The Question Islam and Christianity Can't Answer

[sayak83]

I do believe that God is good, but I question whether God is all-loving because of all the suffering in this world.

Can one be maximally good without being all-loving. I see a contradiction here. The question here is what is the moral justification for a deity to create a person he foreknows will cause evil and will go to hell? Is there one?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

No morally defensible idea of God is compatible with God foreknowing the free willed decisions of created beings and the existence of evil.

I think if future knowledge was all knowable, God could create only beings who choose good. Then evil would not exist, but I don't think it's possible to know all this without trying us in real time, meaning future knowledge is not known.

I agree with both of you, which I think are pretty good grounds for rejecting the Abrahamic god. Thea theist rejects all god claims for lack of sufficient evidentiary support to justify belief, but some god claims are more outlandish that others.

God knows what we will choose but this foreknowledge is not what causes us to do anything.

That's not relevant to the argument that omniscience precludes free will. The existence of anybody at all that can predict the future perfectly tells us that the universe is deterministic even if that mind has no ability to cause anything.

I do believe that God is good, but I question whether God is all-loving because of all the suffering in this world.

Gratuitous suffering rules out a good god. If you allowed your cats to suffer needlessly, would we say that even though you're not all-loving, you're still a good person?

Just show that I'm wrong.

Why? You just make claims. You made this one to me: "People choose hell. That's just how it is." That needs no rebuttal to be rejected, because you make no argument. If I had chosen to answer it, my answer would have been, "That's good news. All one has to do to avoid hell is to not choose it. Live as you like, and when the time comes and you are asked if you choose hell, answer no and go do what you like."

Like claims that free will and strict determinism are compatible and that a god who inflicts gratuitous suffering is good anyway, this is just more excuse making for a flawed god concept that believers want to present as good and just. You can't have it both ways. You try, but such claims are rejected as incoherent (self-contradictory).

 

[Ebionite]

The question here is what is the moral justification for a deity to create a person he foreknows will cause evil and will go to hell? Is there one?

Freewill implies that the question is meaningless.

 

[Trailblazer]

Your question is based on the false assumption of omniscience.

They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire [for] burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake [it], neither came [it] into my mind:
Jeremiah 19:5

It is not an assumption, it is a belief.
Why is it false?

Do you think that Jeremiah 19:5 means God is not omniscient? If so why?

 

[Ebionite]

It is not an assumption, it is a belief.

It is both. An omniscient being would have foreknowledge of the sacrifice of the valley of slaughter.

 

[Anthony H Miller]

John 6:39-40 and 2 Peter 3:9.

 

[Trailblazer]

That's not relevant to the argument that omniscience precludes free will. The existence of anybody at all that can predict the future perfectly tells us that the universe is deterministic even if that mind has no ability to cause anything.

Explain why omniscience precludes free will.
Explain why the existence of anybody at all that can predict the future perfectly tells us that the universe is deterministic.

Then go into any court of law and tell the judge and jury that the defendant is not guilty because humans have no free will.

Gratuitous suffering rules out a good god. If you allowed your cats to suffer needlessly, would we say that even though you're not all-loving, you're still a good person?'

What you stated is only a personal opinion. You cannot rule anything out with a personal opinion.
It is also ONLY my personal opinion that God is not all-loving.

Nobody can ever know if God is good or if God is all-loving. Those are only religious beliefs some people hold because of scriptures.

 

[Trailblazer]

It is both. An omniscient being would have foreknowledge of the sacrifice of the valley of slaughter.

And you don't think God is omniscient based upon that verse?

They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire [for] burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake [it], neither came [it] into my mind:
Jeremiah 19:5

1. Jeremiah is not God speaking.
2. Even if it was God speaking and something did not come into God's mind, that does not mean that God did not know it.

 

[Trailblazer]

John 6:39-40 and 2 Peter 3:9.

What do you think those verses mean?

 

[Ebionite]

1. Jeremiah is not God speaking.

"God" is ambiguous, and can mean Elohim. The word of Elohim is associated with the prophets.

I have said, Ye [are] elohim; and all of you [are] children of the most High.
Psalms 82:6

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
John 10:34-35

 

[Ignatius A]

I agree with both of you, which I think are pretty good grounds for rejecting the Abrahamic god. Thea theist rejects all god claims for lack of sufficient evidentiary support to justify belief, but some god claims are more outlandish that others.

That's not relevant to the argument that omniscience precludes free will. The existence of anybody at all that can predict the future perfectly tells us that the universe is deterministic even if that mind has no ability to cause anything.

Gratuitous suffering rules out a good god. If you allowed your cats to suffer needlessly, would we say that even though you're not all-loving, you're still a good person?

Why? You just make claims. You made this one to me: "People choose hell. That's just how it is." That needs no rebuttal to be rejected, because you make no argument. If I had chosen to answer it, my answer would have been, "That's good news. All one has to do to avoid hell is to not choose it. Live as you like, and when the time comes and you are asked if you choose hell, answer no and go do what you like."

Like claims that free will and strict determinism are compatible and that a god who inflicts gratuitous suffering is good anyway, this is just more excuse making for a flawed god concept that believers want to present as good and just. You can't have it both ways. You try, but such claims are rejected as incoherent (self-contradictory).

They do choose hell. What do you want me to do about it? You recognize and admit people are free to make choices but you want to ignore that preferring instead to blame God for it.

 

[Ignatius A]

Pointing out that your responses are immature is not a ‘play’. If you really can’t understand that proof one way or another on an issue like this involves you first understanding what the arguments for and against the existence of free will are, then the answer is to educate yourself. Proof, in the only sense that is relevant here, is a multi-stage process. Demanding that I show you you are wrong via some magical or instantaneous process only shows that you either just don’t understand how to have a basic conversation about something complicated, or you do understand that and are choosing to be disingenuous.

Sure it is. Addressing the messenger and not the message is weak.

 

[Ignatius A]

People are free to choose between good and evil and that is why crimes are punishable by law, but people are not free to choose everything because some things that happen to people are fated/predestined. God is responsible for those things. That's just how it is.

What are examples of the things that happen to people that are "fated/predestined" which God is responsible for?

 

[Trailblazer]

"God" is ambiguous, and can mean Elohim. The word of Elohim is associated with the prophets.

I have said, Ye [are] elohim; and all of you [are] children of the most High.
Psalms 82:6

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
John 10:34-35

The Bible is about as clear as mud as to its meaning....
Anyone can take scripture and interpret it in various ways.
That is why Christians and others cannot agree on its meaning and why Christianity is so divided.

 

[Tomef]

Sure it is. Addressing the messenger and not the message is weak.

What message? If you mean your dishonest ‘prove it’ malarky, I have addressed it. You are sidetracking with this silliness to avoid my response.

 

[Trailblazer]

What are examples of the things that happen to people that are "fated/predestined" which God is responsible for?

I'm glad you asked.

There are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them. Man is compelled to endure them because he has no choice, and since they are not chosen that means they are fated (e.g., it was my fate that I got hit by a car while riding my bicycle, I did not choose that.)

Question.—Is man a free agent in all his actions, or is he compelled and constrained?

Answer.—This question is one of the most important and abstruse of divine problems. If God wills, another day, at the beginning of dinner, we will undertake the explanation of this subject in detail; now we will explain it briefly, in a few words, as follows. Some things are subject to the free will of man, such as justice, equity, tyranny and injustice, in other words, good and evil actions; it is evident and clear that these actions are, for the most part, left to the will of man. But there are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them. But in the choice of good and bad actions he is free, and he commits them according to his own will.

For example, if he wishes, he can pass his time in praising God, or he can be occupied with other thoughts. He can be an enkindled light through the fire of the love of God, and a philanthropist loving the world, or he can be a hater of mankind, and engrossed with material things. He can be just or cruel. These actions and these deeds are subject to the control of the will of man himself; consequently, he is responsible for them.

Some Answered Questions, p. 248

You can read the whole chapter on free will on this link; 70: FREE WILL

 

[Anne1]

Gratuitous suffering rules out a good god. If you allowed your cats to suffer needlessly, would we say that even though you're not all-loving, you're still a good person?

Suffering is usually caused by humans who refused to obey God. The atheist communists who murdered 70 million in China were not filled with Christian love.

The So God has no right to ask you to love Him, even though He's offering you eternal life? You will be yourself with all your quirks and memories, and you will continue to be active forever, millennia after hundreds of millennia.

 

[Trailblazer]

Suffering is usually caused by humans who refused to obey God.

No, not all human suffering is caused by humans who refused to obey God, not by a long-shot.

There are certain things to which man is forced and compelled, such as sleep, death, sickness, decline of power, injuries and misfortunes; these are not subject to the will of man, and he is not responsible for them, for he is compelled to endure them. Man is compelled to endure them because he has no choice, and man has no choice because God set it up that way, so God is responsible for human suffering that is not the result of free will choices of man.

70: FREE WILL

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Yes they do.

Well I am not choosing to go to hell, that sound bad. So hey I guess I am going to heaven right?

 

[Trailblazer]

Like when I stop you in the streets, put a gun to your head, command you to give me your wallet and then say "don't make me shoot you"

If you refuse to hand over your wallet and then get shot, then you in fact committed suicide. And that was "your choice".

Absolutely. That was your choice, your money or your life!
You did not commit suicide but you valued your money more than your life.