Trying to understand the meaning of "God's plan" (translation, bible)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No it doesn't mean God is evil. If I make aluminum foil, it does not mean I am made of aluminum.
However, the Bible ascribes certain attributes to God: he is all powerful, all knowing, and totally benevolent.
If he is all knowing, he's fully aware of all suffering.
If he's all powerful, he's fully capable to removing all suffering.
If he's totally benevolent, he doesn't want anyone to suffer.
These three things do not go together with suffering no matter what kind of tap dance you care to make around it. Explaining how all three of those attributes can coexist with the slightest bit of suffering anywhere in the world is known as "theodicy". It's a whole field of endeavor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
"God is working all things together for GOOD." Eternal torment is not a part of that goal. God is eventually going to save all mankind, so, between Genesis 1:1 to the end of Revelation He is working but it is all for good, not for an evil end.
This is far from a universal Christian belief. Many Christians (and most Christians I've known, including myself when I was a Christian) believe that, as the Bible says, some will be with god forever and some will go to eternal punishment. "Eternal" seems fairly clear to me. But even if yours is the True Faith, even temporary suffering is incompatible with god's asserted tri-omni character.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
In a sense Adam, by eating of the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil, made an agreement that humanity needed this contrastive lesson between good and evil.
God, being all-powerful, is capable of dropping knowledge directly into people's minds; no lessons required. If he does not do this, preferring painful contrasts instead, then he's deliberately choosing suffering over knowledge.
However, the Bible ascribes certain attributes to God: he is all powerful, all knowing, and totally benevolent.
If he's totally benevolent, he doesn't want anyone to suffer.
These three things do not go together with suffering no matter what kind of tap dance you care to make around it. Explaining how all three of those attributes can coexist with the slightest bit of suffering anywhere in the world is known as "theodicy". It's a whole field of endeavor.
God, being all-powerful, is capable of dropping knowledge directly into people's minds; no lessons required. If he does not do this, preferring painful contrasts instead, then he's deliberately choosing suffering over knowledge
.
The Bible says otherwise. It is an atheistic myth. God is not Omnibenevelant. This bit of disinformation is a tool of the anti-theists. Take an untruth...say it as a truth and then use the lie to make God look evil. "Sigh".
The Bible says otherwise. It is an atheistic myth. God is not Omnibenevelant. This bit of disinformation is a tool of the anti-theists.
Really? As a theist I always believed in omnibenevolence. "God is love". "God is not willing that ANY should perish". Also, some day in heaven, god will "wipe every tear from our eyes" (which begs the question of why he would wait that long).
Some theists believe in a more hardcase sort of God, all fiery judgment and brimstone, but most seem to want to think that god is not a sadist, or indifferent to suffering, that it pains him to see a sparrow fall, etc. One of the posters in this thread even believes that god will save all of humanity, at least in the bitter end. So it's scarcely an outside job here ... the idea that god is kind, forgiving, compassionate, and full of loving-kindness comes straight from the Bible.
Really? As a theist I always believed in omnibenevolence. "God is love". "God is not willing that ANY should perish". Also, some day in heaven, god will "wipe every tear from our eyes" (which begs the question of why he would wait that long).
Some theists believe in a more hardcase sort of God, all fiery judgment and brimstone, but most seem to want to think that god is not a sadist, or indifferent to suffering, that it pains him to see a sparrow fall, etc. One of the posters in this thread even believes that god will save all of humanity, at least in the bitter end. So it's scarcely an outside job here ... the idea that god is kind, forgiving, compassionate, and full of loving-kindness comes straight from the Bible.
Yet you ignore the commands by God for the Israelites to kill all of the Midianites, including women and children, except for the virgin which the soldiers were to keep for themselves. Does this sound kind, forgiving, and/or compassionate? Most Christians pick and choose parts of the Bible they want to believe, which lends to the evidence that the Bible is unreliable at best.
Really? As a theist I always believed in omnibenevolence. "God is love". "God is not willing that ANY should perish". Also, some day in heaven, god will "wipe every tear from our eyes" (which begs the question of why he would wait that long).
Some theists believe in a more hardcase sort of God, all fiery judgment and brimstone, but most seem to want to think that god is not a sadist, or indifferent to suffering, that it pains him to see a sparrow fall, etc. One of the posters in this thread even believes that god will save all of humanity, at least in the bitter end. So it's scarcely an outside job here ... the idea that god is kind, forgiving, compassionate, and full of loving-kindness comes straight from the Bible.
Read the whole Bible. God is both kind and loving yet intends to toss those who reject Him into a bad place. The choice is your's. Easy to understand. Choice is yours.
Your use of the lower case "g" says much. As an nontheist you have much to lose if wrong. If you reject God your choice is made and your fate is sealed.
Yet you ignore the commands by God for the Israelites to kill all of the Midianites, including women and children, except for the virgin which the soldiers were to keep for themselves. Does this sound kind, forgiving, and/or compassionate? Most Christians pick and choose parts of the Bible they want to believe, which lends to the evidence that the Bible is unreliable at best.
I don't ignore those at all, and I acknowledge the Bible is schizophrenic on this point (and on many others). However, the Bible does advance the idea that god is loving, kind, forgiving, and desires people to be with him in heaven, and what I was attempting to do was not to prove this to be true, but to show that it is not an extra-Biblical idea concocted by unbelievers.
Read the whole Bible. God is both kind and loving yet intends to toss those who reject Him into a bad place. The choice is your's. Easy to understand. Choice is yours.
Your use of the lower case "g" says much. As an nontheist you have much to lose if wrong. If you reject God your choice is made and your fate is sealed.
Kind and loving is not compatible with tossing people into a bad place. I acknowledge that both are in the Bible, but that doesn't make those ideas compatible.
If wrong, I would have much to lose, but I would have to believe. Belief is not a matter of will. I have come to a place in life where I cannot sustain belief, largely because the Real World(tm) is incompatible with the worldview of scripture. I can no more believe the Bible than you can believe in Thor or Odin by willing yourself to do so. Therefore, I have no fear that I am "wrong", any more than you have any concern that, say, Thor will slay you with a lightning bolt for not believing in him.
Read the whole Bible. God is both kind and loving yet intends to toss those who reject Him into a bad place. The choice is your's. Easy to understand. Choice is yours.
Your use of the lower case "g" says much. As an nontheist you have much to lose if wrong. If you reject God your choice is made and your fate is sealed.
Ah, Pascal's Wager, I haven't heard that argument come up in quite some time. This assumes there are only two choices. What if there is a god, but not the one you believe in? Also, you seem to believe this is a choice that atheists make. Atheism, for most of us, is based upon the available evidence which forces us to come to this conclusion.
Why don’t you just be an atheist? If there is a god, and it is moral and loving and worthy of respect, then it won’t mind if people have rational doubts about it and rational reasons for not believing in it. This god won’t punish people for exercising their critical thinking skills and are skeptical of the claims of other, fallible humans. Thus, you wouldn’t lose anything.
I don't ignore those at all, and I acknowledge the Bible is schizophrenic on this point (and on many others). However, the Bible does advance the idea that god is loving, kind, forgiving, and desires people to be with him in heaven, and what I was attempting to do was not to prove this to be true, but to show that it is not an extra-Biblical idea concocted by unbelievers.
Read the whole Bible. God is both kind and loving yet intends to toss those who reject Him into a bad place. The choice is your's. Easy to understand. Choice is yours.
Toss him into a bad place is a nice way of describing endless torture with no hope of the torture ever relenting. In my opinion, letting someone be tortured endlessly is wrong. It is the epitomy of 'mercilessness".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
