K

Douglas:

You forgot the . Without it, people might actually think you believe that .

Fiach

Why can't God do evil?

While I consider good and evil in relation to whether the act is beneficial and therefore good, or harmful and therefore evil.

Christians, especially fundies, consider that good and evil are determined by the arbitrary ruling of God not by anything intrinsic to the act itself. If God says it is good, it is good. If God says it is bad it is bad, according to those who speak for god. God by defininition can do no evil.

That means that whatever God does, no matter how evil its seems, or how harmful it is, it is good simply because God did it. And God's actions are all defined as good.

This is why Christians and Jews think that God was not really a sadistic mass murderer for killing millions of innnocent babies in Noah's Mythical Flood, or killing all Egyptian firstborn. No matter how gruesome, all such acts are good because God did them and God's acts automatically are judged good.

This arbitrary and changeable morality is one of the major problems with Christianity. Despite this many fundies claim to possess moral absolutes. Absolutes are unchangeable. They accuse humanists of situational ethics. Yet their very own god exhibits situational ethics, arbitary depending on his mood at the time. That is not an absolute in my opinion.

Fiach

Jobar

Adriaan, I am attempting to work with the definitions that theists use for these terms, as best I understand them. For the purposes of this thread, I apply the Biblical meanings for good and evil, i.e., good is what God desires, and evil is what he despises. If you think I am using the terms incorrectly, well feel free to say so- and to explain why.

I will say that for purposes outside this thread, I am of the opinion that good and evil are relative terms. What may be good for me could be evil for you, or vice versa. I think that there are things which are good, or evil, for the whole human race- but I do not say that those things are good, or evil, for the whole universe.

As to creation vs. conceptualization- to the best of my knowledge the word 'conceptualization' is never used in the Bible, so again, for the duration of this thread, I will go with 'creation'. And again on a larger scale, I am of the opinion that one may conceptualize an idea, then create an object or equation or word from that concept. Creation implies bringing into being something that others may perceive. Concepts are all inside your own mind.

For #4- Well, I can think of ideas which I never speak of, which I adjudge evil. Or I can do a deed which others can call evil. So, both can be both. Why do you want to know these things?

DJ Bender-
"A future event might be inevitably determined by actual free will choices."

Douglas, you can't have a round square. Nor can you have determined free will. It's that simple.

And if you think you are winning this argument- well, I think you are getting stomped, frankly. Shall we put it to a vote?

Arvel Joffi

I think a distinction needs to be made between the Old Testament God and the New Testament God. The God of the Israelites was just that: the Israelites' god. The same as a tribe carrying a mammoth skull around and waiting for it's sage advice to be spoken directly into their heads. This god didn't like anyone except for the people that created it, the Israelites, and it was often angered, surprised, uncertain, vengeful, and quite, quite capable of evil deeds.

What god would ask that all the children and animals of heathens be slaughtered along with the sinful adults? If you truly felt that children were being raised "evil" people, might you not consider killing the evil people and raising the children to be "good?" I digress.

When the godhood was reconfigured after Jesus' time, it was determined by his followers/creators that this new god was infallible, merciful, and unwaveringly loving and good. Convenient, now all the atrocities committed in the name of the formerly local god were retroactively justified.

I'd almost buy it if God had sacrificed himself for HIS sins, instead of ours.

Jobar

Welcome, ArvelJoffi. I see that you too have read Gaiman's "American Gods"! I'm a big fan of his- have you read his "Sandman" graphic novels?

The blatantly evil acts of the Old Testament god are certainly a weight around the necks of Christians- but I doubt you will find too many willing to denounce Yahweh, and declare the Father of Christ entirely separate. So we atheists are going to go right on using the Old Testament as proof of God's ability to do evil.

A3

Hi Jobar,
Sorry about the long delay.

Adriaan, I am attempting to work with the definitions that theists use for these terms, as best I understand them. For the purposes of this thread, I apply the Biblical meanings for good and evil, i.e., good is what God desires, and evil is what he despises. If you think I am using the terms incorrectly, well feel free to say so- and to explain why.

Also for the purposes of this thread I’ll put the Swedenborgian approach to good and evil in a nutshell: God’s purpose for creating the human race is to have them all become angels in heaven and lead useful and happy lifes there. Everything we do to help that goal is good and everything we do to obstruct that goal is evil. One very important point in all this is that going to heaven is not a society’s thing, neither a group effort but purely individual. Everything we do as a person goes to our plus or minus side. In every human act it is only the thought or motive that counts, not the motion or gesture we see. We can do something good for someone but if we do it to look good, it’s no good.
This goal of being useful and happy becomes utterly meaningless if that is the only choice or color available. To give it meaning God gave us the freedom to say: “no thank you.”

I will say that for purposes outside this thread, I am of the opinion that good and evil are relative terms. What may be good for me could be evil for you, or vice versa. I think that there are things which are good, or evil, for the whole human race- but I do not say that those things are good, or evil, for the whole universe.

Could you give some examples?
It seems indeed as if spiritual concepts are relative. Maybe that’s because they are just that: concepts. We believe that good and evil and truth and falsity are solid and absolute with God. Like a consistent parent, things are either right or wrong, no two ways about it. And as said above, each single act in a situation is judged by its motive (not by us because we never fully know the motive, sometimes not even our own). To kill is wrong but in self-defense, although still not good, is permissible. Here too, the motive is the deciding factor.
You seem to say there are different rules for the human race as for the universe and I think you’re absolutely right. We are the only species that can become spiritual, to complete the circle of creation. To elaborate a bit. God created this universe from His love by way of His wisdom (making it finite) and passing through the circle, the three kingdoms of nature, we are the only link that can return this love and keep the connection. Love is like electricity, it only works when coming full circle. This connection got so bad two-thousand years ago.....but that’s another book

As to creation vs. conceptualization- to the best of my knowledge the word 'conceptualization' is never used in the Bible, so again, for the duration of this thread, I will go with 'creation'.
Some people see nothing wrong with creating computer viruses because it doesn’t say in the Bible that you shouldn’t
And again on a larger scale, I am of the opinion that one may conceptualize an idea, then create an object or equation or word from that concept. Creation implies bringing into being something that others may perceive. Concepts are all inside your own mind.
If I didn’t know any better, I’d think you were describing Creation. God conceptualized and idea, then created an object from that concept. Creation brought something into being that could perceive others. Love created something outside of Itself to love, to become one with them and to make them happy.
To your last point I’d say, the concept of evil and wanting to do evil is all in our mind too. That potentiality has been there from the beginning, but may not have been utilized until thousands or even millions of years later. We believe in a parallel between the start, growth and development of a human being and that of the human race. Babies are born as spiritual as worms and cannot be said to commit evil, that does not start until the rational has awakened. We feel that the human race was at first in such a baby-like state, incapable as yet of committing evil.

For #4- Well, I can think of ideas which I never speak of, which I adjudge evil. Or I can do a deed which others can call evil. So, both can be both. Why do you want to know these things?
3 and 4 were more or less the same and emphasize a point of an earlier post that evil is not a thing but a concept. Evil, over the ages, has been given this heavy, devilish, conniving connotation. To me it is the whole spectrum from just saying to God “thanks, but no thanks, I’m in charge here,” to “I’ll get everything from life for myself, whatever it takes.”
The best and most excellent commentaries I have read that elucidate these notions about good and evil were written by an 18th century scientist and mystic Emanuel Swedenborg. Two of his many books deal with the very concepts that come up here in practically every post. The first deals wth everything you ever wanted to know about God and is called Divine Love and Wisdom and the other deals the same way with the God-us relationship and is Divine Providence. I sincerely hope you find reading his works as satisfying and stimulating as I did.

Kind Regards
Adriaan

BadBadBad

I've been looking through this thread, and one argument has caught my attention. That God is doing some greater good through the atrocities in the OT. It's not evil, it's correcting a great injustice saving the future of God's chosen few. Where's the basis for this other than the pre-supposition that God exists and that all the omni's that the Bible tags onto God are true?

Even if you give them the argument for the greater good, why is genocide God's mechanism of choice to cure the problem? In our country, God gives our children a head start on the free will choice just by handing out Bibles to our parents. Parents have Bibles, children lead moral lives under God. Why didn't God just send Moses to the Midianites with Bibles? Why didn't he send Jesus? Why didn't he just have a personal conversation with each of them? If he needed to kill them for some greater good, why didn't he just make them disappear? Why didn't he kill them himself? Why did he make the Israelites kill them? Wasn't that an atrocity to the Israelites that they had to butcher children? What's the justification for that? Wasn't it evil for God to force the Israelites to butcher children and babies before their screaming parents? Imagine the horror!

The Bible doesn't answer any of these questions. The Bible doesn't say much if anything about why this genocide was necessary at all. Why should we just assume this was the only option? We're talking omnipotence here right? An omnipotent God chooses genocide with a smile. If you take away the pre-supposition that this was God's only choice, don't you also have to take away omnipotence? If brutal genocide is not evil, how do you define evil?

I have one more question for the christians here. I've been asking it since 9/11, and I haven't gotten an answer. God comes to you in a vision and tells you the arabs are evil and the instrument of Satan himself. They are truly infidels that will bring an un-holy end to the world. He tells you to seek out accomplices and fly an airplane into buildings. How would you know if this was God or Satan?

If these arguments have already been covered, my apologies for jumping in late.

long winded fool

Why do we define evil as physical pain and death? That seems to argue from a human perspective, which is not, supposedly, the perspective of the god of the bible. I think it's obvious from the Bible that its eternally benevolent god would gladly tourture and kill a thousand of his followers to save the life of one "heretic" and that this is a good, and not at all an evil, thing. When his followers die, according to the bible, they go to heaven. When the heretic dies, he chooses to spend eternity away from god. A million christian lives are worth the life of one heretic, since all god ought to care about is the immortal soul. This seems obvious from the text. Therefore an all-powerful benevolent god is incapable of evil, if evil is the definition of anything outside of god's will. An all-powerful all-good entity would be no more capable of evil than he would be capable of making something outside of his own will. If he can't purposely make a mistake, he is incapable of evil. And he would still be omnioptent, since evil is the definition of something existing outside of his will. Our word for evil is what hurts. Like a child calls his parents evil when they spank his butt and ground him for a week, so we call the pain and deaths of innocent people evil. According to the bible, we're just reacting ignorantly to a wise father who punishes for the greater good. Therefore, we have no contradiction.

(And, according to hard logic, an omnipotnet and omniscient god would be incapable of making a rock so big that even he can't lift it.)

Jobar

Originally posted by A3:
Hi Jobar,
Sorry about the long delay.

Adriaan, I am attempting to work with the definitions that theists use for these terms, as best I understand them. For the purposes of this thread, I apply the Biblical meanings for good and evil, i.e., good is what God desires, and evil is what he despises. If you think I am using the terms incorrectly, well feel free to say so- and to explain why.

Also for the purposes of this thread I’ll put the Swedenborgian approach to good and evil in a nutshell: God’s purpose for creating the human race is to have them all become angels in heaven and lead useful and happy lifes there.

So why does he feel the need of running us through the maze of being fallible and imperfect human beings? Do you think he wasn't able to just make us angels in the first place?


This goal of being useful and happy becomes utterly meaningless if that is the only choice or color available. To give it meaning God gave us the freedom to say: “no thank you.”

??? So God gives us the chance of being useless and miserable? Not a very nice thing to do to your creations.

I will say that for purposes outside this thread, I am of the opinion that good and evil are relative terms. What may be good for me could be evil for you, or vice versa. I think that there are things which are good, or evil, for the whole human race- but I do not say that those things are good, or evil, for the whole universe.

Could you give some examples?

Easily. I beat you to the last parking space close to the mall the day before Christmas by one car length. You then have to park a quarter of a mile away from the store you want. When you get there, you discover that, purely by chance, I have bought the last of the exact gift item you had promised your wife, and they have to wait six weeks to get it on order. On a more serious level, say I step aside just as the sniper fires, and you are standing behind me. What, is this complicated?

It seems indeed as if spiritual concepts are relative. Maybe that’s because they are just that: concepts. We believe that good and evil and truth and falsity are solid and absolute with God.

[Tonto]What you mean, "we", white man?[/Tonto]

We are the only species that can become spiritual, to complete the circle of creation. To elaborate a bit. God created this universe from His love by way of His wisdom (making it finite) and passing through the circle, the three kingdoms of nature, we are the only link that can return this love and keep the connection. Love is like electricity, it only works when coming full circle.

No, love is like oxygen. Queen said so!

And again on a larger scale, I am of the opinion that one may conceptualize an idea, then create an object or equation or word from that concept. Creation implies bringing into being something that others may perceive. Concepts are all inside your own mind.
If I didn’t know any better, I’d think you were describing Creation. God conceptualized and idea, then created an object from that concept.

And you conceptualize God (not very clearly at all I might say) and then create a whole lot of words and books and churches and preachers and wars and stuff about him. However, this by no means allows you to say that you have created God, or proven He exists.

Creation brought something into being that could perceive others. Love created something outside of Itself to love, to become one with them and to make them happy.

Um, this would be the same God that created Ebola, AIDS, earthquakes, aging, earaches, and avalanches?


For #4- Well, I can think of ideas which I never speak of, which I adjudge evil. Or I can do a deed which others can call evil. So, both can be both. Why do you want to know these things?
3 and 4 were more or less the same and emphasize a point of an earlier post that evil is not a thing but a concept. Evil, over the ages, has been given this heavy, devilish, conniving connotation.

Given by who? And why are the words 'evil' and 'devil' so similar, hmmm?

[T]hese notions about good and evil were written by an 18th century scientist and mystic Emanuel Swedenborg. [...] I sincerely hope you find reading his works as satisfying and stimulating as I did.

Kind Regards
Adriaan

Adriaan, I have not read a lot of Swedenborg- but what I have read I find less than inspiring. Question of taste, perhaps.

And while I'm on this thread- many have tried to say that God has the ability to do evil, but never ever chooses to do so. Why could not an all powerful and benevolent God give us free will like his, so that we simply never chose to do evil? If he can do it, why not allow us to?

[ November 19, 2002: Message edited by: Jobar ]</p>

A3

Hi Jobar,

A: God’s purpose for creating the human race is to have them all become angels in heaven and lead useful and happy lifes there.
J: So why does he feel the need of running us through the maze of being fallible and imperfect human beings? Do you think he wasn't able to just make us angels in the first place?

A: And put us all in our own little cage? You would rather be treated like a plant? You are asking to have the freedom taken away of not believing in a God and to be forced to believe in a God you now don’t believe exists???
This way you have a choice where you are going. You don’t seem to appreciate what it takes to be human (or an angel for that matter). Creation was good, people have screwed things up ever since because of not being perfect. After all only one can be perfect and infinite. Ah, there is the rub...
=======
A: This goal of being useful and happy becomes utterly meaningless if that is the only choice or color available. To give it meaning God gave us the freedom to say: “no thank you.”
J: ??? So God gives us the chance of being useless and miserable? Not a very nice thing to do to your creations.

A: He doesn’t do anything to His creations, they do it to themselves. No one is forced to become a sniper or a bankrobber etc. But if that is what turns you on, than be one. Hell is a state of mind where people are forced to be useful and are partly happy. Partly, because they would be happy shooting, unhappy when shot at. Happy when robbing but unhappy when robbed.
========
J: I am of the opinion that good and evil are relative terms. What may be good for me could be evil for you, or vice versa. I think that there are things which are good, or evil, for the whole human race- but I do not say that those things are good, or evil, for the whole universe.
A: Could you give some examples?
J: Easily. I beat you to the last parking space close to the mall the day before Christmas by one car length. You then have to park a quarter of a mile away from the store you want. When you get there, you discover that, purely by chance, I have bought the last of the exact gift item you had promised your wife, and they have to wait six weeks to get it on order. On a more serious level, say I step aside just as the sniper fires, and you are standing behind me. What, is this complicated?

A: It seems to be; unfortunate situations maybe but where is the evil here?? Is this your own definition of evil, when someone takes your parking spot that is evil??
But I was actually more interested in examples involving your point of “for the whole human race” versus “for the whole universe.”
========
A: Creation brought something into being that could perceive others. Love created something outside of Itself to love, to become one with them and to make them happy.
J: Um, this would be the same God that created Ebola, AIDS, earthquakes, aging, earaches, and avalanches?

A: No, God didn’t create evil, remember? You drop a glass bowl and it breaks, would you blame God? (Assuming He exists).
=========
A: ...evil is not a thing but a concept. Evil, over the ages, has been given this heavy, devilish, conniving connotation...
J: Given by who?
A: People, of course.
J: And why are the words 'evil' and 'devil' so similar, hmmm?
A: Interesting thought...
=========
J: ...many have tried to say that God has the ability to do evil, but never ever chooses to do so. Why could not an all powerful and benevolent God give us free will like his, so that we simply never chose to do evil? If he can do it, why not allow us to?
A: I don’t know what that is based on, but God, being love itself, is incapable of doing evil. Hey! He did give us free will like His, we never have to do evil.

Kind Regards
Adriaan