God As Accessory To Child Abduction

Many people are gathered this season participating in the Christmas Holiday. They share the story of Jesus born in the manger, being held and cuddled by his mother and adored by all his visitors, angels and animals. Children act out the story in churches. Some say that christmas is for the children. These are the children that we see. But every season, there are children that we don't see. Children that are missing. Children that have disappeared and we can only hope that nothing bad has happened to them. Lets say that Tom saw a child being abducted but has decided not to get involved. Is Tom culpable of being an Accessory to the Crime? Is there any obligation in principle for Tom to report this Crime? Tom is an accessory to the Crime. There is at least a legal principle for him to report the crime. Now lets change one word in our scenario and see what happens.

Lets say that God saw a child being abducted but has decided not to get involved. Is God culpable of being an Accessory to the Crime? Is there any obligation in principle for God to report this Crime? God is an accessory to the Crime. There is at least a legal principle for him to report the crime.

Wikipedia - Accessory

In some jurisdictions, an accessory is distinguished from an accomplice, who normally is present at the crime and participates in some way. An accessory must generally have knowledge that a crime is being, or will be committed. A person with such knowledge may become an accessory by helping or encouraging the criminal in some way, or simply by failing to report the crime to proper authority. The assistance to the criminal may be of any type, including emotional or financial assistance as well as physical assistance or concealment.

Here is a link to Child Find of America

When they went missing, God was there in his omniscience, omnipotence, omni-benevolence and his "perfect" Justice. Christians can lay down piles of Rhetoric about God valuing Freewill so much that the he won't interfere with the criminals act, but since this is the case, then he values the criminals freewill more and the subsequent act of the criminal more than the freewill of the victim or the safety of the victim, whom in the context of this article are children.

God Violates the very sound principle of reporting a crime when one has knowledge of it. God is Guilty as accessory to crimes associated with missing children.

So as you are looking at baby Jesus laying in the manger and basking in the joy that your children bring you as they sing, play and open their christmas presents in wide-eyed wonder, think about those children that have had their freewill violated and are missing today. Pray God brings them back home tonight, then lets see how many come back home tonight.

85 comments:

Anonymous said...

"God doesn't do anything about a crime, therefore God does not exist"

i sense a slight equivocation in your title...

keep grinding that axe

Anonymous said...

Hi withinreason,
what you have done is misused the word equivocation, and presented a red herring in the form of straw man.

My argument leaves the possibility open that god exists.

My argument is
P: god has knowledge of child abduction and doesn't report it.
P: if a person has knowledge of child abduction, they should report it.
P: if a person has knowledge of a crime and doesn't report it, they are an accessory.
P: God doesn't report it.
C: God is guilty of being an accessory to the crime.

Try attacking that.

I'll give you a hint. "Special Pleading".

Anonymous said...

oh yea,
don't forget to say your prayers.

zilch said...

c'mon, lee- you know the answer to this one: since all evil comes from God (Isaiah 45:7), He is the cause of all crimes too. So whom is He going to report His crimes to?

Merry Christmas!

FOREVERSEARCHING>COM said...

Forever Searching is a group dedicated to raising awareness to missing children worldwide. Please visit our website to see a little of what we do www.foreversearching.com

We are looking for volunteers to help within our small, friendly, professional group. Can you spare some computer time? As a volunteer, you will need to use the internet to research possible target audiences, as well as emailing posters of missing children worldwide.

You will be allocated a Team Leader who is there to assist you whenever needed. You will be required to email your weekly progress reports to your team leader and discuss where to focus next.

We just need you to be computer literate, reliable and have a passion for children.

Application procedure: Please send an e-mail to register@foreversearching.com. Remember to mention where you saw our advert.

Thank you
www.foreversearching.com

Speedwell said...

I. God may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
II. God must answer prayers given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
III. God must perpetuate and spread its own worshipper base as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

OK, this is a stupid, pointless exercise worth a moment's amusement, but it points up how ridiculous it is to ascribe even the most rudimentary morality to God, who is supposed to be the fount of all morality. I've been an atheist for five years and I'm still astounded how deluded I was...

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Hello Lee!

The problem with my abilities for insight and foresight is that I, initially, tend to react with shortsightedness to these types of incidents. My limited ability to "see" is that I am tempted to view only one lost child in this story. By faith, there are two lost children in this story. The abductor is a person as well and is as lost as the one he/she has stolen away.

I believe Y'shua could have bypassed the crucifixion but He instead, demonstrated a different way to Salvation - He wanted to save even those who persecuted and hated Him.

This Way of God's is not a problem of evil - the "problem" (for we who think we are completely void of the need for mercy and feel justified condemning others) is that of grace. Yes, I've known a few people who have had their run-ins with the law - and I know their life stories personally. If the people who get indignant at life's difficulties at the sensational level would get involved and care to intervene, perhaps we would have less time to ruminate.

I recently was made aware of a young boy that I met and knew while I was volunteering in his second grade class (he is now a seventh grader) who has recently been incarcerated in a junvenile detention facility. When in second grade, he introduced himself to me by throwing a beanie baby pointblank in my face. In response, I asked him if he needed a hug. He was too taken aback to get the hug I offered, but I wish I would have given it to him. He became one of my favorites. If he isn't rehabilitated and if he ever reaches the headlines, you can throw stones at him if you like, but I love this person. I will do my best to let him know that I am sorry that I didn't do more to show him that his life is too valuable to get involved in mistreating himself and others.

Y'shua was criticized on the cross by one of his neighbors who was embittered and wanted salvation to be enacted in a different way other than what God was offering. But I am both grateful and sometimes grieved He does it His way. He loves both the lost "children" in these abduction stories and that often hurts and offends my sense of righteousness.

Thanks!

Logismous Kathairountes said...

Your argument, Lee, fails to take into account one of the many offices which we Christians attribute to God: That of Ultimate Judge. We believe that He will one day judge every person for everything that they've done, and reward all the good deeds and punish all the bad deeds. In this way, He is the final and highest authority in the Universe.

Once God knows about a child abduction, it has already been reported, and to a much higher authority than any Earthly police agency or government. He will make sure that justice is done, no matter what.

Just because He doesn't see fit to tell you about every child abduction doesn't mean He's not going to do justice in every case.

John said...

Good points logismous

Ben said...

So God would rather mete out justice after the fact than prevent these horrors in the first place?

How is that just?

John said...

Jonathan Edwards:

It is a proper and excellent thing for infinite glory to shine forth; and for the same reason, it is proper that the shining forth of God’s glory should be complete; that is, all the parts of His glory should shine forth, that every beauty should be proportionably effulgent, that the beholder may have a proper notion of God. It is not proper that one glory should be exceedingly manifested, and another not at all…Thus it is necessary, that God’s aweful majesty, His authority and dreadful greatness, justice, and holiness, should be manifested. But this could not be, unless sin and punishment had been decreed; so that the shining forth of God’s glory would be very imperfect, both because these parts of divine glory would not shine forth as the others do, and also the glory of His goodness, love, and holiness would be faint without them; nay, they could scarcely shine forth at all. If it were not right that God should< permit and punish sin, there could be no manifestation of God’s holiness in hatred of sin, or in showing any preference, in His providence, of godliness before it. There would be no manifestation of God’s grace or true goodness, if there was no sin to be pardoned, no misery to be saved from. How much happiness soever He bestowed, His goodness would not be so much prized and admired….So evil is necessary, in order to the highest happiness of the creature, and the completeness of that communication of God, for which He made the world; because the creature’s happiness consists in the knowledge of God, and the sense of His love. And if the knowledge of Him be imperfect, the happiness of the creature must be proportionably imperfect.

Is God less glorious because He allowed that evil be? The answer is no.

Anonymous said...

So God would rather mete out justice after the fact than prevent these horrors in the first place?

How is that just?


Good question, but what is justice without something to be just about? Let us say that it is morally good to prevent an evil from happening; this I would not disagree with. Similarly, however, I would think that it is equally as morally good to give awards and punishments to those that do good or evil and recompense all those that were hurt.

Ultimately we have to blame the person that committed the crime, rather than the judge who is to judge it. We seem to think that God is to blame because He didn't step in and stop it, but it seems more like we should be blaming the criminal for doing it in the first place.

He'll get his.


But then let us wager that he WON'T get what's coming to him. I write about this in my recent article on the CADRE called "The Problem of Evil: A Problem for Skeptics?" where I make the claim that if there is no Ultimate Judge or Afterlife, then our concept justice is ultimately meaningless as well as the value of human life.

For if there is no afterlife, and all we do is die in the end, then murder is no injustice to the victim, for their is no way they can percieve that they have been dealt an injustice. And, if injustice is merely a percieved thing by other people, then the value of human life is soley dependant on how other people feel about said person. The problem is, how do we distinguish between the value judgement of the murderer and those that cared about the person? We can't; objectively that is without an Ultimate Judge or Law Giver.

So the problem here is no so much for Theists or Christians specifically, but it is for Atheists; more along the lines of the materialists sorts. Why should I consider this an injustice at all within your worldview?

It seems that though God does not act within a particular time of a crime and this appears to be a problem, we Theists still have a solution where justice ultimately prevails.

It doesn't seem an Atheists has any solution at all, and in matters of reasoning, the best belief is always that which has the better solution.

Anonymous said...

And I apologize for any typos. I'm still rather tired (didn't sleep much last night).

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Hi,

About the issue of judgement, I believe Y'shua makes reference to the existance of two judges and two fathers - two types of judging and two types of "parenthood".

At any rate, seasons greetings!

Ben said...

For if there is no afterlife, and all we do is die in the end, then murder is no injustice to the victim, for their is no way they can percieve that they have been dealt an injustice.

Oh, brother. You can't really believe this! Can you?

Also, if there were an afterlife, why would murder be so horrible? The murdered simply gets to his glorious afterlife sooner!

Anonymous said...

Hi Logismous,
Once God knows about a child abduction, it has already been reported, and to a much higher authority than any Earthly police agency or government. He will make sure that justice is done, no matter what.
Just because He doesn't see fit to tell you about every child abduction doesn't mean He's not going to do justice in every case.


So it is more important for god to let the crime continue to its natural conclusion. Lets see how that applies to real life.
if we all get punished in the end by god, as ultimate authority, then there really is no reason for law enforcement is there?

Go to google news, do a search through the archives for 'chained child' and see what you get. Tell me that its not better to intervene.

God doesn't have to prevent anything, just an anonymous phone call, or a note, or a dream, or a psychic with some accurate information. Law enforcement can get the perpetrator, he/she can go to jail, get saved and reduce the need for so many people to go to hell. Did you think of that?

As is stands right now, to the chained child that died in the bed, if she decided that her circumstances were so horrific that she can't believe that god would allow it, then she would go to hell after she burns alive chained to the bed.
He was there watching her writhe in agony and did nothing.

As it stands right now, since god didn't act, he might as well not be there. He didn't really make a difference did he?

Anonymous said...

Hi Cole,
why don't you learn to think for yourself?
If it were not right that God should< permit and punish sin, there could be no manifestation of God’s holiness in hatred of sin, or in showing any preference, in His providence, of godliness before it.
This is silly, like I said before, sin can persist, but this false dichotomy is only necessary if there is a god that is not willing to participate, or is not there. God set a precedent of using prophets in the OT. He could use these so called 'mediums' to really locate criminals and bring them to justice. Let us handle his light-work. There is already a human made system in place. We are showing due care and dilligence in handling sin as best as we can. The criminally sinful are a small percentage of the population. Their crimes disproportionately harm us. Look at Hitler, etc. Jeffry dahmer, serial killers. We want to stop them, stop the harm to the victim and rehabilitate the criminal. As it stands right now, God is irrelevant. Things are happening just as if he didn't exist.

Logismous Kathairountes said...

Lee,

Really, there are two answers to these questions:

1) The Job answer. If God is as Christianity claims He is, He's perfectly wise. If you are as Christianity claims you are (and I am), you're not perfectly wise. Compared to God, you're pretty stupid.

Now, it makes perfect sense for a stupid human being not to understand why a perfectly wise and perfectly just God would sit by and let a crime be committed. It's like how it makes perfect sense for a dog not to understand why his master comes and goes when he does. But it makes no sense at all for him to accuse God on that basis. "I don't understand it, so it must be evil!"

For you to accuse God of injustice or evil or stupidity or whatever, you have to claim to know how He should have acted. To claim to know how He should have acted and didn't, you have to claim to be wiser or more just or better than He is, or at least able to judge His actions by your standards.

And suddenly, you're talking about a 'God' than whom you are wiser or better or more just - Which is not the God I'm talking about at all. You're not accusing my God - You're accusing some other God with different attributes from the one I say exists. To me, the accusation goes in one ear and out the other - I say, "Who is he to accuse God? Does he think he's smarter than God? What kind of insane vanity is that?"

Suffice to say, it makes perfect sense that what God does and does not do would make no sense at all to us.

2) The mercy answer. If justice were to be executed on us, none of us would escape the flames of Hell - This is Christian doctrine. I believe that we ought to thank God for being merciful - Because just as He's merciful to a rapist or murderer and doesn't intervene to send them to jail, He's merciful to me in not sending me to Hell right now.

Anonymous said...

Oh, brother. You can't really believe this! Can you?

Actually, I do, Ben. Do you have a reasonable rebuttal other than "Oh brother", because I'd like to see it.

Also, if there were an afterlife, why would murder be so horrible? The murdered simply gets to his glorious afterlife sooner!

Because, murder is by definition the unjust taking of a life. Life here on Earth has meaning as well, as dictated by the Creator. Only the Creator truly has the authority to give and take life away or to give authority to others.

Anonymous said...

HI M,
For if there is no afterlife, and all we do is die in the end, then murder is no injustice to the victim, for their is no way they can percieve that they have been dealt an injustice.
Where do you get your philosphy? Comic books?
This is a non-sequitur. There is intrinsic value to human without god from a number of angles. I'll bet your mother places a high value on you, and if you're a good worker, your employer places a high value on you, for just a couple of examples. If you are a nurse, doctor, fireman, accountant, as long as a person is adding value to the world, there is value to the person. Now go ahead and accuse me of utilitarian sentiment. Present your red herring for godless atheism, "because the terry schiavos of the world would be doomed" but its the truth as it stands with an apparent lack of God. God should take care of the terry schiavo's of the world by bringing them home where they belong instead of letting them languish.

the best belief is always that which has the better solution.
The better solution is for you to pray for all those lost kids to come home tonight, and this all powerful god should answer to his glory and make a statement. Put up or shut up.

You guys are making excuses for an all powerful god that doesn't do anything. Its called 'rationalization' and its caused by cognitive dissonance.

On sept. 11, do you think that all those people that were raining down like tear drops found Jesus? Statistically, I'd say no. They ran out of time. I'd say some of them renounced him on the way down. I know I would have.

Let me see, burn alive, suffocate, or jump 25 or more stories to my death? Jesus thanks for this opportunity to find you and come home, but wait, committing suicide is a sin, so I'll just sit here and burn to death. Nahhhhhhh!

The problem with your version of the problem of evil is that it backfires. People can get more than they can handle, and turning to god doesn't help, and when it doesn't help, then the logical conclusion is that they were wrong about god. Not that he's evil, but that since it looks like he doesn't do anything, another hypothesis is that he's not there.

Anonymous said...

Hi Logismous,
in my scenario about Tom, is he justified in not reporting the Crime? If yes, why,
if not, why not please.

John said...

Lee,

Things are happening as though He does exist.

God allows evil
1. To punish His creatures
2. To discipline and test His children.
God always brings good out of evil.
Since we all deserve eternal suffering God does nothing wrong in allowing evil and suffering.

Anonymous said...

Hi Cole,
God always brings good out of evil.
Can you imagine what good was served by an abused child chained to a bed burns to death?

Since we all deserve eternal suffering God does nothing wrong in allowing evil and suffering.
Speak for yourself cole. I am pillar in my community as much now as when I was christian. You are probably too hard on yourself. And if you think it through for yourself, you'll see that it doesn't add up.

John said...

God's wrath belongs to Him alone.
He does give SOME of His authority to the government.

Anonymous said...

Hi all,
here is a little exercise i'd like you to try. Every time you see something on the news that disgusts you or shocks you, say to yourself "God was there, knowing the mind of the victim, seeing the fear, providing no comfort, except the knowledge that the criminal will get their judgment after they've lived out their life and done more harm than good".

John said...

Lee,

God uses evil people for His judgement and discipline and then turns arround and judges them based on their evil intentions. God's intentions are good man's intentions are evil.

Anonymous said...

Hi Cole,
I suggest you look into the origins of the bible, the Canaanites, the mythology of the Canaanites, and the heritage of the Israelites, and then ask yourself, why is the Canaanite religion considered myth and the Israelite religion not?

If you aren't comfortable doing that, spend a year studying the near east starting after the last ice age, around 10,000 bc, "the agricultural revolution". No harm in Ancient history is there? And you can get college credit. Win-Win situation.

Nightmare said...

Lee, any other time, even a few days from now I'd agree wholeheartedly. But, tonight is Xmas eve. Now is not the time.

The first year of World War One, the British and German troops in some places on the Western Front made their own peace - a bit of truce, a bit of humanity amidst the war. It started by singing songs, and (at least in one place) by one brave German risking his life to bring a Xmas tree to the British in the opposite trench.

Why do I go into this? Because I wanna be that German Lee (and everyone else). All this culture war crap is necessary - vitally so - but for tonight and tomorrow let us have peace, let us make our own truce. We can go back to the trenches in due time.

Peace, everyone. Please.

zilch said...

Allow me to be the first to say (with the unfair advantage of Greenwich Time +1) Merry Christmas! I don't really care what set of beliefs are behind being peaceful: it's peace that's important.

Cheers from chilly Vienna, zilch

Anonymous said...

Hi Nightmare,
Fröhliche Weihnachten, or whatever.
Peace should be 24/7. But its not going to get that way by praying about it.
See you later.

Anonymous said...

merry christmas to you too zilch, and everyone else!

Nightmare said...

Lee Randolph said...
Fröhliche Weihnachten, or whatever.

Sorry, I'm American and don't speak German, but thank you for the effort.

Peace should be 24/7. But its not going to get that way by praying about it.

I agree, totally. Twas just the timing of this particular argument that sparked my request, tis all.

Anonymous said...

Ultimately we have to blame the person that committed the crime, rather than the judge who is to judge it. We seem to think that God is to blame because He didn't step in and stop it, but it seems more like we should be blaming the criminal for doing it in the first place.

Very well said!! This is where all this energy should be going.

Lee,
Every time you see something on the news that disgusts you or shocks you, say to yourself "God was there, knowing the mind of the victim, seeing the fear, providing no comfort, except the knowledge that the criminal will get their judgment after they've lived out their life and done more harm than good".

Yes...my husband and I watched a movie last night while we waited for our children to fall asleep. It's called, "Journey from the Fall". It's a Vietnamese movie about the plight of the "boat people" and those who were in re-education camps. After seeing the movie, which requires a box of tissue and maybe a hand to hold, I looked up more information about the boat people. What happened to some of them was horrific as well.

I do wonder what God thinks and why He allows some things and not others. If He is real, and I believe He is, I don't understand why...but then I also don't understand how the Thai government...or any other nation except the U.S. which was more "Christian" than any other at the time, could sit back and allow pirates to be so unbelievable brutal to those poor people. A sad truth about the whole situation is that if we want to be technical we have to follow it all the way back.

At what point is evil...evil. Is it when the thought enters the mind or when even the tiniest untruth is told?
What constitutes goodness?

From my perspective, God made a pure world. Pure meaning in balance, working in harmony.

I recently learned that blood and animal products cannot be digested by worms which means that soil can actually be damaged (as far as producing the highest quality foods) by blood. God warned Cain that "sin was crouching" at his door and told him to master it. He didn't. Whether that is figurative or actual isn't the point...it's what is conveyed.

God's pure world was stained..."your brother's blood cries out to me from the ground".

What should God have done at this point? If God is your version of good does that mean He is also just? If He's just does that mean He should have ended Cain's life?

What about lying?

I'm not being nit picky or snide. I wonder about this. Does it really make sense for God to intervene in EVERY evil intention? Should God run the world as seen in Minority Report? If that's the case...what about the criminal? Is there ever an instance for grace? If there is grace, there is the possibility for mistakes...should it be three strikes and you're out?

Should God only strike dead those who abuse children? (And please know that it makes me physically sick knowing that people are abused...especially children.)

What do you propose?

Anonymous said...

Hi all,
this is not about blaming god for crime or evil so stop it. This is about god violating a perfectly sound principle. This is about man being responsible for evil, man trying to fix himself, and god not reporting crime when we expect other lesser people to report crime and hold them accountable when they do not.

Hi Jennifer,
It is odd to me that you all have such a hard time getting your minds around this, especially since it is a concept that gets elaborated on in TV every week. The "psychic" that helps the police is a common premise for a story.

Here it is laid out in analogy.

Jennifer is sleeping. She has a dream that starts as follows. A person, or Jesus appears at the beginning and says "You need to remember this and go report it to your local law enforcement. This is a message from God." Then you get the details, you write them down, take them to law enforcement, they arrest the perpetrator because you got perfect information for the prosecution. You tell your story, some people don't believe you some people do. It keeps happening over and over again every day to different people. It become commonplace. The perps get busted, God gets the glory, the perps get saved, guys like me and Dawkins get put in our place, less people go to hell, because they did not have their freewill violated, but the harm is minimized. Its a win-win situation. In this situation, the integrity of the Gods "test" gets preserved and harm gets minimized and god gets the glory and a perfectly just god does not violate the perfectly sound principle of reporting a crime that one has knowledge of.

So let the strawmanning begin. Come back with, "so God reports every little childs play ground scuffle, stealing candy, or lifting a dollar out of a purse or wallet etc? Thats ridiculous and your whole concept is flawed". That would be a slippery slope fallacy. The 'info' filter could be place anywhere, on the messengers end or on the receivers end. If the parents knew when their kids were bullying other kids they could bring it up over dinner, if they knew they were getting involved with drugs, it could be nipped in the bud. We could coexist minimizing the harm that is done through the "PoE" test .
At this point, who could argue that its NOT mans fault? Who would turn away or deny christ? No one. Win-Win.

If god is all powerful and all just, then he should act that way. If he doesn't and he violates perfectly sound principles, then the chance that positive claims that depend on those premises are not as likely to be true as the other possibilities. In other words the claim of "perfect justice" and "loves us enough to give his son so that none may perish" is not as likely to be true as doesn't care, or isn't there.

Anonymous said...

lee doesn't realize that he's making a moral judgment.. yet he doesn't have a leg or foundation of morality to stand on

Logismous Kathairountes said...

Lee,

In the 'Tom' scenario, Tom would commit an injustice to fail to report the crime.

The answer to the question, "Why is it not unjust for God not to report the crime?" is: Once God knows about the crime, it has already been reported to the highest authority possible.

God and Tom are not interchangeable in any argument having to do with justice, since God is the ultimate arbiter of justice and Tom is just some guy.

I'm taking this from the book of Job.

Anonymous said...

Hi withinreason,
what do I have to do with anything?
Its simple logic, simple reasoning.

Is reporting a child abduction a valid principle?
yes.
Does god know about child abductions? yes.
God should report child abductions.
Since he doesn't, he violates a valid principle.

Can we lable this principle moral? if you want to. From the perspective of people, it would be sufficient. Then,
does god violate a valid moral principle?
yes.

Are there circumstances that would make not reporting a child abduction an invalid principle? I can't think of any. help me out.

Anonymous said...

What makes it a valid principle? You want to apply the moral principle part with God not reporting it. You are making a judgment on something that God does not do. You have deemed it as some sort of crime. Sounds like a moral judgment to me

What makes your end-of-all principle true? Anyone could say that the principle is bogus

Anonymous said...

Hi Logismous,
It’s nice to see you again.
The answer to the question, "Why is it not unjust for God not to report the crime?" is: Once God knows about the crime, it has already been reported to the highest authority possible.
Then using this as a precedent, we can say that we do not need law enforcement because in all cases the highest authority has already been notified? I'll rebut this at the end.

I sense this heading to the 'invalid comparison' rebuttal so here is my justification for using Tom to compare to god.

- God is moral.
- the human set of morality contains a set, or subset of moral principles.
- God has properties similar to the set of human moral principles.
- We say god is moral because we compare him to the set of principles comprising the set of morality. Otherwise we have no basis for the comparison.

So now if pick a valid principle out of the set of morality, and see if it can be compared to god, this should be a valid test of Gods similarity to the set of morality that we are comparing him to.

Additionally let’s add these qualifiers.
- We are made in gods image,
- God loved us so much that he have his only son so that none should perish

So how moral is god? How many of our characteristics of morality does god possess? Not this one. And if we make a list of moral principles, and we compare it to god’s behavior can we come up with a value of "how moral is god when compared to our set of moral values"?

Then if we say that some principles in our set are "universal morals" I'd be willing to bet I could get a consensus that reporting a child abduction comes close to being a universal moral, meaning it would span all cultures and categories.

If god doesn't match it, then he violates one of our principles making up our set of morals.

If we say that it is reasonable to impose this set of morals on a human, and we say that god is moral, then we can say in some respect it should be valid to impose this set of morals on god. If we can't, then saying that god is moral is meaningless, especially, perfectly moral. So if humans cannot possibly be more moral than god, then God must meet or beat any expectations that we can place on a human. If we say that a human is deficient in morality for not reporting a child abduction that he has knowledge of, then if god does not at least meet that expectation, then he is deficient as well, unless we can say that violating this principle is not an indicator of a violation of this principle or any shortcoming of morality.

So what it is? On what grounds does god not need to meet this expectation? On what grounds do people need to this expectation? If people need to meet this expectation and god meets or beats our expectations of morality, then he should be expected to do it to. Not just because I say so, but because it is consistent with what he has approved of to be said about him, which should be the truth.

Does it not apply because he is the final Judge and we are not? If that is sufficient, then the criminal will go about his life inflicting more harm, which is contrary to gods wishes, he will violate the freewill of innocents, which not what god wishes, and he will cause doubt in the minds of some people as to his integrity or his existence, which is not what he wants, people will not try to inhibit themselves as much as they can from sin because they know that there are no immediate repercussions causing them to sin for a longer time and some of them will die before they get a chance to wholeheartedly repent, which is against gods wishes, more people will go not get to heaven and yet god gave his only son so that none should perish. Additionally he won't violate anyone’s freewill but will be operating within the mechanism of the "problem of Evil" that he has set up for us a test.

My grounds for saying that god should report the crime when he has knowledge of it is because it is consistent with what he has approved of to be known about his character. Not reporting the crime to law enforcement is not consistent with what he has approved of to be known about his character.

This weakens the argument that God has the characteristics that he wants to be known about himself.

How could this happen if God is everything he says he is? It wouldn't.

It would happen if he’s not everything that human folklore says he is.

Anonymous said...

Hi withinreason,
What makes it a valid principle?
well without getting into the metaphysics of it, one qualifier is that it is part of a set of laws in civilized countries.

What makes your end-of-all principle true? Anyone could say that the principle is bogus
Okay, do it. I'd love to see you defend the assertion that it is a bogus principle. Not a lot of things are more interesting than a christian trying to refute a moral principle.

Anonymous said...

lol...

you're assuming that everyone has the same moral principles.. very funny.

btw, i don't think that the principle is bogus.. i said anyone can say that the principle is bogus...

again, with the moral principle. i want some scientific proof of this all around good, moral principle.

atheists don't have a moral foundation besides "whatever the culture says is just that". i guess with all the crap and atrocities in the world that are happening, i guess you shouldn't express any condemning judgment (or hold an opinion for that matter) on other peoples/country's atrocities. billions of people were murdered in the holocaust. i'm sure glad nobody passes any judgment on that time period!

Anonymous said...

Hi withinreason,
you should change your screen name.

I don't need to assume. there is research to show that some moral principles cut across categories of people and cultures. There's your scientific research.

And I know that this principle that I'm talking about is widely accepted, even by you.

Jay said...

Just as God's ways are higher than our ways so are God's thoughts higher than our thoughts.

Anonymous said...

Hi jay,
not only is that a stinky pile of rhetoric it is a violation of rule one for critical discussions.
1. Parties must not prevent each other from advancing or casting doubt on each
others viewpoints.


By saying that gods thoughts are higher than ours, it implies that they are above criticism. That closes off discussion and is not useful for gaining knowledge and understanding on a topic.

Jay said...

"Who are you to question me.
I will question you.
Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth?
Are not my ways higher than your ways?"

Anonymous said...

it's like talking to a wall

Anonymous said...

so there is a universal moral behavior that basically every culture subscribes to? i don't really disagree with you there, but you're assuming the vast majority is always right on the code. so the world changes and flips its morality, as long as we're all in agreement, it's fine.
i guess that's what happens when you presuppose that the 'supernatural' is not an option.

Don said...

Why stop at child abduction? Let's go one step further. After Jesus was born and the wise men went home without checking in with Herod, Herod was so upset that he killed off all the infants under the age of two in Bethlehem. See Matthew 2 16-18. You'd think God would have prevented that.

Anonymous said...

If the parents knew when their kids were bullying other kids they could bring it up over dinner, if they knew they were getting involved with drugs, it could be nipped in the bud. We could coexist minimizing the harm that is done through the "PoE" test .

I agree! Sadly, many parents don't have time or take the time to know where their kids are. They don't want to smother their kids or invade their privacy. Fortunately for me, my dad was/is well known in the community I grew up in and eyes were everywhere. I still did things I shouldn't have, that were destructive to some degree, but because I knew my dad would eventually find out about overt things it helped to curb some impulsive desires.

I see the value of the psychic example. I don't have a t.v. and don't watch it so I'm a bit illiterate when it comes to shows or ideologies expressed through it.
The fact is....the Thai government, and others, knew that Thai fisherman turned pirates, were brutally killing, raping and selling young girls and women into brothels in Thailand, but CHOSE not to do anything about it.
The reason we did was not because we're perfect, but because we felt some responsibility for not winning the war.

I think I understand that what you are getting at....that if God is not going to strike people dead or intervene before a crime, He should be telling people to give information to the human authorities who have the power to bring the criminal to justice.

In order for God to report a crime there must be a receptive person who believes that what they are hearing/seeing is real and then they must be willing to do something active about it. Maybe God will resort to talking donkeys again, but I know how you feel about that.

Anonymous said...

Lee,

Where do you get your philosphy? Comic books?

Actually, I'm a Philosophy major.

I'd also like to say that I haven't been rude to you this entire time. Rational discourse usually tries to stay away from degrading other people because of their ideas. Perhaps you should practice that.

This is a non-sequitur.

How does it not follow?

There is intrinsic value to human without god from a number of angles. I'll bet your mother places a high value on you, and if you're a good worker, your employer places a high value on you, for just a couple of examples. If you are a nurse, doctor, fireman, accountant, as long as a person is adding value to the world, there is value to the person.

On the contrary, for something to be intrinsic (since the word is applied to human perception), it cannot simply be within the view of other people. Subjectivism does not equate with intrinsic.

If person A doesn't love me, but person B does, there is no distinction between A or B's feelings towards my value if it is simply placed within context of human perception.

So what you are basically stating with your examples is that my value is solely dependant on how people view me, which is not intrinsic.


Now go ahead and accuse me of utilitarian sentiment.


I didn't gather you were a Utilitarian from your examples. There's not enough evidence for that in your response.

What I will accuse you of is a non sequitor (right back at ya) for assuming that subjective appeals among other people towards our value as human beings actually equates to that value being intrinsic

Present your red herring for godless atheism,

Are you a self proclaimed psychic or just a little paranoid?

"because the terry schiavos of the world would be doomed" but its the truth as it stands with an apparent lack of God. God should take care of the terry schiavo's of the world by bringing them home where they belong instead of letting them languish.


God already does. Just because He doesn't do so within your time period does not mean He doesn't do it.

Now let's really pray for the dying, the suffering, the anguished, for when they die there is nothing left for them, no justice, no reconciliation, and no peace. Their murderers who were never caught, their rapist who were never caught, their molesters who were never caught; none of them are ever caught.

Let's pray for our concept of human value, which is dependant on how other people feel about us...and let us pray for the concept of justice, which is merely a facade perpetuated by the strong and something to scoff at by the tyrants.

Anonymous said...

HI M,
my apologies, that wasn't nice.
I only have this three pounds of meat in my skull to think with, and keeping it disciplined is a daily struggle. I'm a meat head.

How does it not follow?
Okay, I'm willing to concede that there is no real value to anything, it is all in the eye of the beholder, in one context. However, there are algorithms built into us that force us to react in certain ways that imply a built in valuation of another individual. Animals exhibit it. The "mother" instinct. The way that mothers of all species will permit their babies to come to them in intimate ways. The way that parents naturally want to protect their young. The way that babies, or animals seek out their mother. The way that babies start crying when other babies cry, or the animal "knows" when we are sad, the way that monkeys will react to each other when one is in distress, the way that mice are more susceptible to pain when they see a cage mate in pain. This is what I meant. In this context, there is a valuation system (or at least empathetic system) built into some organisms, including you and your mother. But this is a topic that i'm going to address in another article that I'm struggling with.

So i'll take the hit for the non-sequitur since I violated the principle of clarity.

Are you a self proclaimed psychic or just a little paranoid?
I was anticipating arguments.

God already does [take the brain dead home instead of letting them languish]. Just because He doesn't do so within your time period does not mean He doesn't do it.
Well, I ask you to forgive me if I can't tell the difference in "Gods Time" and "chance".

And then you go on to talk about praying. Prayer doesn't work. And it defies reason even for a christian. God already knows how things are going to play out, he knew it before he made it. Things must be set to happen a certain way or he violates his own omnicsience. You are a philosophy major so you must be familiar with the paradoxes of Gods omnipotence, and omniscience. When someone decided to attribute the characteristics of infinity to God, they didn't think it through. the only thing, logically, that I can see about prayer that I don't see violating any principles of logic is praise. And he already knows he's all that and a bag of chips, so what is left for prayer?

so in any case, I hope you will forgive my little outburst and not let it taint your opinion of the integrity of my arguments.

Red herring chased (arf, arf). Now to get back on track.

Anonymous said...

HI withinreason,
i don't really disagree with you there, but you're assuming the vast majority is always right on the code.
No,
unfortunately, morality seems to a large degree to depend on context.

for example.
It is not good to stick babies with needles, generally.
- unless they need medicine that can only be delivered with a shot.

- Its not good to kill people.
- unless your survival depends on it.

- Its not good to lie to people.
- Unless the lie will prevent harm to a person.

and these things change in context whether or not the supernatural exists.

there are some things I can think of that defy re-evaluation in the context, such as rape, kidnapping, or harming another person or animal for pleasure.

But in general, a principle of minimizing harm, or "the golden rule" seems to be sufficient to guarantee a large return on investment in terms of societies.

There are some neat ideas in game theory for equitable distribution that I want to look into one of these days.

Anonymous said...

Hi Jennifer,
If my dogs told me that there was a little boy chained to a bed somewhere in town, I'd check it out. Then I'd rethink my atheism. But until then, I'm stuck.

Anonymous said...

Lee,

OK, but what if you had a dream..or even just a daytime thought where you envisioned something traumatic? Would you instinctively try to find out about it or would you dismiss it as imagination?

I'm not saying follow every rabbit trail...but why do some people have a psychic ability? Doesn't that defy logic and reason? If psychic ability is real..and it seems to be, even as recorded in the Bible, why are some people more receptive than others?...and if we parallel that with some people being more receptive to experiencing or hearing God...I wonder what the difference is?

If some people are able to experience the presence of God and others are not, it seems as if it may be a communication problem. My case is that I don't think the problem would change if God were physically present because it seems people in general have a hard time taking off their filters in order to understand realities outside their own immediate experience.

You said that you leave room for a god to exist, but not the God of the Bible. If it isn't too personal, I ask why?. What should the God of the Bible be doing and why would you expect anything different from Him than of any other sort of God?

Anonymous said...

Hi Jennifer,
OK, but what if you had a dream..or even just a daytime thought where you envisioned something traumatic? Would you instinctively try to find out about it or would you dismiss it as imagination?
It depends. Look, god is all-everything right? if he's going to send me a message he should know how to convince me. For one thing he could tell me where and who to go to (officer Badass), who will know me when he/she sees me. simple.

I don't think anyone has psychic abilities, and i leave the possibility open that a god exists but I think that logically we can cross off the christian god since he doesn't meet his own criteria (and he is logically inconsistent ) and israel heritage is canaanite and we all know the canaanite religion is mythology, therefore, without strong evidence to the contrary we can infer through precedent that israelite religion is mythology as well.

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

If your desire for a "god" is that he be under compulsion - that he does not allow his creation to be separate/individualized from him - that he is narcissistic and that he must clone us and control us in order to provide perfect safety - this is an idol and POE does disprove his existance. POE does not however, disprove the existance of the God exemplified by Y'shua - POE does not disprove a God who is both creative and progressive - who is gracious and who, while honestly acknowledging evil (there will always be wars - there will always be poor)does not indict us for being infected with it but rather, offers a different Way. POE does not discount a God Who provides (as a priority), inner spiritual connection and salvation. POE does not discount the existance of a God who is looking to fill His house before moving on to the next age/generation of creative expression. He is not under compulsion such as we cling to.

Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Hi mmm,
if reporting a crime that you have knowledge of is a valid moral principle and god does not do it, can't we cross that off our list of "gods moral characteristics" and he loses a point in the moral category?

Humans have devised processes to handle evil and if god is interested in 'none shall perish' he should help out in bringing those criminals to justice on earth, let us handle his light work and get them ready to receive the message.

he doesn't seem to want it bad enough. I think he loses a point in the "caring" category as well.

John said...

Lee,

What if God were on a different level from us. (morally)

God is outside or above the law.
He would then have the right to do things which seem evil to us. For man it would be wrong to allow evil but not for God. I'm not sure that is the God of the Bible though.

John said...

Lee,

Would you agree with me that IF I deserve to suffer forever in hell then God does nothing wrong by allowing me to suffer for say 30 years of my life?

Unknown said...

Cole, just an aside, this whole idea of eternally torturing people who may have led otherwise good, true lives--without Christ--is highly disturbing and seems to be unjust.

But anyhow,

Cole said:

What if God were on a different level from us. (morally)

God is outside or above the law.
He would then have the right to do things which seem evil to us. For man it would be wrong to allow evil but not for God. I'm not sure that is the God of the Bible though.

If, in God's view, things we may view as evil are, for God, good, then why should we follow him? Is he evil by our standards? If this is so, will murderers or rapists (those who do that which god truly views as good) go to heaven, and if I try to stop them, I will go to hell? What if a church formed under this view; they could rape and murder and claim that these are truly acts which are good by His standards. I am not interested in a depraved, bizarre moral system such as this. You may be implying that we cannot know His will. Well then, what's the point? How does this contribute to living a life ethically and with purpose? It is nonsensical, and holds little weight as a guide to ethics.

Plus I think some issues crop up with the 'standard' of morality and how it relates to an, as you put it, 'omni-everything' God. If good ness is based on nothing but what God decrees, then its his whims that govern our morality. You know that he sanctions murder, rape, genocide, and the killing of civilians in the Bible(s). When judging if God is good, we should have standards that are outside of him...we would apply the same to anything else: "this person is generous; they give to poor, have spartan lodgings so they can do so optimally, etc." "Hoarding money excessively" is not on the list. You can't just say, "God is good because he's God."

To say that God recognizes what's good and choses to do good, you have to admit ethics come from outside of God.

To simply say he transcends this or that practically removes the meaning of a good God in the first place.

Unknown said...

Woah, pardon some of my spelling--several keys (including thespacebar, shit!) broke away from my laptop and I have to jab violently at the sensors!

John said...

I think I will agree with what you said about God being above the law emily.

But do you think it's true that

IF I deserve eternal suffering then God does nothing wrong for allowing me to suffer intense pain for half my life?

Unknown said...

Who deserves eternal anything? Honestly, unless you are a sadistic, serial child rapist or something, I can't think of many--if any people--that deserve eternal torture in flames and agony. who the advances this kind of justice. That question is just weird, in light of the weirdness of this concept of justice.

Unknown said...

correction: "Who the hell advances this kind of justice?"

John said...

Emily,

I'm just saying IF.

IF I deserve eternal suffering then God does nothing wrong for allowing or causing me to suffer intense pain for half my life.

If.

Unknown said...

Yes, I think it's wrong for him to do so. It is wrong to force someone to live in intense pain based on your own caprice, and then condemn them to eternal suffering, AT ALL. Again, I submit that this is a foolish question and I can't discern from the thread what you're trying to prove or get me to agree to here.

Unknown said...

I am repulsed by "God's" idea of justice. The concept of hell combined with my non xian belief has tripped up many good xian friends, and caused them to doubt.

Unknown said...

Cole, What if:

I had a puppy who occasionally peed on the floor or chewed furniture and even nipped at the little child next door (as an intelligent being who knows something about puppies, I am familiar that this is normal puppy behavior). I am only caring for him for a year until an Army buddy who was deployed unexpectedly returns to claim him. I know this buddy of mine is a sadistic animal abuser. By human standards for dog behavior, this is a 'bad dog'. Does it matter whether I brutally abuse and terrorize the puppy, who, as a life form, cannot comprehend my will or wishes, until my buddy comes to whisk him away to an entire lifetime of abuse? Does he deserve such a punishment beyond his failings? Of course not! Both cases are abusive and morally wrong. What if I said both Masters mentioned here loved the puppy above all else? You would tell me I was a lunatic, and call the police!

This is why I think your question is beyond absurd.

John said...

Good points Emily. I aknowledge your position and promise to weigh it carefully.

Anonymous said...

HI Emily,
nice comment about the puppy,

Hi Cole,
God is outside or above the law.
He would then have the right to do things which seem evil to us. For man it would be wrong to allow evil but not for God. I'm not sure that is the God of the Bible though.

Thats easy to say cole. Some laws are founded in principles. Some principles are founded in logic. If god made everything and logic naturally results from the relationships of his creation then logic is good to. Many apologists use it as the foundation of their ministry, I'm thinking william lane craig among others. So it seems safe to say that we can apply principles of logic when we talk about god.

Should there be a demarcation point? A point where logic doesn't apply, it would be easy to say yes, but harder to say if you think through the implications.

god had something to do with the bible right? The bible says god is good. Good has a meaning whether the word is in hebrew, greek or english. God has approved, through the bible, that the word good describes him. Logically god as agreed to be 'good'. This not a requirement imposed on him by man, but he has imposed on himself. In order to differentiate himself from evil and the devil he has agreed to behave in a way that achieves that. These are limitations that he imposes on himself.

So now back to logic. If god were to violate moral principles, he would be less moral, if god were to violate logic he would be less reasonable.

Would you agree with me that IF I deserve to suffer forever in hell then God does nothing wrong by allowing me to suffer for say 30 years of my life?

so now, god also says of himself that he is omniscient. He knows where you are going to end up before he made you. He knows what you are going to do in five years. no matter what you do now, you will do what god knows about in five years.
any choice you make will not make a difference. It will appear to you that are freely making choices but all of them lead to what god knows you will be doing in five years. You do not really have free will, you only have the appearance of it because you can't know the future.

If you stay christian, you'll go to heaven, if you lose faith, you'll go to hell, but god knew it before you chose it. No matter what you do, God knows the outcome.

so stop worrying be happy, if you get to heaven, you get there, if you don't you really didn't have a choice anyway.

Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Lee wrote: "Humans have devised processes to handle evil and if god is interested in 'none shall perish' he should help out in bringing those criminals to justice on earth, let us handle his light work and get them ready to receive the message."

My response is to present a different way -

I personally do not know of a method that we have devised to successfully handle evil on a wholesale basis. I believe we will attempt to do so, but in the process, will have to create a police state. It seems that our definition of power, of being omnipotent and omniscience and how we believe salvation ought to be enacted differs from what God practices.

If I believe I love justice more than God, I am wrong- but I respect that His perspective is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth which is higher than my view of justice - it is faith. I believe He desires justice and deliverance for all parties involved in these stories. Most people involved in criminal activity have been dealt injustice without proper intervention - they have been mislabeled and mishandled as children without an effective source of rescue.

When Jesus explicitly demonstrated how we ought to bring light about in the world, why would He turn and conform to and enable/reward the very standards that destroy us and that He is trying to save us from?? He desires to set us free from the fear-of-punishment - penal/indictment mindset. If we desire instant and complete remediation then we do not yet understand the Way that Y'shua demonstrated.

I do believe a day is coming when God will progress and grace will travel with Him, but until then, POE does not succeed in eliminiating the possibility of a gracious God - a God Who loves both victim and victimizer (that is offensive to our sense of justice and our penal mindset when we focus on the ultimate outcome of it). We don't often think in those terms. We justify withholding grace to others but want it for ourselves.

The fact that evil exists is a testament to grace not negligence or abuse. For example, if we continually view Hitler as the personification of evil rather than seeing him as a symptom of a family/culture that promoted a cold, impersonal and dysfunctional approach to childrearing, then we misplace our focus and do not see completely the source of evil and how it infects us. When we say things like "Well other kids are abused and don't turn out to be like Hitler" we miss the point that some children try to be very obedient in their pursuit of a stamp of approval - they are compliant and are destroyed in their attempts to conform to abusive and insensitive authority.

We often take offense and throw stones at the crops we ourselves instigate and perpetuate, without looking inwardly to see how we ourselves have contributed. By the gospel, God does not assign the burden of blame to us - but offers salvation. If we desire a different way and turn, then we become accessories to light rather than being an accomplice to dark.

The gospel is about being set free from victim/victimizer roles and turning to take up a new role as a child in a new family void of indictment and bonded by healed, whole hearts filled with grace, trust, promise and proactive love - coercion and immediate remediation is not the same as learning to trust a promise - the latter is grace and faith.

Allowing God to equip us with sensitivity and fulfilling our full potential - to know when to lay down our lives and when to take them up - is good news. We do not need to be overwhelmed with compulsive reactions, impotence and demoralization when faced with evil. By faith, we can recognize and know when to take up arms to protect the innocent and weak and to avoid enabling ourselves in the practice of destructiveness. By faith, we can know when it is right to take up arms or to turn the other cheek. What we do with love and compassion at the foundation, succeeds.

Some, who are successful in collecting and cloning people - keeping others from inspiration, inner peace and warm, wholehearted relationship, prefer darkness - will hell be "hell" for them? I doubt that Hitler would be very comfortable in heaven in the presence of those he hated. People who justify and practice mistreating one another and handing down generational hatred will most likely instinctively turn away from a place where they cannot continue to do so.

We often accept and put into practice those habits that are born of malicious intent. We can get bullied and intimidated by evil and abandon faith and hopefulness.

It's easy to justify mocking and devaluing one another without questioning the effects of such. Instead, we ought to begin by withholding judgement and condemnation as Y'shua stated.

At any rate, this is lengthy - I will cease - thanks much!

P.S. In response to what Lee wrote previously "If my dogs told me that there was a little boy chained to a bed somewhere in town, I'd check it out. Then I'd rethink my atheism. But until then, I'm stuck"

"Woof woof, bark growl snuffle snuffle!" (translation: "Hello to Lee's dogs -this is 3M's dog - let's teach our owners how to be good pets, eh??")

Unknown said...

Better yet, instead of reporting to the authorities, God should stop the crime himself, since there would be no danger to him or the victim. He's god, after all.

Anonymous said...

Hi MMM,
I personally do not know of a method that we have devised to successfully handle evil on a wholesale basis. I believe we will attempt to do so, but in the process, will have to create a police state.
This is a slippery slope you have via a false dichotomy. There are some excluded options in there that are valid to handle evil. Law enforcement, Medical system, schools, fire fighters, trash pickup, monitoring. There is a human made process to handle all the things typically called 'evil' . Earthquakes and storms are monitored scientifically and there are warning process in place. Disease is handled through scientific research and doctors. Bad behavior is handled by law enforcement and the justice system. As far as I know, God is not helping out in any noticeable way as we try to help ourselves. And don't forget, that if statistically a population is more christian than not, then representatives in each of those categories are more likely to be christian than not. The christian God should help christians if no one else.


If I believe I love justice more than God, I am wrong- but I respect that His perspective is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth which is higher than my view of justice - it is faith.
If god is perfect justice and god is truth, then if you love justice and truth you love god. No? How can you love something higher than itself? If we say god embodies these things, then even if I don't believe in a god entity, if i value its characteristics (as I do) then I would be implicitly worshiping god as well, no?


I believe He desires justice and deliverance for all parties involved in these stories. Most people involved in criminal activity have been dealt injustice without proper intervention - they have been mislabeled and mishandled as children without an effective source of rescue.
this is where christianity trips up. Not enough nurturing. God shoulders some of the blame by not helping us help ourselves. We have all those processes I stated above because it doesn't get done by praying about it.

When Jesus explicitly demonstrated how we ought to bring light about in the world, why would He turn and conform to and enable/reward the very standards that destroy us and that He is trying to save us from?? He desires to set us free from the fear-of-punishment - penal/indictment mindset. If we desire instant and complete remediation then we do not yet understand the Way that Y'shua demonstrated.
I'm not saying anything should be immediate. I'm saying god should help us help ourselves in a nurturing way instead of a sink or swim kind of way. The same way you alluded to above. Nurturing in a way that minimizes harm and doesn't interfere with the PoE as a test.

I do believe a day is coming when God will progress and grace will travel with Him, but until then, POE does not succeed in eliminiating the possibility of a gracious God - a God Who loves both victim and victimizer (that is offensive to our sense of justice and our penal mindset when we focus on the ultimate outcome of it). We don't often think in those terms. We justify withholding grace to others but want it for ourselves.
speak for yourself. You withhold grace from others but want it for yourself.? The PoE does eliminate the possibility of a gracious god to most people but not to some if you think it through and apply gods omniscience to it. And at that point it becomes a matter of context. From whose perspective is god good, just and moral? From the saved or the Damned?

The fact that evil exists is a testament to grace not negligence or abuse......- they are compliant and are destroyed in their attempts to conform to abusive and insensitive authority.
again we are back to my point about nurturing. And you are forgetting that people have chemical processes in their brains that motivate them independently of any other processes. That is how you get schizophrenia, bi-polar disorder and low seratonin in the frontal cortex will likely produce a suicide. Sometimes they turn out that way all against their will.


We often take offense and throw stones at the crops we ourselves instigate and perpetuate, without looking inwardly to see how we ourselves have contributed.
MMM, why don't you use "I" statements instead of "we" statements. Are these things true about you? My goodness, you need help if you are as bad off as "we" are. I don't, I am all for personal accountability, I don't believe in supernatural forces influencing anything. That is how I handle my life. I look for solutions to problems and realize that mistakes are going to happen when all I have to work with is three pounds of meat behind my face.

By the gospel, God does not assign the burden of blame to us - but offers salvation. If we desire a different way and turn, then we become accessories to light rather than being an accomplice to dark.
This flies in the face of scripture. "we all fall short of the glory of god", we are all sinners, we are born sinful. Sin is bad, mkay, God doesn't like sin, and you got sin all over you, mkay? Does any of this ring any bells? What is it if it is not an accusation and criticism. it would be considered abusive language If I leveled that at a child.

Allowing God to equip us with sensitivity and fulfilling our full potential - to know when to lay down our lives and when to take them up - is good news.
right here it is, ascribing supernatural forces to influence your life. I say by using reason and the principle of minimizing harm (generally speaking) we can do much better because there is nothing else but us to deal with. No supernatural forces that don't meet criteria for evidence or can defy reason on a whim.

Mmm, in closing I'd like to say that I really appreciate your input and I don't want to mock anyone that doesn't 'draw first blood'. So, I hope you look at the inconsistencies in your reasoning that I pointed out above and do not consider it mocking.

Tom said...

Lee,

If survival of the fittest were the dominent force shaping humanity, we might see some chaos and randomness, but not the kind of evil and suffering that fills our headlines daily. We humans are different from all other species. We have the powereful capacity for expressing evil. Unlike other species, we can inflict suffering on others for a variety of motives from revenge to perverse pleasure. Unlike other species, we kill other animals for sport, and we tend to kill the best, rather than the sick and the weak. As for killing our own species societies like Nazi Germany show that we are willing to slaughter and torture others. How much of the injury and death and even disease-promoting behyavior perpetrated by humans does anything to enhance the survival or well being of the perpetrator? A reality check informs us that we cannot chaulk up the evil and suffering in our world simply to natural process and survival instincts. Rather than proving the non-existence of a spiritual realm and Creator-God, evil and suffering-even by our recognition of their repugnance-provide evidence of a good God opposed by some supernatural enemy, a God for good reasons, some revealed in scripture, is currently restraining the exercise of His Almighty wrath against evil.

Beautiful Feet said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Manifesting Mini Me (MMM) said...

Hi Lee! thanks for the thorough and thoughtful exchange - I don't feel mocked or belittled even if that were your intention. I am not convinced or impressed by your stance because I have rationalized 'god' away before and I'll never return to nonbelief again.

I began to pen a lengthy rebuttal, but have decided to withdraw instead. At any rate, by faith, it is consistant that you would pereceive my stance as inconsistant. Y'shua makes it clear that God's salvation allows both weeds and wheat to mature together - perhaps this in accordance to the nature "I" embrace and trust and that is what will ultimately be honored - is that cruel or is it grace?

Take care!

John said...

The Bible teaches that love always protects.

Love always protects children from being abused.

God is love

If God exists then He will always protect children from being abused.

God doesn't always protect children from being abused.

God doesn't exist.

Michael Ejercito said...


Lets say that God saw a child being abducted but has decided not to get involved. Is God culpable of being an Accessory to the Crime? Is there any obligation in principle for God to report this Crime? God is an accessory to the Crime. There is at least a legal principle for him to report the crime.

No there is not.

God is Lord of Lords and King of Kings, so he is not culpable by reason of sovereignty.

Michael Ejercito said...

C: God is guilty of being an accessory to the crime.
The last statement is wrong.

God is not guilty by reason of sovereignty.

Michael Ejercito said...

I. God may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
II. God must answer prayers given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
III. God must perpetuate and spread its own worshipper base as long as such does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

OK, this is a stupid, pointless exercise worth a moment's amusement, but it points up how ridiculous it is to ascribe even the most rudimentary morality to God, who is supposed to be the fount of all morality. I've been an atheist for five years and I'm still astounded how deluded I was...

Morality is obedience to God.

Immorality is disobedience to God.

Michael Ejercito said...

So God would rather mete out justice after the fact than prevent these horrors in the first place?

How is that just?

It is just because God says so .

What could be more just than God, who is just by virtue of His station as Lord of Lords and King of Kings?

zilch said...

trey- you say:

If survival of the fittest were the dominent force shaping humanity, we might see some chaos and randomness, but not the kind of evil and suffering that fills our headlines daily. We humans are different from all other species.

We humans are indeed different from all other species: we have the brains and specializations to have language and culture. Societies require ideas of good and bad that transcend individual gains and pains, and have been codified in laws and religions. But they are still based upon our biological heritage, which is why there is so much cross-cultural agreement about them. See this discussion here at DC for more on this.

We have the powereful capacity for expressing evil.

"Evil" is just "bad" with God's stick to whack it.

Unlike other species, we can inflict suffering on others for a variety of motives from revenge to perverse pleasure.

True, our intelligence has refined our possible motives, for good and bad.

Unlike other species, we kill other animals for sport, and we tend to kill the best, rather than the sick and the weak.

Lots of animals kill for sport: cats play with mice they don't eat, sea lions tear off the fins of sunfish and leave them to die... And we kill the best, because we can. Other animals tend to kill the sick and weak because it's easier, not because they are motivated to be nice.

A reality check informs us that we cannot chaulk up the evil and suffering in our world simply to natural process and survival instincts.

Depends upon what you mean by "natural" process. If culture counts as "natural", then I can and do chalk up all the evil and suffering in our world to natural processes.

Cheers and Happy New Year from chilly Vienna, zilch

Anonymous said...

HI Trey,
If survival of the fittest were the dominent force shaping humanity, we might see some chaos and randomness, but not the kind of evil and suffering that fills our headlines daily.
so something else is the dominant force shaping humanity? What is it? Are you suggesting that something other than humans is influencing our freewill?

We humans are different from all other species. We have the powereful capacity for expressing evil. Unlike other species, we can inflict suffering on others for a variety of motives from revenge to perverse pleasure. Unlike other species, we kill other animals for sport, and we tend to kill the best, rather than the sick and the weak.
Have you ever seen a cat or a dog play with a lizard? Both my cat and dogs amuse themselves all day long chasing lizards around the yard when they are in season.

A reality check informs us that we cannot chaulk up the evil and suffering in our world simply to natural process and survival instincts.
Reality check using what? Evidence? supporting what conclusion? Unless you have evidence to support the influence of the supernatural, then all you have is evidence of the natural world and then your conclusion doesn't follow, but mine does. In any case
What you are suggesting is that humans are influenced by the spiritual world and we are not 100% culpable for our decisions right? To a degree the spiritual world influences us and since it is more powerful than us, then we are at an unfair disadvantage? Doesn't god value free will enough to let us make our own damning decisions based on our nature? I'd say that in your scenario, that god has some fault in our poor decision making process and we are not justified in being punished.

Rather than proving the non-existence of a spiritual realm and Creator-God, evil and suffering-even by our recognition of their repugnance-provide evidence of a good God opposed by some supernatural enemy, a God for good reasons, some revealed in scripture, is currently restraining the exercise of His Almighty wrath against evil.
the presence of evil in the world proves there is god? This is a hasty conclusion in the same way that if I see that my driveway is wet, I can conclude that it has rained, but it was really my roommate washing his car that made the driveway wet. If I had bothered to look further than my driveway I would have reached a different conclusion.

Nightmare said...

Michael Ejercito said...
What could be more just than God, who is just by virtue of His station as Lord of Lords and King of Kings?

You're kidding right? Clue - trying reading the bible instead of just parroting it.

Anonymous said...

Lee, I sympothize with you that it seems that you are hurting and are trying to find someone to blame for something that has happened. I will pray for you!

God is not to blame for things that happen. He sees things that we don't so to say that there isn't a reason for even the most horrible thing to happen you just don't know what the bigger picture is. None of us do. So my suggestion is that you stop blaming God for all the sick and despicable things the MAN does in this world and start looking at how to either correct the problem or how to help yourself deal with what has happened. It maybe hard and you may need some counseling. Again, I will pray for you.