Is God absent minded or plain evil?

[Riverwolf]

Seems like god left a lot of technicalities and loopholes for apologetics to cover it up.

The Jewish Torah isn't limited to the Pentateuch, you know.

My point all along has been that what god came up with as morality, men could have easily.

Huh. I thought your point was that God was either absent minded or plain evil. You never put forth the option that God was simply on the same level as humans, who are not inherently absent minded or plain evil.

 

[TheKnight]

Seems like god left a lot of technicalities and loopholes for apologetics to cover it up.

No. Not really. You just don't understand how Jewish tradition treats Torah.

My point all along has been that what god came up with as morality, men could have easily.

1. Man could have done nothing if God did not create him.
2. Man could not have come up with the same moral rules found in Torah for two reasons:

A. Man is imperfect.
B. Actions don't have inherent moral value unless God assigns the action such.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I'm gonna give up trying to see sense in your posts.

The OP presented a false dilemma.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

The OP presented a false dilemma.

and why is that?

 

[Eliot Wild]

and why is that?

I wouldn't worry about it too much.

A "False Dilemma" is a logical fallacy in which only two poor options are provided as possible solutions or answers to a question when in fact there might indeed be multiple alternative options that satisfy the question. By only offering the options that God is either fallible or cruel, you seem to ignore possible other options that might explain the question at hand.

However, I see your original post, not as a true theological inquiry, but as a rhetorical device that is intended to make a point. Your post had substantive merit on that level, or at least I found that it did and that's why I responded honestly rather than dismissing it due to inherent weaknesses or false assumptions.

I don't see the original question as being reflective of God's nature, as I don't believe that God is either absentminded or evil, hence He/She is not fallible nor cruel.

But I see the original question as a device that points out how many have misinterpreted or misrepresented Biblical teachings. God, if he/she really exists, is most likely neither fallible or cruel. However, those who claim to KNOW and understand God are merely using Biblical passages as a means of forwarding their own agendas, whether those be personal, political or otherwise.

In other words, it is not God that is fallible, but the problem lies with those who strictly claim that the Bible is His/Her infallible word which should be taken literally.

Anyway, that's my two-cents, hope I didn't offend anyone.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I wouldn't worry about it too much.

A "False Dilemma" is a logical fallacy in which only two poor options are provided as possible solutions or answers to a question when in fact there might indeed be multiple alternative options that satisfy the question. By only offering the options that God is either fallible or cruel, you seem to ignore possible other options that might explain the question at hand.

However, I see your original post, not as a true theological inquiry, but as a rhetorical device that is intended to make a point. Your post had substantive merit on that level, or at least I found that it did and that's why I responded honestly rather than dismissing it due to inherent weaknesses or false assumptions.

I don't see the original question as being reflective of God's nature, as I don't believe that God is either absentminded or evil, hence He/She is not fallible or cruel.

But I see the original question as a device that points out how many have misinterpreted or misrepresented Biblical teachings. God, if he/she really exists, is most likely neither fallible or cruel. However, those who claim to KNOW and understand God are merely using Biblical passages as a means of forwarding their own agendas, whether those be personal, political or otherwise.

In other words, it is not God that is fallible, but the problem lies with those who strictly claim that the Bible is His/Her infallible word which should be taken literally.

Anyway, that's my two-cents, hope I didn't offend anyone.

I think I'm going to like you.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

Huh. I thought your point was that God was either absent minded or plain evil. You never put forth the option that God was simply on the same level as humans, who are not inherently absent minded or plain evil.

Read between the lines. Eliot Wild did admirably.

 

[blackout]

Is God absent minded or plain evil?

Both. And many other things too.

 

[ChristineES]

Eliot Wild did have a very good point, which is the reason I didn't truly answer the question. Since English wasn't the original language of that version of the story, and the story was told word-of-mouth for who knows how long before it was even written down. Add to the fact that other cultures have/had other similar stories and dissimilar stories about the "dawn of man" then we don't have a clear answer to this question.
My opinion in my earlier posts are that this story and some others are symbolic of a true event. What the literal truth is, no one knows- except God.
But I still say man in fallible and God is not.

 

[Riverwolf]

Read between the lines. Eliot Wild did admirably.

I read between the lines while reading literature, not thesises. (Or is it thesi?)

Good arguments are clear and concise.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

and why is that?

You posited two conditions of God which don't apply.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

I read between the lines while reading literature, not thesises. (Or is it thesi?)

Good arguments are clear and concise.

I apologize if it was not clear to you.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

You posited two conditions of God which don't apply.

Logically, they do. We just seem to be having differing opinions.

 

[PMM]

Here is an interesting theory...What if there were people here before Adam and Eve? The bible said God created Adam in His image. Now, we know there were dinosaurs and they were not mentioned in the Bible. By saing Adam was the first man, who was created in God's image, it could mean that Adam was the first man to have God's reasoning skills, compassion, intelligence...soul if you will. Show me a caveman who can invent a cumbustion engine. It's not a stupid question. God wants us to question these things. Who knows how Adam and Eve's offspring flourished? If it's not in the Bible, maybe it is insignificant in our relationship with God.

 

[MSizer]

... Show me a caveman who can invent a cumbustion engine. It's not a stupid question....quote]

How many homo sapiens existed before the combustion engine was invented? Billions of them. Not to mention that if not for the long history of gradual technological advances before the engine, no homo sapien could have invented it.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

For that matter, show me how many people today could invent the internal combustion engine - or, heck, even describe how one works.

 

[Riverwolf]

I apologize if it was not clear to you.

Thanks. I accept.

 

[Riverwolf]

For that matter, show me how many people today could invent the internal combustion engine - or, heck, even describe how one works.

Without looking up directions.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Logically, they do. We just seem to be having differing opinions.

God doesn't pass ex post facto laws.

 

[FlyingTeaPot]

And you have a hotline to god, perhaps? You seem to know an awful lot about god's psyche.
See above about the example of Cain and Abel. That seems ex post facto to me.