The "Problem" of Evil

[wgreen]

juliod wrote:
The bible certainly does not describe a god that is all-god or all-powerful, but a large number of christians seem to conceive of god that way.

Is it true that the Bible does not present a God who is All Powerful and All Good?

It would seem that this is not true. Two examples follow.

"And [Jesus] said to him, "Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments (Matt 19:17; NASB)."

"Now when Abram was ninety-nine years old, the LORD appeared to Abram and said to him, "I am God Almighty; Walk before Me, and be blameless (Gen 17:1; NASB)."

[juliod]

Is it true that the Bible does not present a God who is All Powerful and All Good?

Yes. YHWH, as presented in the bible does things that are wicked, and shows a lack of power at times. The verses you quote only say that he is good and powerful, not infinitely good and infinitely powerful.

I don't have time to look up the exact verses right now, but here are some examples.

Wicked acts by YHWH are all over the Old Testement. Murder, genocide, mass-rape, lying to Adam and Eve, etc etc. One particularly bad example is in Hosea, chapter 13 I believe. There YHWH rips open the bellies of pregnant women because the menfolk have been worshipping an idol.

As for power, the OT doesn't make claims that YHWH is infinitely powerful. Instead they are interested in showing that YHWH is stronger than other gods, such as Baal. For specific examples, there is the case of Adam and Eve. After they eat from the tree, YHWH is worries that they would eat also from the Tree of Life, and become "just like one of us". The gods of Genesis are not much more powerful than humans. Secondly, in the Babel story, YHWH is again threatened, this time by the building of the tower. He takes action to separate the peoples because they would be too powerful if allowed to complete the projects. Thirdly, there is a case where YHWH is unable to help defeat an enemy because they have chariots clad in iron.

So there you have it. Individuals, groups, and high technology, each has the ability to either defeat YHWH, or make him feel threatened. Obviosly not an imnipotent being.

DanZ

[nanikore]

Is it true that the Bible does not present a God who is All Powerful and All Good?

Yes. YHWH, as presented in the bible does things that are wicked, and shows a lack of power at times. The verses you quote only say that he is good and powerful, not infinitely good and infinitely powerful.

I don't have time to look up the exact verses right now, but here are some examples.

Wicked acts by YHWH are all over the Old Testement. Murder, genocide, mass-rape, lying to Adam and Eve, etc etc. One particularly bad example is in Hosea, chapter 13 I believe. There YHWH rips open the bellies of pregnant women because the menfolk have been worshipping an idol.

I believe many of those objections are answered by these answers

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/objedex.html

As for power, the OT doesn't make claims that YHWH is infinitely powerful. Instead they are interested in showing that YHWH is stronger than other gods, such as Baal. For specific examples, there is the case of Adam and Eve. After they eat from the tree, YHWH is worries that they would eat also from the Tree of Life, and become "just like one of us". The gods of Genesis are not much more powerful than humans. Secondly, in the Babel story, YHWH is again threatened, this time by the building of the tower. He takes action to separate the peoples because they would be too powerful if allowed to complete the projects. Thirdly, there is a case where YHWH is unable to help defeat an enemy because they have chariots clad in iron.

So there you have it. Individuals, groups, and high technology, each has the ability to either defeat YHWH, or make him feel threatened. Obviosly not an imnipotent being.

Wait... Who was it that asserted that humans would become "just like (God)", according to scripture? Was it God... or the serpent?

[wgreen]

Yes. YHWH, as presented in the bible does things that are wicked, and shows a lack of power at times. The verses you quote only say that he is good and powerful, not infinitely good and infinitely powerful.

" Is anything too difficult for the LORD? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son."
Genesis 18:13-15

"I know that You can do all things,And that no purpose of Yours can be thwarted.
Job 42:1-3

" The Rock! His work is perfect, For all His ways are just; A God of faithfulness and without injustice,Righteous and upright is He.
Deuteronomy 32:3-5

"Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Matthew 5:47-49

"He is the Rock, his works are perfect,
and all his ways are just.
A faithful God who does no wrong,
upright and just is he. (Deut 32:4; NASB)"

There are many more like these.

The Bible is very clear on this.

As far as examples of violent acts of God, before I could address these, I would need to know how you define "good." I should have begun by asking that question. It is always important to define terms.

As for the examples of God being like humans:

For specific examples, there is the case of Adam and Eve. After they eat from the tree, YHWH is worries that they would eat also from the Tree of Life, and become "just like one of us".

Let's look at the whole verse:

"Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- (Gen 3:22)"

Not only does this not say anything about God being worried about power (instead He mentions "knowing good and evil") but it does not even necessarily refer to his motives for prohibiting eating from the tree (the prohibition was based on their "dying").

I don't think you are considering these verses in an unbiased way any more than I am.

Secondly, in the Babel story, YHWH is again threatened, this time by the building of the tower. He takes action to separate the peoples because they would be too powerful if allowed to complete the projects.

Again, you seem to be reading your ideas into these passages. The Babel account does not say why God is concerned that they will be too powerful. You are reading a motive into this. He was actually concerned for their sakes.

Thirdly, there is a case where YHWH is unable to help defeat an enemy because they have chariots clad in iron.

I'm not familiar with this passage.

In all cases like those you cited, I interpret the passages that are unclear in light of the bulk of Scripture, which is very clear (i.e. verses like those quoted at the beginning of this reply).

We do the same thing in science (not that I need to appeal to scientific practice). When things are unclear (such as the interpretation of quantum uncertainty) or seem to contradict current understanding, we do not abandon what is clear (i.e. the established "laws" of physics or quantum mechanics), at least until other forces come into play to cause a paradigm shift. Instead, we stick to established theory and attempt to explain anomalies and enigmas in terms of established theory.

We do the same thing with the Bible.

However, the main error that I see in your reply (other than your apparent hostility toward God) is that you do not understand God's righteousness and justice, but have sought to establish your own standard. You seem to be applying some standard of what is good. Please explain to me your standard of "good," and then we can discuss the passages relating to God's violent acts/decrees.

Thanks,

Bill Green

[McCulloch]

However, the main error that I see in your reply ... is that you do not understand God's righteousness and justice, but have sought to establish your own standard. You seem to be applying some standard of what is good. Please explain to me your standard of "good," and then we can discuss the passages relating to God's violent acts/decrees.

You have a good point there. Before anyone can say that God is or is not righteous and just, the terms righteousness and justice need to be properly defined. In the same way that Juliod cannot say that God is unjust and unrighteous without first defining the terms, you cannot say that God is just and righteous without first defining the terms.

Just

• Honorable and fair in one's dealings and actions *
• Consistent with what is morally right; righteous *
• conforming to reason or a standard of correctness ‡
• conforming with what is deemed fair or good ‡
• implying justice dictated by reason, conscience, and a natural sense of what is fair to all §
• free from favoritism or self-interest or bias or deception; or conforming with established standards or rules §

Righteous

• Morally upright *
• In accordance with virtue or morality *
• characterized by or proceeding from accepted standards of morality or justice §

The same theme comes across in all of these definitions. Morality. So very soon I would expect this discussion to very soon lead to the Euthyphro Dilemma with the theists doing the usual circular logic.

* The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
‡ Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.
§ WordNet ® 2.0, © 2003 Princeton University

[wgreen]

So very soon I would expect this discussion to very soon lead to the Euthyphro Dilemma with the theists doing the usual circular logic.

Thanks, McCulloch, but I don't follow the euthyphro dilemma point 5.

By the way, how do you define what is moral and immoral?


Thanks,

Bill Green

[McCulloch]

So very soon I would expect this discussion to very soon lead to the Euthyphro Dilemma with the theists doing the usual circular logic.

Thanks, McCulloch, but I don't follow the euthyphro dilemma point 5.

Premise (5) states the consequences of the divine command theorist affirming the second of the options offered to him in premise (1), “morally good acts are morally good because they are willed by God”. It states that if this option is true then there is no reason either to care about God’s moral goodness or to worship him.

The emptiness problem is the problem that divine command theory appears to entail that the standard moral claims about God are empty tautologies. If divine command theory is true, the emptiness objection holds, then statements such as “God is good”, “God’s commands are good” and “God’s actions are good” are trivial, true but devoid of content. ...
If divine command theory is true, then God’s will is the standard of moral goodness.... To say that God’s actions are good would be to say that God doesn’t forbid himself from doing anything that he does. There is surely, however, more to moral goodness than this.

By the way, how do you define what is moral and immoral?

Not that it is relevant, since the dilemma exists regardless of how you define morals but I define morals in a somewhat humanistic way. To me morality flows from a concern with human beings. Moral values are properly founded on human nature and experience alone.

[nanikore]

To say that God’s actions are good would be to say that God doesn’t forbid himself from doing anything that he does.

I don't see how that follows

He just forbids Himself from doing anything bad

[juliod]

Wait... Who was it that asserted that humans would become "just like (God)", according to scripture? Was it God... or the serpent?

Both. It's in Genesis 3. The serpent told Even the truth about the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. YHWH lied to Adam and Eve about it. But the serpent was correct that YHWH was afraid of A&E becoming like one of the gods.

BTW, in the Babel story, YHWH holds the mistaken notion that a brick tower can be built more than a few dozen feel high. Not only is YHWH not omniscient and omnipotent, he does not appear to be very bright.

DanZ

[juliod]

There are many more like these.

Those are just flattery. I only need to give a single counterexample for god to be not infinitely good/powerful/knowing, etc.

As far as examples of violent acts of God, before I could address these, I would need to know how you define "good."

Good: The property of not ripping open pregnant women.

If you use the word "justice" in relation to Hosea 13, I will denounce you as a dangerous psychopath.

Not only does this not say anything about God being worried about power (instead He mentions "knowing good and evil") but it does not even necessarily refer to his motives for prohibiting eating from the tree (the prohibition was based on their "dying").

So what do you imagine the problem with knowing good and evil? YHWH is not portrayed as being very self-confident. Not one one would expect from an omnipotent being. And an omniscient/omnipotent being would not be able to make a creation (like man) capable of disobedience.

The Babel account does not say why God is concerned that they will be too powerful.

Do you really need it spelled out so simply for you? What could the possible problem be with a project that had no more object that civic pride? All the people were living together in peace and harmony. Why was that objectionable to god? Why does YHWH prefer division and conflict? Only one reason: he was scared.

I'm not familiar with this passage.

Not surprising. Preachers don't focus on the verses that conflict with their doctrine. Here it is:

Judges 1(NIV):
[/i]19 The LORD was with the men of Judah. They took possession of the hill country, but they were unable to drive the people from the plains, because they had iron chariots.[/i]

you do not understand God's righteousness and justice, but have sought to establish your own standard.

No. I am using what christians always claim they have: absolute morality. I would assume that all of us could agree that butchery, genocide, and mass-rape of children is always wrong. It's wrong even if god orders you to do it. It's wrong even if god does it. Period.

If you disagree then you:

a) don't believe in absolute morality, and

b) are a dangerous psychopath.

DanZ