How good is god, really?

riemann4d · Post by **riemann4d** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:09 pm

After the tragic shooting I am once again reminded of the question of whether god is really "good".

Here's a hypothetical situation:

There is an assistant principal named Bob who works at Sandy Hook elementary school. He sees a dangerous looking man walking up to the school with a gun in his hand.

Now, lets assume that bob has a taser, and at any point Bob could stun the dangerous man walking up to the school and reduce him to a writhing mess.

But he doesn't, and innocent people die.

Should Bob be fired? Of course!!!

---

Bob is god. God should be "fired", eh? Why not? What's the difference?

Post by **otseng** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:23 pm

(I'm going to move this to the C&A debate subforum.)

Here's one thought:

It is Bob's responsibility to protect the students. He is charged with the students welfare. If he is able to protect them and fails to do so, he can be held responsible.

Nowhere does it state in the Bible that God is responsible to ensure the safety of all humans. If someone is harmed, that does not mean that God is liable for it.

riemann4d · Post by **riemann4d** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:25 pm

Then why should we worship god? He is not all powerful or he is not good. This inevitably goes back to the 'god cannot be both all powerful and good' idea.

TheTruth101 · Post by **TheTruth101** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:29 pm

riemann4d wrote: Then why should we worship god? He is not all powerful or he is not good. This inevitably goes back to the 'god cannot be both all powerful and good' idea.

You worship God because if you don't, then you'll end up in Hades or sheol. It's called authority, just like we have to live under the authority that we have to pay taxes or get imprisoned, you have to follow the authority that God said to worship him.

Post by **otseng** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:41 pm

riemann4d wrote: Then why should we worship god? He is not all powerful or he is not good. This inevitably goes back to the 'god cannot be both all powerful and good' idea.

Yes, it all goes back to the problem of evil and suffering. And there is no trivial answer to this. (But that does not mean there are no answers.)

Alchemy · Post by **Alchemy** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:47 pm

otseng, your God sounds like he doesn't care too much about his creation. Most animals show far more care for their young that your God. I would worship none so ambivalent as this.

TheTruth101, your God sounds like a maniacal dictator or medieval king that demands fealty or else. I would die on my feet than grovel on my knees to worship this Sadamesque God.

alive · Post by **alive** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:51 pm

We just need a better god.............

Post by **otseng** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:04 pm

Alchemy wrote: otseng, your God sounds like he doesn't care too much about his creation. Most animals show far more care for their young that your God. I would worship none so ambivalent as this.

Oh, he does care. Bible is clear about that.

Let me ask you this. Does God need to step in before you cut your finger on a piece of paper?

Alchemy · Post by **Alchemy** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 11:33 pm

otseng wrote:
Alchemy wrote: otseng, your God sounds like he doesn't care too much about his creation. Most animals show far more care for their young that your God. I would worship none so ambivalent as this.
Oh, he does care. Bible is clear about that.

Let me ask you this. Does God need to step in before you cut your finger on a piece of paper?

It depends on whether or not you subscribe omnibenevolance, omnipotence & omniscience to God. If He were such that none more kind nor more protective nor more loving could be imagined then yes, I would expect him to step in and stop me from getting a paper cut. I would certainly step in if I had fore knowledge that my child was going to get a paper cut so therefore, since I can imagine it, he fails the test of omnibenevolance.

I would certainly step in if I foresaw them being cut down by a semi automatic rfile at school. I imagine faulire for me to do so would be universally seen as evil actually.

If you don't subscribe to omniloving, omnibenevolent and omniscient, then he doesn't sound like much of a God to me. Certainly not something worth of worship.

Post by **otseng** » Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:02 am

Alchemy wrote: If He were such that none more kind nor more protective nor more loving could be imagined then yes, I would expect him to step in and stop me from getting a paper cut. I would certainly step in if I had fore knowledge that my child was going to get a paper cut so therefore, since I can imagine it, he fails the test of omnibenevolance.

So, God is to prevent any and all pain in order to be God? That might be your requirement for God, but it's not the God of the Bible.

I would certainly step in if I foresaw them being cut down by a semi automatic rfile at school. I imagine faulire for me to do so would be universally seen as evil actually.

Here's what I'm driving at. At what point should God intervene in human events? Though the death of 20 children is tragic, it is nothing compared to killing over 1 million unborn babies every year in the US. God has not stopped that either.

If you don't subscribe to omniloving, omnibenevolent and omniscient, then he doesn't sound like much of a God to me. Certainly not something worth of worship.

Actually, I don't. The Bible never uses those terms to describe God.