all or nothing”. The Bible is not monolithic.

With more nuance: most Christians do believe all of it, but what they mean by “belief” varies a lot. The Biblical literalists try to force the idea that “belief” can only mean “belief in the literal truth”. But belief can mean something like “belief in the essential truth”.

For example, take the phrase “all men are created equal”. No one believes that statement is literally true–men are born with varying amounts of intelligence, charisma, privilege, etc. But the statement is true in the sense that political rights should not depend on the particulars of one’s heritage. And not just men, but women, as well. So many people, if asked “do you believe all men are created equal?”, would answer “yes”.

Belief in a statement must always be qualified by what the interpretation and context are.

As for “everyone gets to roll their own”, well, yes, we do. God gave us free will and judges us each as individuals. Everyone has to roll their own, because the “Pope said so” won’t get you a free pass on Judgement Day.

Tradition, scripture, etc, are the work of humans so then you are not using the will of God but what some other human taught, read ,wrote or thought.

God if God is all knowing then there should be no need for a judgment,God would have known all about a person even before they were conceived.

[Kobal2]

@Aji_de_Gallina

Free will.
There can be no love without freedom not to.

Nobody has ever chosen to fall in love. Nobody has ever been able to will themselves out of love, either. These two simple truths are an ever renewed source of grief for mankind, if art history is any indication.
I think you can just as easily apply them to faith, for that matter.

[monavis]

@Voyager

Which if are you referring to? If god existed or if I didn’t believe you about Venice? I do, because I have other pieces of evidence that it exists - like a big book of its history I got when we were planning to go there, and lots of people I know who have. (And seeing the German Brunetti shows.)

You say IF You didn’t believe me about Venice or the" if" about God’s existance, either way it expresses doubt.

[monavis]

@kanicbird

There are many such faiths, mostly in the category of spirituality, where God is primarily defined as Love.

The most basic emotion, is the most basic desire of the human heart, to find Love, God’s Word and promise is seek me and you will find me. In other words my take is our hearts are programmed to at some point seek Love and the promise is we will find God.

Not sure exactly why you feel God wants us to seek the truth, and I’m pretty sure that’s wrong because God will reveal the truth to us, so again it’s seek Love and all things will be provided including truth. Why reinvent the wheel, we have access to all truth already. To me it doesn’t make sense that God would require this of us as He is the one to supply it.

Of course IMHO

Many thousands of generations have past and those people were never given the answer, so why was their needs not revealed?