Is God Evil?

[Oberon]

Why should correctness evoke fear?

Because He's got it and we don't.

 

[Fluffywolf]

No. I think that the God we're talking about would be inherently good. You don't have to discuss this, I'm just correcting you so that others don't become confused.

God aside, then it just boils down on your perspective of what good is and what isn't.

Depending on the context, everything can be considered good or evil from different perspectives. Omnipotence logically transcends perspective, so good and evil become a non issue. But that might be exactly what you find to be inherently good from your perspective ofcourse.

 

[onemoretime]

Because He's got it and we don't.

Why is fear the proper response to that?

 

[Oberon]

Why is fear the proper response to that?

If you accept the premise of the Judeo-Christian God, then fear is the proper response because humans are wrong, unrighteous, morally deficient, however you want to put it, at the mercy of a God who is the standard against which rightness is judged.

If one is to discuss humanity on one side and God on the other, the two do not balance. They cannot be discussed reasonably on equal terms. Intrinsic in the notion of that Judeo-Christian God, you see, is that He is God and we are not. There is no equivalence, no negotiation, no binding arbitration from a disinterested third party.

Based on this premise, every one of us is a fugitive from inevitable and absolute cosmic justice. That is the reason for the fear.

 

[onemoretime]

If you accept the premise of the Judeo-Christian God, then fear is the proper response because humans are wrong, unrighteous, morally deficient, however you want to put it, at the mercy of a God who is the standard against which rightness is judged.

If one is to discuss humanity on one side and God on the other, the two do not balance. They cannot be discussed reasonably on equal terms. Intrinsic in the notion of that Judeo-Christian God, you see, is that He is God and we are not. There is no equivalence, no negotiation, no binding arbitration from a disinterested third party.

Based on this premise, every one of us is a fugitive from inevitable and absolute cosmic justice. That is the reason for the fear.

So, it's because of force? That you comply to a being's will because of the force that would be enacted on you otherwise?

Seems like the only way that's not "evil" is if you carve out a "god exception."

 

[Ginkgo]

God aside, then it just boils down on your perspective of what good is and what isn't.

Depending on the context, everything can be considered good or evil from different perspectives. Omnipotence logically transcends perspective, so good and evil become a non issue. But that might be exactly what you find to be inherently good from your perspective ofcourse.

If morality became a non issue to God, as an omnipotent being, it would not prevent Him from imposing ethics on others, seeing as ethics are external principles and morals are internal and subjective. Since we are concerned about God's morality, we are imposing our ethics on Him, which is retarded if he's omnipotent.

EDIT: typo sorry keyboard broken

 

[Oberon]

So, it's because of force? That you comply to a being's will because of the force that would be enacted on you otherwise?

NO. That's not it. It's not extortion, cosmic arm-twisting...

My belief in God is such that were he to base His judgment of me on the basis of my own right-ness, my own moral standing based on my own personal thoughts/words/actions, He would condemn me... and I would concur with His judgment.

I cannot co-exist with the God Who Is any more than a piece of tissue paper can exist in the middle of a roaring fire... and who am I to blame God for being like that fire?

That's where the fear comes from.

 

[onemoretime]

NO. That's not it. It's not extortion, cosmic arm-twisting...

My belief in God is such that were he to base His judgment of me on the basis of my own right-ness, my own moral standing based on my own personal thoughts/words/actions, He would condemn me... and I would concur with His judgment.

I cannot co-exist with the God Who Is any more than a piece of tissue paper can exist in the middle of a roaring fire... and who am I to blame God for being like that fire?

That's where the fear comes from.

What if his goodness weren't tautological?

 

[Oberon]

What if his goodness weren't tautological?

Then it would be evident from the fact that I haven't yet gone up in a flash of flame and a puff of smoke.

 

[onemoretime]

Then it would be evident from the fact that I haven't yet gone up in a flash of flame and a puff of smoke.

Isn't that slightly solipsistic? The rest of us heathens are still here.

 

[Oberon]

Isn't that slightly solipsistic? The rest of us heathens are still here.

Oh, I'm no better than you in terms of native righteousness... just a little better-informed is all. That the rest of you heathens are still here is just further evidence of the goodness of God.

 

[ReadingRainbows]

Oh, I'm no better than you in terms of native righteousness... just a little better-informed is all. That the rest of you heathens are still here is just further evidence of the goodness of God.

Good point.

 

[onemoretime]

...and we've gotten to the point of circular argument. Like this always will, because it comes down to something impossible to prove. So what's the answer to this question?

ç„¡

 

[ReadingRainbows]

...and we've gotten to the point of circular argument. Like this always will, because it comes down to something impossible to prove. So what's the answer to this question?

ç„¡

Which question

 

[Totenkindly]

...and we've gotten to the point of circular argument. Like this always will, because it comes down to something impossible to prove. So what's the answer to this question?

I don't think the question has inherent meaning. There are only assumed frameworks through which to view it.

As far as the OP goes in its attack on xianity... I'll have to read it more closely.

Oberon's pretty much portraying standard mainstream Christian boilerplate accurately, though.

 

[Sniffles]

I don't know how much this relates to what you and OMT are discussing, but this might interest Oberon:

All religious reality begins with the acceptance of the concrete situation as given one by the Giver, and it is this which Biblical religion calls the ‘fear of God.’ The ‘fear of God’ is the essence of ‘holy insecurity,’ for ‘it comes when our existence becomes incomprehensible and uncanny, when all security is shattered through the mystery.’ By ‘the mystery’ Buber does not mean the as yet undiscovered but the essentially unknowable -- ‘the undefinable and unfathomable,’ whose inscrutableness belongs to its very nature. The believing man who passes through this shattering of security returns to the everyday as the henceforth hallowed place in which he has to live with the mystery. ‘He steps forth directed and assigned to the concrete, contextual situations of his existence.’ This does not mean that he accepts everything that meets him as ‘God-given’ in its pure factuality.

He may, rather, declare the extremist enmity toward this happening and treat its ‘givenness’ as only intended to draw forth his own opposing force. But he will not remove himself from the concrete situation as it actually is.... Whether field of work or field of battle, he accepts the place in which he is placed. (Eclipse of God, ‘Religion and Philosophy,’ p. 50 ff.)​

One should not willingly accept evil in one’s life but should will to penetrate the impure with the pure. The result may well be an interpenetration of both elements, but it may not be anticipated by saying ‘yes’ to the evil in advance. (From a conversation between Buber and Max Brod quoted in Max Brod, ‘Zur Problematik des Bösen und des Rituals,’ Der Jude, ‘Sonderheft zu Martin Bubers fünfzigstem Geburtstag,’ X, 5 [March 1928], ed. by Robert Weltsch, p. 109.)

Fear of God is the indispensable gate to the love of God. That love of God which does not comprehend fear is really idolatry, the adoration of a god whom one has constructed oneself. Such a god is easy enough to love, but it is not easy to love ‘the real God, who is, to begin with, dreadful and incomprehensible.’ (Eclipse of God, p. 50 f.; Martin Buber, Israel and Palestine, The History of an Idea [London: East & West Library; New York: Farrar, Straus & Young, 1952], p. 89.)

He who wishes to avoid passing through this gate, he who begins to provide himself with a comprehensible God, constructed thus and not otherwise, runs the risk of having to despair of God in view of the actualities of history and life, or of falling into inner falsehood. Only through the fear of God does man enter so deep into the love of God that he cannot again be cast out of it. (Israel and the World, ‘The Two Foci of the Jewish Soul,’ p. 31 f. Cf. ibid., ‘Imitatio Dei,’ p. 76 f.; For the Sake of Heaven, p. 46.)​

The fear of God is only a gate, however, and not, as some theologians believe, a dwelling in which man can settle down. When man encounters the demonic, he must not rest in it but must penetrate behind it to find the meaning of his meeting with it. The fear of God must flow into the love of God and be comprehended by it before one is ready to endure in the face of God the whole reality of lived life. (Israel and the World, ‘The Two Foci of the Jewish Soul,’ p. 32; Eclipse of God, ‘Religion and Philosophy,’ p. 50 ff.; Two Types of Faith, pp. 137, 154.)

Martin Buber: The Life of Dialogue

Sorry for the long excerpt. Hopefully this is of some assistance.

 

[Oberon]

...and we've gotten to the point of circular argument. Like this always will, because it comes down to something impossible to prove. So what's the answer to this question?

ç„¡

If you're going to ask the question "Is God Evil?" and expect to reach a conclusion without even accepting the premise of the existence of God, you've started on a fool's errand.

One assumption intrinsic to the question is that there is in fact a God. What I have discussed here is what I hope is a fair representation of the Judeo-Christian perspective on the matter.

 

[Take Five]

I agree with Oberon. We have to start with the assumption that God exists for this question, and some people are too rebellious to do that.

 

[Sniffles]

Stubborn could also describe it. They just can't get past themselves.

 

[onemoretime]

I agree with Oberon. We have to start with the assumption that God exists for this question, and some people are too rebellious to do that.

Or don't believe in fairy tales.

I swear, and theists call atheists smug.