A person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
So this started as a discussion on God's Benevolence, or lack of, and it soon becomes derailed when the religious arguments dry up and the only responses are to change the subject, avoid discussing God altogether and fall back on fallacious arguments (ad hominem, straw man, tu quoque, disanalogy etc.)
As I said I assume there is no deliberate trolling here - but rather just a lack of logic, high emotions and genuine memory loss...
Commentary
|
||
Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 2:08PM
|
||
1
|
Many of the posters here argue that God is truly benevolent and "Loves all His children"
However in order to benefit from eternal salvation one must follow some rules laid down by God.
These include;
However, failure to obey these rules will result in "eternal damnation", which by definition is malevolent.
If He is indeed benevolent then surely these rules are optional rather than compulsory?
|
Interesting question. Reminds me of David Hume's formulation of the problem of evil...
"Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? then he is impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?"
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 5:21PM
|
||
2
|
Only faith in Jesus leads to salvation. You aren't saved through behavior, only through faith. Your list is flawed.
|
There's a flaw in that logic...
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 5:38PM
|
||
3
|
that seems to strengthen the point that He isn't benevolent
|
That's the flaw.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Biblical Literalist on 15 Mar 2014 at 5:40PM
|
||
4
|
Jesus is the cornerstone
Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to mankind by which we must be saved.
acts 4
|
The faith argument again.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 5:48PM
|
||
5
|
yes I think we've established that belief, but it doesn't answer the original question
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Born Again Christian on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:08PM
|
||
6
|
So, in your view Pantheist , what would a benevolent God look (or act) like?
|
Good question.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:18PM
|
||
7
|
A very good point Born Again Christian , I'll have to have a think about that as deities aren't something I can easily identify with
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:31PM
|
||
8
|
I think Shakra is an example of a benevolent god.
Santa Claus is also a contender.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:37PM
|
||
9
|
Santa is definitely the ultimate benevolent being
Not familiar with Shakra, could you provide more info
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:43PM
|
||
10
|
Really? If you're bad Santa gives you a lump of coal. No gifts. You "earn" the right to a gift from Santa. And if you earn it, it's not really a gift now is it? So much for Santa being well meaning and kind. Be good or else you get nothing! That's being benevolent?
|
If you're bad - God kills you. I'd rather have a lump of coal.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:45PM
|
||
11
|
your santa may give you a lump of coal, mine never would
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:48PM
|
||
12
|
Well no wonder you like Santa. You've created your own version of him.
|
And Christians create their own versions of God.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:49PM
|
||
13
|
somewhat like religion then
|
Yes!
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:51PM
|
||
14
|
Good point. That's exactly right when it comes to religion/religion(s).
|
All in agreement.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:44PM
|
||
15
|
One issue with eastern gods is they have a different name in each culture.
Here's one story about Shakra
http://www.himalayanart.org/image.cfm/50196.html
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 16 Mar 2014 at 5:51AM
|
||
16
|
OK I've had a chance to think about it;
|
A reasonable list of attributes of a benevolent God - and very different to the God of the Bible.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Born Again Christian on 16 Mar 2014 at 1:52PM
|
||
17
|
Thank you for your thoughtful response Pantheist . I will think about this as well.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:40PM
|
||
18
|
Pantheist said… that seems to strengthen the point that He isn't benevolent
How so?
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:46PM
|
||
19
|
as I just stated benevolence is unconditional
|
Exactly. It has already been established that the Christian God demands faith - not good behaviour.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:50PM
|
||
20
|
So a benevolent King would never punish a wrong doer. You can violate any law without fear of the Judge. There are no conditions.
|
A benevolent king? So why have we suddenly stopped talking about God? Because the argument of God's benevolence has been conceded maybe?
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:56PM
|
||
21
|
I don't know, I've never come across one
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:57PM
|
||
22
|
on the one hand you know what benevolent is and on the other you don't?
|
Where did that conclusion come from?
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:03PM
|
||
23
|
benevolent
adjective
1. characterized by or expressing goodwill or kindly feelings: a benevolent attitude; her benevolent smile.
2. desiring to help others; charitable: gifts from several benevolent alumni.
3. intended for benefits rather than profit: a benevolent institution.
malevolent
adjective
1. wishing evil or harm to another or others; showing ill will; ill-disposed; malicious: His failures made him malevolent toward those who were successful.
2. evil; harmful; injurious: a malevolent inclination to destroy the happiness of others.
3. Astrology . evil or malign in influence.
What definitions are you using?
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:06PM
|
||
24
|
The same. But I asked if a benevolent King would ignore injustices and you don't seem to know how a benevolent King would deal with such. It's odd. It seems in your definition of benevolence, there is no justice. Wrong doers go unpunished and victims receive no recompense for their injuries.
|
What does a benevolent King (presumably a human being) have to do with questions about God?
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:09PM
|
||
25
|
I said I didn't know of a benevolent king
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:11PM
|
||
26
|
if you don't know of a benevolent king, how do you even know what is or isn't what a benevolent king should be like?
|
Again - what does this have to do with God? It's a total disanalogy.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:14PM
|
||
27
|
but we are not hypothesising here, we are talking about God and his rules, demands and actions are documented
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:20PM
|
||
28
|
You're just dodging the question. You don't even believe in God so you have to hypothesis to critique this imaginary entity.
|
Dodging is not an accurate description of being unable to answer a question that is irrelevant and makes no sense. The on-topic discussion about God's benevolence has been strangled.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:22PM
|
||
29
|
whether I believe or not, the documented evidence is there and as I am constantly being told is truthful.
I'm not dodging the question as the question was about God, not ficticious kings
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:24PM
|
||
30
|
No. We were dealing with your view of benevolence and how it works in the world. You are dodging. In your view, it seems, the criminal goes before the judge and gets to tell the judge how he is to be treated and the judge must obey.
|
From Kings to judges? It seems any topic will do as long as it's not God.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:27PM
|
||
31
|
are we talking kings or judicial systems?
judicial systems aren't based on benevolence so I fail to see the relevance?
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Creationist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:29PM
|
||
32
|
you're dodging a simple question
|
Refusing to be drawn into a series of disanalogies would be a more accurate assessment. The Creationist is the one who is dodging.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:09PM
|
||
33
|
A benevolent king would deal with injustices in a benevolent way. A kind way.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Born Again Christian on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:12PM
|
||
34
|
How?
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:12PM
|
||
35
|
We'd need an example to explore the idea. Can you provide a scenario?
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:17PM
|
||
36
|
I don't think Jim has an answer for the grittier realities of a world with sin and evil, nor the fact that a "least bad" response is sometimes called for. If an army bent on destruction, rape and pillaging is heading towards you, for example, you aren't going to stop them with acts of "benevolence" IMO.
|
An intervention which again avoids any discussion of God and goes on to completely derail the discussion.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:19PM
|
||
37
|
You can if you are God.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:21PM
|
||
38
|
Only be negating free will and its attendant consequences.
|
Where is the justfication for that assumption? I say God can prevent evil actions and still be benevolent. The Religious apologist says God can only do this by "negating free will". How can an omnipotent and omniscient God have such a limitation?
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:24PM
|
||
39
|
The Bible is full of examples of God "negating free will" to use your words, e.g. commanding people to kill children or killing people Himself.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:30PM
|
||
40
|
Aside from your misrepresentations regarding God's actions and motives, at what point did He ever take our "free will" away?
|
How can the descriptions of God's killings in the Bible be misrepresentations?Unless the Bible is doing the misrepresenting?
In any case, I didn't say anything about free will being taken away. So why ask that question? An attempt to derail the discussion even more?
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:34PM
|
||
41
|
I didn't day He took it away. Your word was "negated". He negated free will. Nullified it. God makes it clear that His commands must be obeyed.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:40PM
|
||
42
|
Yes, God's purpose was to make His plan clear in context. We are still to either accept or reject such. You are not making your point.
God has intervened directly in rare circumstances--particularly in ancient times when the physical and moral survival of His people was at stake to get His point across--but again, free will is never negated.
|
Way off topic now. Having a purpose or making a plan clear does not mean benevolence. The concept of having to accept or reject that plan on pain of death implies a lack of benevolence.
And now the apologist says that God can intevene without negating free will, contradicting his previous assertion that a benevolent God can't intervene without negating free will.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:58PM
|
||
43
|
Your concept of human free will is negated when humans are commanded by God or when God intervenes. Some examples (which also demonstrate God's limited benevolence, some might argue absence of benevolence)...
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:01PM
|
||
44
|
So on the one hand you complain when God doesn't intervene to sort out the messes we've made and on the other hand you complain when He does?
And--once again--that has nothing to do with free will! |
There has been no complaint about God intervening or not. A further dodging of the topic.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:04PM
|
||
45
|
And before we get another misdirect on the matter, I am stating that whether God intervenes directly and dramatically or not, He never takes away our free will to act as we choose.
|
So I suggest a benevolent God can intervene, the apologist states interventions would negate free will - now the apologist says God can intervene without taking away free will.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:12PM
|
||
46
|
I don't complain about God. That seems an odd concept to me, like complaining about the tooth fairy. I'm just highlighting Biblical examples of God's limited (or absent) benevolence - which is the topic. If a mess has been created, and you believe in a Creator of everything who is omnipotent and omniscient, then the Creator is accountable for the mess.
If God's benevolence has nothing to do with free will then let's not be distracted by the concept of free will.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:22PM
|
||
47
|
JimC said: I don't complain about God.
Well, yes you do--constantly!
JimC said: That seems an odd concept to me, like complaining about the tooth fairy.
Nice try. You don't have to believe in something to call it benevolent/non-benevolent, as all readers here well know.
JimC said: I'm just highlighting Biblical examples of God's limited (or absent) benevolence - which is the topic.
And I keep pointing out that you are not doing so honestly and in context, and you are ignoring that matter.
JimC said: If a mess has been created, and you believe in a Creator of everything who is omnipotent and omniscient, then the Creator is accountable for the mess.
No--the mess results from our wrong exercise of our free will. When we use free will rightly, the world is a better place. When we use it wrongly, "messes" result.
JimC said: If God's benevolence has nothing to do with free will then let's not be distracted by the concept if free will.
You are the one claiming free will has no relevance--I'm pointing out that it does.
|
A blind assertion about me "complaining" with no evidence - and totally off topic in any case.
The Apologist makes a fallacious straw man argument regarding the tooth fairy analogy. My proposition had nothing to do with the benevolence of the tooth fairy. It was a response to the accusation that I complain about God.
Then a mild ad hominem... I've explained that the God of the OT illustrates a lack of benevolence, but the Apologist just denies this is the case with no justification. Apparently it is not "honest" to do so.
Hard to tell if the final sentence is a straw man or just the result of a bad memory. The apologist said on line 44 that an intervention by God has nothign to do with free will. And now it is relevant?
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:32PM
|
||
48
|
I agree that you don't have to believe in an entity to judge its benevolence. What I said was it's a weird concept to complain about that entity.
The context I'm using for benevolence is the definition of the word and how I would act if I had Gods powers, namely that I would be more benevolent and merciful than the Biblical portrayal of God if I had His powers. We can discuss examples if you like, to illustrate. We have examples in the Bible which I refer to but you ignore.
God created human beings who "use free will wrongly" as you put it. He's accountable. Humans are responsible.
|
Note that I am referring to myself here - not because I want to be the centre of attention - but because I was specifically asked about a scenario and "what would you do?" |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:40PM
|
||
49
|
JimC said: I agree that you don't have to believe in an entity to judge its benevolence. What I said was it's a weird concept to complain about that entity.
But yet you do!
JimC said: The context I'm using for benevolence is the definition of the word and how I would act if I had Gods powers, namely that I would be more benevolent and merciful than the Biblical portrayal of God if I had His powers. We can discuss examples if you like, to illustrate. We have examples in the Bible which I refer to but you ignore.
All such examples still ignore context--that is, the specific actions required at a specific point in time with whatever options are available. Note once again my "Do-I-blow-up-the-bridge" example.
JimC said: God created human beings who "use free will wrongly" as you put it. He's accountable. Humans are responsible.
God gave us free will in hopes that we would use it rightly. That is HIS will. It's not fair to blame God when we use it wrongly and a mess results.
|
I explain the apologist's straw man argument. He ignores that and just repeats an unjustified assertion that I complain about imaginary entities.
Then we're back to the Biblical descriptions of God's atrocities and how the Religious apologists choose to ignore them. Then a reference to the "blow up the bridge" scenario. This is a disanalogy the Apologist uses on a regular basis to demosntrate the concept of the "greater good" specifically, a marauding army is about to attack and they can be eliminated by destroying a bridge which would also result in the death of innocent children. So in order to justify the actions of an allegedly all powerful and perfectly benevolent God, the Apologist uses an analogy of imperfect humans with limited power. The post concludes with another straw man - no one was blaming God. |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:48PM
|
||
50
|
Your blow up the bridge example is again a way to evade discussing God by discussing human beings. If I was God I wouldn't blow up the bridge.
I'm not blaming God. Again that's like blaming the tooth fairy. In fact I've made it very clear in the past here that God should not be blamed for events that He is falsely attributed to. The point here is God's defence by His believers when His lack of mercy or benevolence are illustrated in the Bible. |
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:58PM
|
||
51
|
JimC said: Your blow up the bridge example is again a way to evade discussing God by discussing human beings. If I was God I wouldn't blow up the bridge.
I'm not the one avoiding the issue. I'm asking you what specifically you would do--and you're avoiding giving a response!
JimC said: I'm not blaming God. Again that's like blaming the tooth fairy.
Yet you insist on portraying Him as a monster and blaming Him when He intervenes in our affairs and blaming Him when He does not.
JimC said: In fact I've made it very clear in the past here that God should not be blamed for events that He is falsely attributed to. The point here is God's defence by His believers when His lack of mercy or benevolence are illustrated in the Bible.
Then please respond in honest context to God's actions! I'm still waiting for you to respond to "difficult circumstances" scenarios like my "Blow up the bridge" one, and what specifically you would think would be the "benevolent" response!
|
Obviously, it is avoiding the issue to ask me what I would do when the topic is God. The Apologist has also forgotten that in previous debates I've said I probably wouldn't blow up the bridge. I can't see myself killing innocent children for any reason.
Then another unsupported assertion - that I "blame" God for intervening and for not intervening, even though I've explained it is ridiculous to blame imaginary entities for anything. You have to believe in God (or Satan or gremlins) in order to blame them. The Apologist has also forgotten that I've previously made it clear that anyone who does believe in God and blames God for the atrocities in the OT is blaming God unfairly. It's obvious they are just legends where people have used God as an explanation for terrible events. Even if God exists, the OT stories about him are fictional. Finally another request for me to respond to the blow up the bridge scenario which I have responded to a dozen times previously, and which is irrelevant. |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 16 Mar 2014 at 12:08AM
|
||
52
|
If I was me I probably wouldn't blow up the bridge. If the topic was "Is JimC Benevolent?" we could discuss it.
The topic is God. If I had God's alleged powers I definitely would not blow up the bridge. I would intervene with a peaceful solution, minimising any suffering. In fact I would ensure the situation didn't arise in the first place.
The Bible portrays God as a monster. Not me. And as I said - I don't blame God. That makes no sense. It's likely the Biblical events are legends folk tales and the people of the time attributed actions to God which He didn't do.
What's interesting is how people who believe those tales defend God's actions.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 16 Mar 2014 at 12:15AM
|
||
53
|
Taking this to the top under a new heading--"hard choices."
|
It seems the Apologist has finally realised he is avoiding the topic, and so decides to create a new topic of discussion to try and take control of the argument.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 16 Mar 2014 at 8:44AM
|
||
54
|
I wonder why?
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Born Again Christian on 16 Mar 2014 at 2:01PM
|
||
55
|
JimC said: "If I was me I probably wouldn't blow up the bridge. If the topic was "Is JimC Benevolent?" we could discuss it."
You are the one who keeps making it about you, and how you are more merciful than God. (Interesting that you go on to make it about you again.) It all comes back to the fact that you cannot accept the seriousness of sin and rebellion, even "minor" ones in your opinion.
JimC said: "What's interesting is how people who believe those tales defend God's actions."
And yet you take us to task for NOT defending them --- we really can't do right in your opinion, can we?
|
This is interesting. The Born Again Christian is saying that I make the topic about me. She seems to have missed the fact that I am only responding to questions about what would I do (e.g. lines 49 and 51). So if I ignore those questions because they are off topic, I'd be criticised for ignoring them. If I answer them - then I'm criticised for making the topic about me!
Then an unjustified assertion that I do not accept the seriousness of sin and rebellion. Where's the evidence for that? And what does that have to do with God's Benevolence? And a repeat of the unjustified assertion that take people to task for not defending God's actions, when I've actually said the exact opposite. |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 16 Mar 2014 at 2:27PM
|
||
56
|
I didn't make it about me - I was specifically asked what I would do in that bridge scenario and my point all along is that it's irrelevant what I would do when the topic was what would God do. But I answered anyway! Perhaps I should have ignored the question.
I never said I was more merciful than God. I said that it is a fact that given the definition of the word mercy and the actions described in the OT, I am more merciful than the god described in the OT - but not just me - you too, and in fact most people.
I have never taken anyone to task for not defending God's actions. Just the opposite. What's interesting is the moral hoops apologists have to jump through to try and defend the indefensible. However those conversations tend to be the most interesting.
|
|
| Re: is God benevolent? | ||
| Posted by Religious Apologist on 18 mar 2014 at 12:21AM | ||
56a
|
So in admitting the fact that you wouldn't blow up the bridge--thus resulting in a much more catastrophic mayhem than would have occurred otherwise--what you're really saying is that you'd rather be THOUGHT of as "benevolent" than actually BE benevolent--correct? The point is that real "benevolence" is sometimes the result of the "least worst" option, and you are judging God's actions falsely if you cannot grasp this concept. |
Begins with a straw man - I didn’t say I wouldn’t blow up the bridge. I said I probably wouldn’t – especially if it required me to kill innocent children. How do we know the consequence would be “catastrophic mayhem”? It’s impossible to answer the scenario without having more information. In any case, this is totally irrelevant with regard to God’s actions as I don’t have God’s powers. And the scenario is not a demonstration of mercy in any case. |
| Re: Is God benevolent? | ||
| Posted by Pantheist on 18 Mar 2014 at 05:42AM | ||
56b
|
We've already established an omnipotent God could come up with a solution that didn't involve blowing up the bridge. The question as to whether a mortal Jim would blow up the bridge is of no relevance to a benevolent god. Nice divert, but we were referring to defending God's actions, not man's morals |
That's what I was going to say! I think this Pantheist is trying to put me out of a job :-)
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:20PM
|
||
57
|
Religions Apologist said: I don't think Jim has an answer for the grittier realities of a world with sin and evil, nor the fact that a "least bad" response is sometimes called for.
Back to topic, please. |
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:23PM
|
||
58
|
Jim asked for an example--I provided one. Read the thread, please!
|
This response is a non-sequitur. I asked for an example of a "benevolent King" in order to understand the argument being made on lines 20-35 by someone else. |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:26PM
|
||
59
|
Actually you didn't. You avoided discussing God by referring to a vague example based on human limitations.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:25PM
|
||
60
|
it's my thread so please Back to topic, please.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:34PM
|
||
61
|
Yes it is your thread, and we are discussing God's benevolence. As I continually point out, context best describes everything. If I were to slaughter others all day long it would be easy to call me a butcher, beast and murderer.
If I did so in defense of ramparts that were being stormed by an enemy bent not only on my destruction but that of the innocent people behind the gates, it would be another matter entirely. |
We are supposed to be discussing God's benevolence. And again, the Apologist uses an example of human beings. If the ramparts were being defended by someone with God's powers who was perfectly benevolent, no one would die.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:52PM
|
||
62
|
JimC said: Actually you didn't. You avoided discussing God by referring to a vague example based on human limitations.
You're avoiding defining and defending your own view of "benevolence" by pretending that unpleasant realities can be ignored. |
The Apologist ignores the point that he is still using examples of human limitations to justify God's alleged actions.
Instead he implies that I have my own view of benevolence (I don't - I just use the dictionary definition). This is followed by the unjustified assertion that I "pretend that unlpeasant realities can be ignored". |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:02PM
|
||
63
|
I don't need to define benevolence - it is already defined. It is the quality of well meaning and kindness.
I didn't say unpleasant realities can be ignored but it does seem God's Biblical unpleasantness is being ignored. |
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:06PM
|
||
64
|
Very well--how would you respond to a group of thugs bent on murder, rape and mayhem per your definition of "benevolence?"
You say God’s Biblical unpleasantness is being ignored - That's because you refuse to recognize God's actions in context. |
And so we get yet another question based on what would people do when the topic is God's benevolence.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:14PM
|
||
65
|
It doesn't matter how I would respond to a group of thugs. What matters is how I would respond if had God's powers.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:23PM
|
||
66
|
OK--tell us what you'd do.
|
And finally! The apologist accepts that we need a scenario based on actions given God's powers.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 11:37PM
|
||
67
|
If they were already committing a violent act that I was too late to prevent I would temporarily paralyse them. Then I would make them feel the emotional pain of their victim or intended victim.
Then I would use my omniscience to determine how they came to be in their current psychological state that led them to this point, and I would use my omnipotence to rehabilitate them.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 16 Mar 2014 at 12:01AM
|
||
68
|
Thanks for FINALLY responding! Now--how would your interference play out in leading us to all take responsibility for our own actions?
|
Note the misplaced sarcasm of the word "finally" as if it's me that's been failing to respond to the question of what actions are possible with God's powers!
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 16 Mar 2014 at 12:12AM
|
||
69
|
"Finally responding"? That's the first time you've asked me that question. I can't respond before you ask!
My interference in all such similar situations would play out so that eventually, I wouldn't have to intervene at all. And I would achieve that without having killed anyone. |
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 16 Mar 2014 at 12:15AM
|
||
70
|
Taking this to the top under a new heading--"hard choices."
|
The Apologist decides to give up on the God's Benevolence topic and start a new topic.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Evangelical Christian on 15 Mar 2014 at 7:57PM
|
||
71
|
Mr. Pantheist, I'm not sure which of the three bullet sentences you posted causes you to believe God is "malevolent".
Accepting Jesus as your saviour--Ohh, perhaps we need a broader perspective. Whether we believe the Genesis account is literal or a way of teaching, we are familiar with the Serpent luring the woman to disobey God and lose the paradise of the surroundings and missing the joy of a close walk with God. Eve gave in to the clever serpent--ahem, Adam should have been there for her--I suppose. Since that time, human nature changed for all of us, without exception. We fell from perfection to "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". Can we call God malevolent when He imposes some reasonable adverse consequences to our disobedience? Even a child gets discipline, or should. Yet, even in the face of His humans wanting to be like God--autonomous--He began to tell of His plan of redemption through a man to come, starting even in Genesis. We see mankind's failures and rebellions, over and over, as we go through the Bible, yet God preserved His faithful remnant--time after time.
To hit a few highpoints, His chosen people became slaves in Egypt, but God showed His power to protect and preserve them. His people were constantly rebelling--we do too--but, hey, that's our nature since the Fall in the garden. In Leviticus, God taught! While the rules were external then, we should have recognized the patterns, types, examples, shadows (Book of Hebrews), to be applied internally. Example: Forgiveness of sins required the shedding of blood. The perfect lamb as a pattern became the perfect Lamb for us to believe in. Through Jesus our sins were forgiven. His people were slaves then and God freed them; people now who genuinely believe completely with heart and mind are freed from the slavery of sin. Our deserved consequences, our debts, for our sins were paid in full by God for us, once and forever--when we believe.
For purposes of examining whether God is malevolent, lets put the current situations of our lives and God's revelation into the proper perspective. I'll start with part of a verse, "...whoever does not believe is condemned already..." Whoops, that sounds a little malevolent to some people, I suppose. No, see it all in proper context. The famous line known by many is John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. Verses 17 & 18 continue: For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already.... (English Standard Version) God seeks that we believe unto Him and be rescued from our "already" status of condemnation. All I see is a great love for me here--and you, too.
Okay,I'm aware there are false teachers and false proclaimers prancing and raging and calling themselves Christian--Satan still wars. So...lets look at this belief. Since early in New Testament times, the sincere and learned church fathers compiled, drafted, and presented for our benefit a Biblically sound explanation--No! Not contrary to and not in addition to Biblical Scripture! They simply outlined for my benefit and yours in an understandable way what "belief" meant. I hope this will be helpful:
Noticia--a latin word, meaning knowledge, intellectual gathering and possessing facts--for our discussion here, the true Biblical facts as given to us in the Bible. Yes, college professors (teachers) and even me as a child knew and learned many Biblical facts--but we must go on from mere knowledge. Many learned people with great Biblical knowledge do not believe UNTO salvation.
Assensus--Once we have knowledge, do we assent to it? Does in benefit us? Example: In our age, perhaps many political facts and theories from history or now assail us constantly. We may have investigated and studied until we know well the truth of these political facts, yet we do not assent or consent to them; we do not want these political facts to govern or be a part of our lives. So knowledge and assent/consent is necessary
Fiducia--Our banker who has our money--that we have or don't have--has a fiduciary duty to us to faithfully, deligently keep our money and propery accurately and secure for us. He earns our trust, hopefully, and we trust the banker. Yes, that is a human analogy that is subject to many debate twists and turns, but you get the idea. In regard to a belief that leads to salvation, we trust God. We have Faith in Him--even Faith is a gift of God. I struggled with that concept as a youngster. What did it mean to trust and have faith? He had none of my money--and He never promised to be a Santa Claus for all my heart's desires. I prayed for a little red sports car to drive/race--God and my parents knew best.
I present a (concise?) elaboration of a salvation belief: A true believer (and only God and you knows who you are) walks in this life in Union with God! 2 Corinthians 5:17: *"If anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come."* Only in the exercise of this new faith can we enjoy the blessed truth and rest our hearts upon the absolute Sovereignty of God. It has been said, God is too wise to err and too loving to be unkind. We walk in faith, always occupied, consciously or otherwise, with God. By faith we endure "as seeing Him who is invisible" (Heb. 11:27--Reading Hebrews, chapter 11, tells us more about faith. Reading it thoughtfully seems always to bring me to tears. So be careful--if you are ashamed of tears.) We endure disappointments, hardships, and the heartaches of life knowing we are securely in God's benevolent hands. We face all that enters our lives with HOPE and a courage that endures. As with Christ in His resurrection we know He prepared the way of us. We will live again with Him. "O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting?"
|
This would appear at first glance to be an example of
...but let's see if we can get anything from this essay that is related to the topic. Accepting Jesus as your saviour: Within this overview of the tale of Adam and Eve there's an assertion that the atrocities attributed to God in the Bible are "reasonable adverse consequences to our disbobedience" and these are "imposed by God". Then the usual human disanalogy of a parent punsihing a child. Second paragraph is an overview of Exodus and Leviticus, conveniently ignoring the horrific, cruel and bizarre atrocities and commandments they contain. Also asserts that the ancient superstition that killing animals was required to forgive sins is somehow relevant. The third paragraph is a classic example of the apologist strategy of using contradictory Bible verses - If there are verses where God is acting like a psychopathic monster, counter-act them with verses that don't. This is like someone on a diet eating lettuce because it will counter-act the calories in the chocolate they've just eaten. The logic of the second half of this essay is hard to follow. It is introduced as a helpful way to understand what belief means. It does appear to be an example of the fallacious argument from gibberish For example, the author doesn't seem to know that "Noticia" is not a Latin word. Which is ironic given that she states it is the Latin word for Knowledge. The assensus paragraph equivocates facts with theories, and talks about "political facts" explaining what a political fact is. The Fiducia paragraph suggests we should trust bankers. Hs there ever been a worse analogy for trust? The final paragraph just asserts that God is benevolent as long as you are a "true believer", which is the same as saying that God is not truly benevolent, which I think was the point being made by the person who kicked off the discussion. |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 8:14PM
|
||
72
|
Are you sure noticia is the Latin word for knowledge? I thought it was the Spanish word for "news". I think the Latin word for knowledge is scientia for example... Et ipsa scientia potestas est
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Evangelical Christian on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:00PM
|
||
73
|
Yes, you are correct...but, mmm, so am I. Even in the legal system we talk of scientia or scientor. However, Noticia is the root of our word Notice. As used, if we put someone on notice by our words or message, we are saying, "You have knowledge now!" And I'll further be sure I do not attribute my definition to the work of the early writers. I didn't look anything up again in writing these definitions...but I very much hope, my only desire was to convey the meaning accurately.
Thanks for reading my post.
|
The "Noticia" mistake accepted, then denied, then compunded with two additional mistakes.
(Pseudo-intellectuals often end up shooting themselves in the foot like this) |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:11PM
|
||
74
|
If you "put someone on notice" you are giving them a formal warning about something that is about to happen.
The root of the word "notice" is the Latin notus. "Noticia" is the Spanish word for notice.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Evangelical Christian on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:44PM
|
||
75
|
Okay, okay already! I don't mean to be snippish, but belaboring this, I will tell you that scientor in law is the mental part of the person's actus reus--conduct (and I've probably mispelled reus or rius--but do we have say more about that, too?) Umm, we can have mental awareness (scientor) without much knowledge. As a matter of fact I'm confident "noticia" is Latin, but I could be techically off on the exact definition.
I will say no more now. I must get busy. I'm late getting to the gym on the this Saturday and I absolutely must hurry back to see my Lobos play a championship basketball game. Hey, I have my priorities straight! Or, God is merciful. Anyway, goodbye.
|
Mistakes are piled upon mistakes.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:07PM
|
||
76
|
"Scientor" is not a Latin word or an English word. Perhaps you mean "scienter" which is essentially a deliberate act i.e. knowingly. That comes from the Latin "scire" for example... Ipse se nihil scire id unum sciat. And as already discussed leads to scienta. From a religious angle, God is often described as omniscient which is Latin for all knowing.
This is an excellent Latin resource
http://latindictionary.wikidot.com/verb:scire
Noticia is a Spanish word.
Here are the Latin form of noscere
http://latindictionary.wikidot.com/verb:noscere
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 8:41PM
|
||
77
|
None of Evangelical Christian’s bulleted point indicate God is malevolent, they are just some of God's rules for obtaining salvation (as the sentence above states).
The posit that prompted me to post this thread was posted by Biblical Literalist and it said… “The Jews have made a choice to reject salvation, they will not share the presence of the LORD JESUS, they will experience torment”
Hence my posit Many of the posters here argue that God is truly benevolent and "Loves all His children"
Perhaps you would like to explain that, should it be "Loves all His children that belong to His club"?
Surely a god that condemns anyone to eternal torment is acting with malice?
To address some of your other points
Evangelical Christian said: we are familiar with the Serpent luring the woman to disobey God and lose the paradise of the surroundings and missing the joy of a close walk with God.
Benevolent?
Evangelical Christian said: Can we call God malevolent when He imposes some reasonable adverse consequences to our disobedience?
IMHO, yes when the actions are done with malice.
Evangelical Christian said: It has been said, God is too wise to err and too loving to be unkind.
So eternal damnation is being kind?
I have no idea what the relevance of your other points are.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Evangelical Christian on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:31PM
|
||
78
|
Hmm, perhaps you remember some adult teaching you not to be disobedient when you were a child? Perhaps a reasonable spanking was required to show you that bad behaviour has consequences. In every civilized country, I think, laws against stealing and physical violence of various sorts is prohibited. When the wrongdoer is caught, is it not just and proper that punishment is inflicted? Punishment may be good for the wrongdoer's future and should be a lesson to all others that committing crimes brings down unpleasant consequences. It is NOT DONE WITH MALICE!
God is just, but He is merciful. God has told us, warned us, showed us in various ways that we should not be taken by surprise when God shows us He meant what He said would happen. I have seen the prisoner going to jail trying to excuse his own conduct and the decisions he made. In fact, recently the repeated burglar was highly alarmed that we were sending him to prison. He saw us as taking away years of his life and all he did was take property belonging to others--again and again. Indeed, we tend to excuse ourselves and blame others. This is the way I see your claim that God is unfair. You were duly warned.
About this club you say God has; Bible verses that I am not looking up for specific citations now--time gets to be a problem for me--make it clear that God would prefer all mankind would believe in Him. Jesus/God even weeped for us and at His death he asked forgiveness "for they know not what they do." We are taught to go into the world and teach the Gospel to all people and nations. If anyone comes to Him, He will in no way reject that one who is sincere and answers the call. Doesn't that sound like God loves us? How can you complain about God's justice? He is doing what He says He would do.
|
This would appear at first glance to be yet another example of
...but let's see if we can get anything from this essay that is related to the topic. First paragraph illustrates the principal of human society dealing with anti-social behaviour. It avoids any mention of how some societies are more benevolent or merciful than others, for example, in their use of the death penalty. The second paragraph asserts that God is merciful and just, with no justification. It also includes the falalcious argument that... God has "warned us", so we should not be "taken by surprise when He shows us He meant what He said would happen." The topic isn't about being taken by surprise after being warned. For example, no one is surprised when terrorists attack after "doing what they said they would do" - But how does that demonstrate benevolence? |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:38PM
|
||
79
|
I think spanking children is an example that undermines your argument. As society evolves, the smacking of children becomes unacceptable and is now outlawed in several countries.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Evangelical Christian on 16 Mar 2014 at 3:16AM
|
||
80
|
Oh really! I think child abuse is one of the most horrible crimes. But a reasonable stinging whack is not child abuse. I've listened to a Child Psychiatrist, a seminar speaker, say we can't allow a child to endanger himself or someone else and if he presists a paddling has to be. Again, it an opinion thing!
|
A fallacious straw man argument. The Evangelical ignores the point that various countries have outlawed spanking children, and chooses to justify spanking by discussing child abuse instead.
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 16 Mar 2014 at 5:24AM
|
||
81
|
spanking for the sake of protection is an odd concept to me, but then again God's slaughtering for protection seems to highlight that some people think this is acceptable behaviour
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:44PM
|
||
82
|
Evangelical Christian said: God is just, but He is merciful. God has told us, warned us, showed us in various ways that we should not be taken by surprise when God shows us He meant what He said would happen. How can you complain about God's justice? He is doing what He says He would do.
Yes possibly, but that doesn't make Him benevolent. His love is conditional, benevolence is unconditional
Evangelical Christian said: Punishment may be good for the wrongdoer's future and should be a lesson to all others that committing crimes brings down unpleasant consequences. It is NOT DONE WITH MALICE!
A matter of opinion, and not necessarily mine. "spare the rod, spoil the child" and "an eye for an eye" come to mind
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Evangelical Christian on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:48PM
|
||
83
|
How about we simply agree that when you get to be God, you do it your way? Until then, I believe in a wise, just and merciful God.
|
This demonstrates that religious people believe in what they want to believe in - despite what their Scripture actually says. See lines 12-14
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Pantheist on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:54PM
|
||
84
|
I wouldn't want to be god, that would involve meddling in peoples lives. I think if I were though I might find a better way of letting people know my wishes than get a load of people to write an ambiguous rule book over a few hundred years.
By all means believe in a wise, just and merciful God., just don't try and get me to also or tell me my beliefs are inferior
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Religious Apologist on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:12PM
|
||
85
|
I'm sorry that you view God's progressive revelation and account of His dealings with His people--culminating with His self-sacrifice on our behalf--as "an ambiguous rule book written over a few hundred years."
I believe most of us are trying to reason with one another honestly here, and in the process we disagree to be sure but that's how an exchange of views works. I still hope we will reach a greater understanding of each other's perspectives in discussion here through continuing to do so. It would help of course if this were less a Christian/Anti-Christian debate and more about others willing to offer their own perspectives for review and critique as well.
|
Nothing in this post adds any value to the debate.
The "dealings with His people" are where the examples of God's lack of mercy and benevolence are sourced from. Note the fallacious assumption that challenging the idea that God is benevolent is "anti-Christian". |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 15 Mar 2014 at 9:48PM
|
||
86
|
I think a very clear and simple illustration of God's limited mercy and benevolence is the story of Onan in Genesis 38.
|
|
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by Born Again Christian on 15 Mar 2014 at 10:17PM
|
||
87
|
This is a clear and simple illustration of the results of deliberate and spiteful rebellion against a caring and loving God. Once again, is God to ignore the injustice done to Tamar by letting Onan off the hook? The consequences of our own sin brings our own destruction.
|
What? Onan was killed by a "caring and loving God"?
Where is the logic in that argument? |
Re: Is God benevolent?
|
||
Posted by JimC on 16 Mar 2014 at 8:38PM
|
||
88
|
Refusing to make his dead brother's wife pregnant is spiteful rebellion? OK let's assume that was some kind of crime.
Then we have to wonder why the only two choices God has are to "let Onan off the hook", or kill him. Then we have to wonder how killing a man for such an act is an example of mercy or benevolence.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment