God, Moral Evil, and Man's Nature

[Bronzeage]

Do you understand the concept that most Christians believe the Books of the Bible are revelations from God to mankind?

Do you speak of God breathed scripture? If one considers the amount of revelations which have been visited on humans in the past million years or so, your obsession with this particularly small set seems a little narrow. What seems even more strange is your surprise they apparently got some parts wrong.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

Do you understand the concept that most Christians believe the Books of the Bible are revelations from God to mankind?

Do you speak of God breathed scripture? If one considers the amount of revelations which have been visited on humans in the past million years or so, your obsession with this particularly small set seems a little narrow. What seems even more strange is your surprise they apparently got some parts wrong.

Bronzeage,

I'm underwhelmed by whatever point you're trying to make.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Psalm 145:9 The LORD is good to all, And His mercies are over all His works.

Psalm 86:5 For You, Lord, are good, and ready to forgive, And abundant in lovingkindness to all who call upon You.

1 Chronicles 16:34 O give thanks to the LORD, for He is good; For His lovingkindness is everlasting.


Do I really have to post a huge catalog of proof texts for you?

Psalm 25
8 God is fair and just; He corrects the misdirected, Sends them in the right direction.
9 He gives the rejects his hand, And leads them step-by-step.

Wait... God in the Tanakh is not a forgiving god to just anyone... only the chosen people. God delights in the pain and anguish he tosses about among those he doesn't like. God only shows the slightest remorse after punishing his own people.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Psalm 145:9 The LORD is good to all, And His mercies are over all His works.

Psalm 86:5 For You, Lord, are good, and ready to forgive, And abundant in lovingkindness to all who call upon You.

1 Chronicles 16:34 O give thanks to the LORD, for He is good; For His lovingkindness is everlasting.


Do I really have to post a huge catalog of proof texts for you?

Psalm 25
8 God is fair and just; He corrects the misdirected, Sends them in the right direction.
9 He gives the rejects his hand, And leads them step-by-step.

Wait... God in the Tanakh is not a forgiving god to just anyone... only the chosen people. God delights in the pain and anguish he tosses about among those he doesn't like. God only shows the slightest remorse after punishing his own people.

Of course, God seems to have reformed by the time of the New Testament. Stopped drinking, attended some anger management classes. Well a bit anyway. God the potter who makes some people elect and saved and others doomed. Is that the act of a god who loves us and is perfectly morally good? Not so merciful or compassionate. There is a disconnect between God's supposed actions and his revelations that he is good, merciful, loving and just.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Do you understand the concept that most Christians believe the Books of the Bible are revelations from God to mankind?

Do you speak of God breathed scripture? If one considers the amount of revelations which have been visited on humans in the past million years or so, your obsession with this particularly small set seems a little narrow. What seems even more strange is your surprise they apparently got some parts wrong.

Genesis. This is indeed the underlying text of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is believed by billions of people. God created us. And our nature. We have no choice in how God supposedly created us, and why we were given a substandard nature prone to evil. Its a pointed little question meant to highlight the discrepancy of God's supposed way of doing things and his good moral nature. This calls this supposed revelation into severe question. Why would I not examine critically the text that is the basis of so many billion of believers? Would it be better to attack the basic texts of some obscure cult or sect?

 

[Bronzeage]

Do you speak of God breathed scripture? If one considers the amount of revelations which have been visited on humans in the past million years or so, your obsession with this particularly small set seems a little narrow. What seems even more strange is your surprise they apparently got some parts wrong.

Genesis. This is indeed the underlying text of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is believed by billions of people. God created us. And our nature. We have no choice in how God supposedly created us, and why we were given a substandard nature prone to evil. Its a pointed little question meant to highlight the discrepancy of God's supposed way of doing things and his good moral nature. This calls this supposed revelation into severe question. Why would I not examine critically the text that is the basis of so many billion of believers? Would it be better to attack the basic texts of some obscure cult or sect?

I could ask you what you mean by better, but what's the point. What would be more enlightening would be some idea what God could have done differently to make you happy.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God is not all that nice, and the revelators are just trying to get on his good side? After all, if God is on our side, the other side is going to think He's being a real prick about that last second catch in the end zone, even though, that may have been his mother's doing.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Genesis. This is indeed the underlying text of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is believed by billions of people. God created us. And our nature. We have no choice in how God supposedly created us, and why we were given a substandard nature prone to evil. Its a pointed little question meant to highlight the discrepancy of God's supposed way of doing things and his good moral nature. This calls this supposed revelation into severe question. Why would I not examine critically the text that is the basis of so many billion of believers? Would it be better to attack the basic texts of some obscure cult or sect?

I could ask you what you mean by better, but what's the point. What would be more enlightening would be some idea what God could have done differently to make you happy.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God is not all that nice, and the revelators are just trying to get on his good side? After all, if God is on our side, the other side is going to think He's being a real prick about that last second catch in the end zone, even though, that may have been his mother's doing.

There is a BIG disconnect from a Bible that tells us God is good, merciful, just and loves us and the way he does things.isn't there? What would make me happy? For the fundies and literalists to admit that the supposedly good God isn't morally good and this mythology is so much nonsense and nothing more.
Now can we have evolution back in science classes in our schools? Can we stop hating homosexuals and lesbians because of Leviticus 20?

 

[Kharakov]

All that religious stuff against homosexuality is an expedient method to redirect anger away from those who use social inequality for personal gain which results in greater social inequality.

In other words, evil assholes know people will break, and will either band together to focus righteous anger against them, or they will go for soft targets presented by various religious groups. So the real enemy here are those who are more than willing to use religion to draw ire away from social injustice so they can live the good life on the backs of others.

Of course some of those on top like to present stuff like the problem is the bible. They're atheists living comfortable lives that are entirely dependent on social inequality, and they want to appear to have fought against the very thing that props them up in case the whole pyramid comes crashing down.

The bible is a tool used by atheists and theists to preserve social inequality, by redirecting efforts and anger against red herrings like homosexuality, the bible, and religion itself.

 

[Bronzeage]

I could ask you what you mean by better, but what's the point. What would be more enlightening would be some idea what God could have done differently to make you happy.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God is not all that nice, and the revelators are just trying to get on his good side? After all, if God is on our side, the other side is going to think He's being a real prick about that last second catch in the end zone, even though, that may have been his mother's doing.

There is a BIG disconnect from a Bible that tells us God is good, merciful, just and loves us and the way he does things.isn't there? What would make me happy? For the fundies and literalists to admit that the supposedly good God isn't morally good and this mythology is so much nonsense and nothing more.
Now can we have evolution back in science classes in our schools? Can we stop hating homosexuals and lesbians because of Leviticus 20?

You paint with a large brush.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Genesis. This is indeed the underlying text of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. It is believed by billions of people. God created us. And our nature. We have no choice in how God supposedly created us, and why we were given a substandard nature prone to evil. Its a pointed little question meant to highlight the discrepancy of God's supposed way of doing things and his good moral nature. This calls this supposed revelation into severe question. Why would I not examine critically the text that is the basis of so many billion of believers? Would it be better to attack the basic texts of some obscure cult or sect?

I could ask you what you mean by better, but what's the point. What would be more enlightening would be some idea what God could have done differently to make you happy.

I have no idea what your angle on this is. But regarding "happy", a massive chunk of the Tanakh is trying to assess why if they are the chosen people, they aren't happy. The general answer is 'it was our forefather's fault'.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God is not all that nice, and the revelators are just trying to get on his good side?

A god 4000 years ago wouldn't be nice. They would be powerful and demand obedience. They would be the sword of the people to cut down other people and take their stuff, hump their women, sponge off their online authorization code for on demand cable programming. Their god would make their fight the obviously moral one, because they were ordained by the deity to fuck up some other group of people... and steal their HBO Go password.

The God in the Tanakh isn't a nice guy... though he does show a repeated sense of always trying the mend bridges... after going ape shit over something rather trivial... for a god. God is a the banner of war, not some pacifist that wants peace among the people.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Obviously the idea that if we take the Bible seriously as a supposed revelation, we should examine its claims logically, demonstrating the fact that these claims make little sense doesn't float your boat. So be it.

Why wouldn't a supremely wise, powerful and good God not create us with a morally good nature rather than a less than good moral nature? A morally fallible nature? It's not about free will. That pointed little question is still there.

 

[Bronzeage]

I could ask you what you mean by better, but what's the point. What would be more enlightening would be some idea what God could have done differently to make you happy.

I have no idea what your angle on this is. But regarding "happy", a massive chunk of the Tanakh is trying to assess why if they are the chosen people, they aren't happy. The general answer is 'it was our forefather's fault'.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God is not all that nice, and the revelators are just trying to get on his good side?

A god 4000 years ago wouldn't be nice. They would be powerful and demand obedience. They would be the sword of the people to cut down other people and take their stuff, hump their women, sponge off their online authorization code for on demand cable programming. Their god would make their fight the obviously moral one, because they were ordained by the deity to fuck up some other group of people... and steal their HBO Go password.

The God in the Tanakh isn't a nice guy... though he does show a repeated sense of always trying the mend bridges... after going ape shit over something rather trivial... for a god. God is a the banner of war, not some pacifist that wants peace among the people.

I don't really have an angle, must less a grasp on any of this, which is why I keep asking the same question over and over. There seems to be confusion over whether a person's revelation can alter reality.

 

[Horatio Parker]

I don't really have an angle, must less a grasp on any of this, which is why I keep asking the same question over and over. There seems to be confusion over whether a person's revelation can alter reality.

Absolutely revelation alters reality. The problem, though, wrt religion is that it is presented as if revelation is all that's necessary. Obviously, any revelation that we have has to be tested against what we already understand, whether empirical or subjective.

All our conscious lives we are perceiving, considering, identifying, classifying, and passing judgement. Religion is based on the heart of these proceedings, and is actually quite profound in that sense, even as it's nonsense as history or science. That's why it has appeal to many people, some of who you might think should know better.

I think believers, aware of the very real benefit they receive, confuse the "truth" of that benefit with scientific truth, which is a very different thing.

 

[Kharakov]

Why wouldn't a supremely wise, powerful and good God not create us with a morally good nature rather than a less than good moral nature? A morally fallible nature? It's not about free will. That pointed little question is still there.

No. It's the fact that God can't micromanage everything, and evil creatures rise up (naturally, and purposefully to exploit the good) in various places, targeting those God cares about over and over again. They can't kill God. They can just inflict pain and misery on the weaker beings that God cares about.

On the one hand, they should be killed, on the other, nobody feels bad about abusing someone who is willfully, continually abusive to the point that they corrupt the good, and if you can isolate someone who is consistently purposefully abusive, and you have a few things you're frustrated about? Nobody is going to hold it against you for giving them hell.

Well, nobody accept the abuser, who will try to lie and cheat their way out of their rightful spot in the hierarchy of beings.

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

I have no idea what your angle on this is. But regarding "happy", a massive chunk of the Tanakh is trying to assess why if they are the chosen people, they aren't happy. The general answer is 'it was our forefather's fault'.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God is not all that nice, and the revelators are just trying to get on his good side?

A god 4000 years ago wouldn't be nice. They would be powerful and demand obedience. They would be the sword of the people to cut down other people and take their stuff, hump their women, sponge off their online authorization code for on demand cable programming. Their god would make their fight the obviously moral one, because they were ordained by the deity to fuck up some other group of people... and steal their HBO Go password.

The God in the Tanakh isn't a nice guy... though he does show a repeated sense of always trying the mend bridges... after going ape shit over something rather trivial... for a god. God is a the banner of war, not some pacifist that wants peace among the people.

I don't really have an angle, must less a grasp on any of this, which is why I keep asking the same question over and over. There seems to be confusion over whether a person's revelation can alter reality.

It is the fact than billions claim to know about God's nature from revelation, and the claims supposedly tell us about reality, the supposed nature of God. Which fails the logic test. The supposed nature of God constrains God, we should see a reality that supports the claims, God is all powerful, creates all and is perfectly morally good. We don't in fact see that.

 

[Bronzeage]

I have no idea what your angle on this is. But regarding "happy", a massive chunk of the Tanakh is trying to assess why if they are the chosen people, they aren't happy. The general answer is 'it was our forefather's fault'.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God is not all that nice, and the revelators are just trying to get on his good side?

A god 4000 years ago wouldn't be nice. They would be powerful and demand obedience. They would be the sword of the people to cut down other people and take their stuff, hump their women, sponge off their online authorization code for on demand cable programming. Their god would make their fight the obviously moral one, because they were ordained by the deity to fuck up some other group of people... and steal their HBO Go password.

The God in the Tanakh isn't a nice guy... though he does show a repeated sense of always trying the mend bridges... after going ape shit over something rather trivial... for a god. God is a the banner of war, not some pacifist that wants peace among the people.

I don't really have an angle, must less a grasp on any of this, which is why I keep asking the same question over and over. There seems to be confusion over whether a person's revelation can alter reality.

It is the fact than billions claim to know about God's nature from revelation, and the claims supposedly tell us about reality, the supposed nature of God. Which fails the logic test. The supposed nature of God constrains God, we should see a reality that supports the claims, God is all powerful, creates all and is perfectly morally good. We don't in fact see that.

I think you are teasing me. The problem of declaring that someone or something has failed a test, is we don't know how you score your GQ(goodness quotient) test. What would God be like, if he were actually good?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

If God were good and revelation was true that God is good, then God would have all the sub-goodnesses the self same revelation from God are found in the bible. Its not mysterious. The fact God seems to not really in fact be merciful, just, compassionate et al, counts against the Bible being a true revelation that explains anything, obviously.

If as per Romans, God creates some elect and some reprobate, we can ask the question, why not make all elect? If God loves some, hates others, then God is a rather anthropomorphic God.
"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated"

 

[Bronzeage]

If God were good and revelation was true that God is good, then God would have all the sub-goodnesses the self same revelation from God are found in the bible. Its not mysterious. The fact God seems to not really in fact be merciful, just, compassionate et al, counts against the Bible being a true revelation that explains anything, obviously.

If as per Romans, God creates some elect and some reprobate, we can ask the question, why not make all elect? If God loves some, hates others, then God is a rather anthropomorphic God.
"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated"

So, a good God would have loved Esau and Jacob equally and all men would be elect.

It actually sounds kind of boring. Maybe God knew that boredom was bad for us, thus created conflict in order for us to better enjoy life. Wouldn't that be good?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I have no idea what your angle on this is. But regarding "happy", a massive chunk of the Tanakh is trying to assess why if they are the chosen people, they aren't happy. The general answer is 'it was our forefather's fault'.

Have you ever considered the possibility that God is not all that nice, and the revelators are just trying to get on his good side?

A god 4000 years ago wouldn't be nice. They would be powerful and demand obedience. They would be the sword of the people to cut down other people and take their stuff, hump their women, sponge off their online authorization code for on demand cable programming. Their god would make their fight the obviously moral one, because they were ordained by the deity to fuck up some other group of people... and steal their HBO Go password.

The God in the Tanakh isn't a nice guy... though he does show a repeated sense of always trying the mend bridges... after going ape shit over something rather trivial... for a god. God is a the banner of war, not some pacifist that wants peace among the people.

I don't really have an angle, must less a grasp on any of this, which is why I keep asking the same question over and over. There seems to be confusion over whether a person's revelation can alter reality.

It is the fact than billions claim to know about God's nature from revelation, and the claims supposedly tell us about reality, the supposed nature of God. Which fails the logic test. The supposed nature of God constrains God, we should see a reality that supports the claims, God is all powerful, creates all and is perfectly morally good. We don't in fact see that.

I think you are teasing me. The problem of declaring that someone or something has failed a test, is we don't know how you score your GQ(goodness quotient) test. What would God be like, if he were actually good?

Our sexual organs wouldn't also be our bodily evacuation locations? Oh... and taco Tuesdays. And a generally habitable planet.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If God were good and revelation was true that God is good, then God would have all the sub-goodnesses the self same revelation from God are found in the bible. Its not mysterious. The fact God seems to not really in fact be merciful, just, compassionate et al, counts against the Bible being a true revelation that explains anything, obviously.

If as per Romans, God creates some elect and some reprobate, we can ask the question, why not make all elect? If God loves some, hates others, then God is a rather anthropomorphic God.
"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated"

So, a good God would have loved Esau and Jacob equally and all men would be elect.

A just god would have told Jacob to go fuck himself.