FwL
New member
What's there to complain about?Job got a new wife and kids in the end.
No harm, no foul.
No harm, no foul.
-
Features
Did Job consent to be the object of a test by God because of Satan's dare?
- Thread starter repoman
- Start date
I think he actually got double the number of children and servants than he started with, so it’s ok that God murdered them to win a bet.
steve_bank
Diabetic retinopathy and poor eyesight. Typos ...
James Brown
Suspended by Member Request
"Thy Will Be Done" is a complete surrender of personal autonomy to another. Once that declaration has been made, one cannot complain that he is being mistreated, even at a later point in time. The right to protest has been signed away in advance.
In the evangelical church where I grew up, this notion was seen as a desirable condition, because it was understood that we give up our personal autonomy to a perfect being who only knows what is best for us. If God orders us to commit a horrific act--or endure the horrific act committed by others--we are to accept it without complaint, because "God Knows Best." There's no room for us to say, "I'll accept Scenario A, but not Scenario B." We accept all or nothing. Do Whatever You Want to Me--I Don't Mind.™
For a non-Christian, such a sentiment is tantamount to signing one's self into slavery.
The Book of Job details him learning that he still had a way to go in absorbing the lesson. He may have said, "Thy Will Be Done," but it came with a string attached--namely, his moral behavior. Job demanded a hearing with Jehovah so that he could say, "Why am I being punished? I've done nothing wrong." When Jehovah finally responded, he said, "Because I'm your sovereign and you swore allegiance to me, no matter what." It was only when Job agreed with this that his punishment ended. Jehovah can do whatever he wants with Job--or have an agent carry out the order--and Job's moral behavior has nothing to do with it.
Of course, his children and servants were punished as well with the death penalty, but as they would be considered Job's property the matter is academic.
Anyone who says, "Thy Will Be Done" has no room to complain about anything, because "God Knows Best."
In the evangelical church where I grew up, this notion was seen as a desirable condition, because it was understood that we give up our personal autonomy to a perfect being who only knows what is best for us. If God orders us to commit a horrific act--or endure the horrific act committed by others--we are to accept it without complaint, because "God Knows Best." There's no room for us to say, "I'll accept Scenario A, but not Scenario B." We accept all or nothing. Do Whatever You Want to Me--I Don't Mind.™
For a non-Christian, such a sentiment is tantamount to signing one's self into slavery.
The Book of Job details him learning that he still had a way to go in absorbing the lesson. He may have said, "Thy Will Be Done," but it came with a string attached--namely, his moral behavior. Job demanded a hearing with Jehovah so that he could say, "Why am I being punished? I've done nothing wrong." When Jehovah finally responded, he said, "Because I'm your sovereign and you swore allegiance to me, no matter what." It was only when Job agreed with this that his punishment ended. Jehovah can do whatever he wants with Job--or have an agent carry out the order--and Job's moral behavior has nothing to do with it.
Of course, his children and servants were punished as well with the death penalty, but as they would be considered Job's property the matter is academic.
Anyone who says, "Thy Will Be Done" has no room to complain about anything, because "God Knows Best."
I disagree. Just because you're letting someone else be in charge and make the decisions doesn't mean that you're surrendering your autonomy to them, it just means that you're trusting that they're making better decisions in the relevant areas than you, so following their directions is the optimal choice. It doesn't mean that you're giving away your ability to reassess this decision if you find this is no longer the case.
For instance, if I'm in a group which needs to come up with a plan about something and Batman is also in that group, my stance would be that I let Batman come up with the plan and then I'll do whatever Batman tells me to do, because Batman is the Batman of planning things. If, however, he starts shooting torpedoes from the Batmobile and littering the streets of Gotham with corpses, the fact that I've made myself his sidekick doesn't preclude me from changing my mind and saying "Hey Batman, you've gone too dark and crazy here and I'm not joining in on your plans anymore".
Similarly, submitting to God's will is predicated on the notion that God's will is a positive and productive thing. If he starts to will negative and unproductive things, like murdering a bunch of children in order to win a bet, then you're not precluded from changing your mind and saying "Hey God, you're gone too dark and crazy and I'm not serving your will anymore".
James Brown
Suspended by Member Request
Clearly you and I didn't grow up in the same church. The faithful Christian does not have the right to question God about anything. "God's ways are not our ways" and all that.
If committing global genocide is not seen as "too dark" to refute God, then nothing is.
Ya, that's a fair point. Once you're OK with genocide, it would be pretty weird to not be able to rationalize lesser crimes.
Still, on the face of it "thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" looks like a request for heaven-like conditions to happen more often on earth. Heaven's wonderful because God's will prevails there. Earth's not wonderful because God's will doesn't prevail here. Solution: if each person stops being wilful and therefore contentious, then one will... God's will... prevails and makes earth more ordered. So, yeah, it's a submission but not to just anything. It's submission to align one's will with God's will so that things get better.
If the churches say something different, they're trying to unify a lot of disparate books into one overall message by a deified Jesus when only some bits in the gospels are messages by Jesus. Why emulate that behavior and then look for the unreason in what they claim that a God intends in it, and then blame the Bible for the things they say? Maybe instead just find the unreason right there in that behavior of treating the bible as one whole book.
If the churches say something different, they're trying to unify a lot of disparate books into one overall message by a deified Jesus when only some bits in the gospels are messages by Jesus. Why emulate that behavior and then look for the unreason in what they claim that a God intends in it, and then blame the Bible for the things they say? Maybe instead just find the unreason right there in that behavior of treating the bible as one whole book.
lee_merrill
New member
No, he wound up with the same number of children he had before, yet the Lord did give him double. Which means he didn't lose his first ten children.
Blessings,
Lee
What are you taking about? It specifically says that his children all died in a windstorm. Then it specifically says that he had ten new children, even going so far as saying what he named them.
I just reread it to verify that. You are 100% incorrect. Do you have anything to back up your claim?
Eldarion Lathria
Member
The whole Job story shows that Biblegod has no honor, no loyalty, no decency, no morality. An honorable god would have told Satan, "Job is under my protection. He is my friend. Anything you do to him, I will do to you a million times over. Not in some sweet bye and bye, but right now." And, "Michael, get this punk out of here. And if he resists, break his arm."
Eldarion Lathria
Eldarion Lathria
DBT
Contributor
The long game? Millennia of needless human suffering, countless people dying in pain and ignorance for some sort of long game....to what purpose? Glorify the Lord?
Cheerful Charlie
Contributor
Is the Bible God Azathoth?
The last major reference in Lovecraft's fiction to Azathoth was in 1935's "The Haunter of the Dark", which tells of "the ancient legends of Ultimate Chaos, at whose center sprawls the blind idiot god Azathoth, Lord of All Things, encircled by his flopping horde of mindless and amorphous dancers, and lulled by the thin monotonous piping of a demonic flute held in nameless paws".
So that raises an interesting question:
What does the character Yahweh ever do to Satan in the story? In the form of consequences, rehabilitation, or incarceration that is.
All Yahweh does is kick him out of heaven - to where all the humans are.
Couldn't Yahweh have mustered up the creationtivity to create a new place that kept Satan contained and out of our soul incubation zone?
James Brown
Suspended by Member Request
Superman needs a Lex Luthor. Batman needs a Joker.
DBT
Contributor
There are two very different versions of Satan, one according to Judaism and the other according to Christianity.
Lion IRC
Contributor
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2016
- Messages
- 5,138
- Basic Beliefs
- Biblical theist
Needless? Pointless?
I watched this amazing video and was struck by the similarity in strategy between Harris' accusation against God and satan's accusation. With just a little more dose of suffering I bet I can get people to curse you God.
[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGWCxBiCt7Y[/YOUTUBE]
Job's suffering has the opposite effect. Throughout history humans havent shown much of an inclination towards atheism for consolation and comfort in their times of suffering.
If Harris' video wants to portray suffering as pointless WITH God at the helm, how much more pointless is it WITHOUT a Higher purpose?
So it's suffering when you're asked to think it through.
Isn't it weird how some people have enough reason and dignity to not imagine a cosmic sadist when they suffer, and then bow to it and try to appease it so they may suffer less? For "consolation and comfort"...
You're right it's more pointless to suffer if there is no God. To give an example of why: It's more pointless to have an accident and break some bones, than if some maniac deliberately breaks a person's bones. Because the maniac has his point, so it's not pointless. And, as with the message in Job, so long as you don't blame the maniac and resent his abuses, maybe he won't do something like that to you.
Observation shows there's no God. And that is a consoling fact. Thank goodness there is no God.
DBT
Contributor
Assuming the existence of a God, it's not about cursing God. It's a question of the ethics and character of this proposed God. What are the moral or ethical standards of a Being who would torture a faithful follower, have his family killed, etc, in order to win a win a wager or make a point to His own agent/underling, Satan the angel who was created by God to play the role of Adversary?