Theological Opinions

[Spock]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Elijah and Moses did. But otherwise...no, at least the bible doesnt mention any other names besides those two.

Perhaps it's because they had good publisists!

Lots of things happen without people seeing the event.

....poof-goes invisible

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

I don't tihnk God is good, if what you [Lief] say is true. I've read your posts about why you think God is good and it can also be explained by a neutral God, or even a bad God.

I think that is VERY true, Rad, that what we see can be very well explained by either a bad God or a neutral God.

But IMO, you've left out an option.

I think it can also be explained by a VERY good God, one that is good and loves us beyond our wildest dreams; one that loves us even more than we "want" to be loved sometimes (for often it is not comfortable and easy to be purified, but it is great!); one that loves us so much that He took full responsibility for giving people free will, KNOWING they would choose to sin, by taking the penalty of sin onto Himself, IF people will make a free-will choice to accept it.

That's why I have logical objections to the drawing-a-line concept (which the "well they did more good than bad" camp falls into) - I think it DOES call for a God that is either neutral or bad, or semi-good, or semi-powerful, which the Bible does NOT describe God as being. The God described in the Bible doesn't look on from afar at our condition; He joins us, and offers to save us from it, if we will have it. But the condition of salvation is acknowledging the truth, and often we don't like to do that, because the truth about parts of us is often not comfortable to look at.

[hectorberlioz]

I think what should be said here more statedly is:

God knows more than we do, he knows all things. So a death of a beloved may bring us sorrow, it may have looked unjust to rob that person of a possibly joyful life...but God is the only one who really knows, and he may have taken that person from us perhaps that we and others might learn from it, perhaps that person had served the purpose he/she was intended for.

So God does not see death as bad, does it mean that he is bad? I roll my eyes prolifically at the notion.
C.S. Lewis has some very straightforward things to say about that subject, so I advise you read: The Problem of Pain, Mere Chrisitianty, and Miracles. The first two are not very long, and only Miracles is harder to understand theologically.

[Rían]

God definitely sees murder as bad. He sees many things as bad, yet He allows them. The question is, is that because He is bad Himself, or neutral, or weak, or a combination of those things? Or is it as I proposed, that he is very, VERY good, and that He knows eternity is ... well, eternity! and that shaping our souls here is the critical thing. And that He doesn't allow people to go through ANYTHING that He Himself has not suffered Himself.

I just think that it's true that God made people in His image, and He gives us a lot of free will to create our own lives, and then what we create will be judged at the end of our lives. God is a creator, and God is a moral being with free will, and I think we're made in His image.

See, the only way to stop things like murder, etc. is to take away free will. And then we're not free. (Again, it's obvious that we're not TOTALLY free - I can't make the weather change, etc., but IMO it's clear that I have a tremendous amount of free will). And who wants to live in all eternity with a bunch of mindless dolls programmed to say "I love you!"

Read through Jeremiah sometimes if you want to see God grieving over our free-will choices.

I think that God indeed knew that Adam and Eve would sin, and that frankly, He knew they HAD to sin in order to really see its ugliness, and only that would fully open their eyes to God's goodness and holiness.

Not expressed very well, but it's a start ...

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

The Adam and Eve question is hard for me to answer offhand...I have read things about it. In fact, some suggestions go so far as to suggest that the Adam and Eve story is analogy for something that happened on a larger scale, involving more people than two. But the story has the same results: man made a choice to fall.

Elijah and Moses did. But otherwise...no, at least the bible doesnt mention any other names besides those two.

Enoch and Elijah did. Jeesh .

Though I grant you that the scripture is very unclear about Moses' burial. It says that "God buried him," and also there is a scripture about Michael and Satan arguing over Moses' body, so that does imply something strange was going on about Moses' death.[/tangent]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

Lief, are you saying there can't be a good person who doesn't believe in God?

Yes. People who don't have Christ in their hearts can do good and be very loving, yet that does not make them good. Jesus said, "no one is good save God alone." I agree with him. However, I don't think that this will always be true. People who believe in Christ will be transformed by God, and then they will be good as well.

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

But Lief, he created this 'free will'. He knew what will happen.

And I would say he planned it too.

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

To create a person whom you know will surely die because his personality doesn't let him believe in God... hmmm. But God's good.

It's creating something wicked to be destroyed, in order to reveal God's glorious majesty. I don't think we'd appreciate the good in life without experiencing the evil, and I don't think implanting memories in us and lying about them is Godlike or good. Creating people to be destroyed for good purpose can be fine. God is high enough that he knows. Yes, this is faith, and I can see that you don't like taking it on faith that he is like this. However, it's also a step of faith to say he's not like this, and it's sheer arrogance to say he cannot be good and also like this. It's experience that says he is like this. Experience says that Jesus is God. Historical and statistical evidence say that Jesus was God and died for our sins. Experiential evidence says that God transforms us then, steadily perfecting his loved ones. If Jesus was God and died to save us from our sins, as experiential, historical and statistical evidence all indicate, he clearly is a loving God.

One more thing I'll mention again, something RÃ*an has been bringing up. We know for a fact that we are all at least somewhat bad. However, we like to look at ourselves as completely good. We like to justify our bad actions. Granted?

Now, if we justify bad actions but God does good things that run contrary to those bad actions, doesn't it seem logical that from our perspective, God must appear to be bad?

[inked]

Okay, time to lighten up!

Catholic Words Defined
Revelation: God’s self-disclosure to Q and the community of John and to the Gnostics who wrote the Gospel of Thomas and then—after saying nothing for nearly 1,500 years—His renewed self-disclosure to anyone who really, really feels like God is, like, trying to say something profound through him. Totally.

Tradition: The interpretation of Revelation that was interrupted by the “Dark Ages� (150 AD-1962 AD) until academic priests without Roman collars and nuns in polyester pantsuits could reveal the truth to us in the 1960s and 70s.

tradition (lower-case): Changeable customs, institutions, teachings, and practices, such as ordination of men only; the ban on abortion; bishops as a teaching authority; the Eucharist as Christ’s body, blood, soul, and divinity; marriage only between a man and a woman; etc.

Theology: The ordered effort to understand, interpret, and systematically lose your faith and create a narcissistic conception of God that has nothing to do with reality. St. Anselm called it “faith seeking understanding,� but a more modern definition is “faith seeking higher self-esteem and liberation.�

Doctrine: An official teaching of the Church. More specifically, official teaching that can be ignored if it conflicts with your “conscience� or your self-esteem.

Dogma: A doctrine that is taught definitely, that is, infallibly, meaning that when you dissent from it, you have to have better reasoning than when you dissent from regular, old doctrine. Fortunately, we have been liberated from dogmas and you are allowed to dissent from any teaching.

Heresy: An outdated medieval concept. See “academic freedom�.

Dissent: A judgment of disagreement with an official Church teaching. Since personal belief trumps doctrine, dissent is perfectly legitimate, especially under three conditions: The teaching makes you unhappy; the teaching makes you sad; the teaching makes you grumpy. Fortunately, most dissenters are already pretty cranky so it all works out quite well.

Hierarchy of truths: A principle that recognizes the relative importance assigned to various Christian doctrines based on who said it and when. Those things written by a Pope are at the bottom of the hierarchy, while the writings of enlightened people such as Fr. Richard McBrien and Sr. Joan Chittister go at the top.

Sensus fidelium (the sense of the faithful): The idea that the body of the faithful as a whole gets a right to veto any Church teaching they disagree with. And by “the body of the faithful as a whole� we mean the membership of Call to Action and Voice of the Faithful.

Reception: The process by which official teachings and disciplinary decrees are accepted, assimilated and interpreted by the whole Church. Reception is the confirming witness of the sense of the faith by the People of God regarding a decision’s truth and service. When a teaching or decree is not received by the whole Church, those responsible for the decision need to examine the reasons for the lack of acceptance. (Wait, that’s the actual definition: If a lot of Catholics don’t like the teaching then it’s the teaching, not the people who are wrong. I guess the Arians were right then.)

Discipline: The instructions and laws that govern the Church and the faithful. An example of church discipline might be the order of the Mass. Before Vatican II, the Mass was said in Latin (to prevent them from rising up and taking control of the Church) and the priest did not face the people (because they were below him in dignity). After Vatican II, the Mass is said in gibberish and the priest wears clown makeup.

(from Bettnet.com)

[Serenoli]

Funny... and confusing, inked.

And about the debate about God's goodness, well, I believe he's good, which means I have no arguments for it or against it, but believe it nevertheless.

I've never talked to anyone about my religious beliefs, so I'm feeling a bit shy. But, my view on it all, is that no religion is perfect. All have been distorted, changed, and misinterpreted by humans. I used to think Islam perfect, and in some aspects it still is. But when I found out it allows slavery, and when I realized how much it discriminated against women, that's when I lost some faith.

And there's something else. The world was created so long ago, and humans for a very long time. Why should God only reveal his purposes and his religion to humans only in the last two millenia? And why were so many of these religions, the ones which believe in one God, at any rate, all in the same place? Were not other people, in other parts of the world, just as important, was it not just as important for them to know, if belief in religion is so necessary to be good?

And so I follow a very simple faith now. I believe in the main aspects that unite Judaism, Christianity and Islam... the existence of an all-powerful, good God, Paradise and Hell, and that the best guide I can rely on is to do good, and follow my conscience.

And by the way, Lief, it makes no sense whatsoever to me, that Jesus could be God. Experience, historical, statistical evidence doesn't really say anything of the kind. When I think of all God has created, from the magnificient stars to the smallest of cells, then I think He must be wonderful beyond imagination. For Him to come down on Earth as a human, a mere small fraction, of all He has created, and then, just die! He could do it, no doubt if he wanted to, and I am not one to read His mind, but I can not swallow it.

[Lief Erikson]

Good to hear from you on one of these threads, Serenoli! I think this is probably a first time, and it's a great pleasure to hear from you.

I hope you won't find my response at all overwhelming, but I get very excited about this subject .

Originally Posted by Serenoli

The world was created so long ago, and humans for a very long time. Why should God only reveal his purposes and his religion to humans only in the last two millenia?

I have three points to make in response to this.

1# When we sinned, turning away from God, we really made a very complete fall. There was such wickedness and perversion in those ancient lands that even if you didn't think in a Christian, Jewish or Muslim way, you'd be shocked by what you saw. The cruelty and callous uncaring about human life, as well as many other wrongs were just massive. In short, if God had revealed all of his will to us immediately, we could not have handled it. He still has many things he has not revealed to us, things we just couldn't handle if he had told us. If he had laid all that we know now into Abraham or God's other followers, they would probably not have accepted it. It would have been too much, too foreign.

In the scripture it says that Jesus came, "just at the right time." I don't have the same perspective God does, so I can't argue for or against that statement.

2# Another thing is that God has not revealed his will to us only in the last two millenia. He spoke with Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. He has spoken with men as long as men have existed. He has been progressively revealing more and more of his will to mankind, ever since he created us.

3# According to scripture, where people sin ignorantly, not understanding their wickedness, God shows a great deal more mercy than he does with those who sin with the full knowledge of what they've done wrong.

Originally Posted by Serenoli

All have been distorted, changed, and misinterpreted by humans.

As for "distorted" and "changed," based on the documentary evidence of the Bible, I'd have to disagree with you. We have manuscripts of the New Testament that date back the third century AD. We have more from the fourth or fifth century. That we have texts that are this close to the actual time of writing is really a wonderous thing. We accept many other documents as essentially accurate to their original, even when the most recent documents are hundreds of years further from the original than they are for the New Testament, and there are far fewer copies. The New Testament is the most reliable ancient text. We have hundreds of early texts to compare, and from that comparison we can see very, very little discrepancy, but no discrepancy large enough to alter anything big and no discrepancy in major doctrine. There is a great deal of evidence that the New Testament has not significantly changed.

The Old Testament, of course, is rather too old for us to be sure of with the same clarity. However, we do know the care that the Jews took to keep the ancient manuscripts clean of error, and it was extreme, I tell you. If a small error, a small nudge of the pen was different in a new manuscript than it was in an old one, they'd destroy the new one. They'd ruin countless hours' work for one itsy bitsy mistake. They also destroyed the old manuscripts, because they felt that as the old manuscripts age, they would be more difficult to decipher. They believed that what they were writing was the word of God, and they took enormous care over how they copied, as a consequence.

But about it being possible to misinterpret true words from God, I agree. That's one reason that Jesus sent us the Holy Spirit, so that he would be our Counselor and so that he would not make mistakes.

Originally Posted by Serenoli

And why were so many of these religions, the ones which believe in one God, at any rate, all in the same place? Were not other people, in other parts of the world, just as important, was it not just as important for them to know, if belief in religion is so necessary to be good?

If you look in the Book of Jonah, you'll see how much God cared for and loved even the most wicked of nations. He sent Jonah to them to speak to them God's truth, and they listened. He did this out of divine compassion and love. He created Israel with the intent that it be, "a light for the nations." This shows his love for the nations also. That he goes and pays close attention to other people as well as his chosen people Israel is a wonderful truth. If people have never have not sinned knowingly, God will judge them leniently for their crimes. If they sin knowingly, he will judge them sharply.

There is also a scripture that talks about Jesus having gone and preached after death to those who had perished from the time of Noah (Goes bug-eyed). That's just amazingly cool . Some of these people had already heard Noah's message, for Noah, according to scripture, was a preacher of righteousness. They'd heard Noah and rejected his words.

God cared so much that he preached after death, giving another chance even to these evildoers whose "every thought had turned to wickedness", and whose vile crimes had risen so high to heaven that he had been forced to wipe humanity off the Earth!!! It's just astoundingly cool how gracious and giving God is, how much he reaches out to everyone, seeking and hungering from the depths of his heart that all mankind should be saved. Not that they are all saved, unfortunately . He won't destroy our freedom to reject him, which is also good, because by not destroying our freedom, he shows how highly he respects his creatures.

It's just amazing how much God reaches to everyone, though, and it's wonderful how he is gentle with those who have never heard, or who have had less opportunity to know and understand God. That is Biblical too.

Originally Posted by Serenoli

I believe in the main aspects that unite Judaism, Christianity and Islam... the existence of an all-powerful, good God, Paradise and Hell, and that the best guide I can rely on is to do good, and follow my conscience.

I'm afraid that the last part of you said, "the best guide I can rely on is to do good, and follow my conscience," is not the main teaching of any of these three religions. Islam, Judaism and Christianity all share holy scriptures that are supposed to be God's flawless word to man. Paul said, "even though my conscience justifies me, that does not mean I do right." He said something along those lines. The Nazis also believed that they were doing right . The Muslim terrorists are plainly dead certain that they are doing right. It's tough to know what's right and what's wrong, and people's morality changes over time as their society does. Right and wrong don't change with people's swaying morality.

The point I'm making is that we need a plumbline. We need some kind of a standard, or we have nothing. For me, the standard is the Bible, a word through which God spoke to me and revealed himself. The Holy Spirit is a counselor we have also been given, and he will speak to us also and grant us understanding of what is written and of what his will is, so that our own feelings do not lead us astray.

Originally Posted by Serenoli

When I think of all God has created, from the magnificient stars to the smallest of cells, then I think He must be wonderful beyond imagination. For Him to come down on Earth as a human, a mere small fraction, of all He has created, and then, just die! He could do it, no doubt if he wanted to, and I am not one to read His mind, but I can not swallow it.

This is a very, very, very good point. I love pondering the majesty of God seen through nature!! My favorite thing to ponder right now is the colors. I love just thanking God for color, for how beautiful and wonderful it is! Tastebuds too, of course, one can go on and on. Color is the one I think most of right now, though.

If you have a good understanding of how awestriking and unbelievable it is for God to humble himself so much as to become like us and die for us, this is a very good thing. That God would do this for us, would humble himself so low from such high majesty, that he would do this because his nature is love and he is a force of love that is infinite, it just boggles one's mind. He is so far above us that we are like a spot of dirt on the floor. The universe's astounding scale, how great it is in comparison with us magnifies the point that we are officially small. That God in spite of how unbelievably greater he is than us should come and humble himself so low, and die for us, is just incredible.

The way it can start to make sense is if you realize that the good qualities of God's love and humility are as great as his glorious power as creator. I just love it . To think that he is as loving as he is powerful . . . it blows your mind.

[Lief Erikson]

Bump!

[Radagast The Brown]

I feel so stubborn.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

I think that is VERY true, Rad, that what we see can be very well explained by either a bad God or a neutral God.

But IMO, you've left out an option.

I think it can also be explained by a VERY good God, one that is good and loves us beyond our wildest dreams; one that loves us even more than we "want" to be loved sometimes (for often it is not comfortable and easy to be purified, but it is great!); one that loves us so much that He took full responsibility for giving people free will, KNOWING they would choose to sin, by taking the penalty of sin onto Himself, IF people will make a free-will choice to accept it.

I don't find free-will very convincing, as God supposedly knows what will happen anyway. Since he also created our personalities.. there's no free will.

Would a very good god somehow give us free will? Maybe, it depends on the God's personality I suppose. If he's reasonable and logical, then no, but if he's impulsive I suppose it might happen.

That's why I have logical objections to the drawing-a-line concept (which the "well they did more good than bad" camp falls into) - I think it DOES call for a God that is either neutral or bad, or semi-good, or semi-powerful, which the Bible does NOT describe God as being. The God described in the Bible doesn't look on from afar at our condition; He joins us, and offers to save us from it, if we will have it. But the condition of salvation is acknowledging the truth, and often we don't like to do that, because the truth about parts of us is often not comfortable to look at.

I don't understand, Rian... why is god weak if he judges people by the bad and and good they've done and not by bad deeds only as you suggest? Can't you see it's unfair and doesn't fit the image God has? It makes him look fanatic and mean.

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

God knows more than we do, he knows all things. So a death of a beloved may bring us sorrow, it may have looked unjust to rob that person of a possibly joyful life...but God is the only one who really knows, and he may have taken that person from us perhaps that we and others might learn from it, perhaps that person had served the purpose he/she was intended for.

What about letting the murder of millions in the holocaust for instance, after they've passed horrors and torture beyond imagination? There's a good reason for that? Or not to kill them instantly if God thinks it's good for them to be dead?

Originally Posted by Rian

See, the only way to stop things like murder, etc. is to take away free will. And then we're not free. (Again, it's obvious that we're not TOTALLY free - I can't make the weather change, etc., but IMO it's clear that I have a tremendous amount of free will). And who wants to live in all eternity with a bunch of mindless dolls programmed to say "I love you!"

God can surely make a better work than that!
God's existance is obvious in an ideal world, but it doesn't mean we won't have to think about other things - medicine, literature, etc...
It would be the same world you Christians say will come eventually, just without all the suffering in the middle and killing in the end. There will be the exact same results.

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

Yes. People who don't have Christ in their hearts can do good and be very loving, yet that does not make them good. Jesus said, "no one is good save God alone." I agree with him. However, I don't think that this will always be true. People who believe in Christ will be transformed by God, and then they will be good as well.

I strongly disagree. We obviously have different opinions on good: for you good is perfect. I think such a seperation of good and bad, without the 'grey area', is silly and inapporopriate, especially by God.

It's creating something wicked to be destroyed, in order to reveal God's glorious majesty.

Personal gain then.

I don't think we'd appreciate the good in life without experiencing the evil, and I don't think implanting memories in us and lying about them is Godlike or good. Creating people to be destroyed for good purpose can be fine. God is high enough that he knows.

So creating people only in order to kill them, and many people, billions(!! not a comprehensible number for us mere humans. It's hard enough to think of 1000 dead), is alright. But creating memories and lying, and thus sparing the lives of many people, is wrong?!

Yes, this is faith, and I can see that you don't like taking it on faith that he is like this. However, it's also a step of faith to say he's not like this, and it's sheer arrogance to say he cannot be good and also like this. It's experience that says he is like this. Experience says that Jesus is God. Historical and statistical evidence say that Jesus was God and died for our sins. Experiential evidence says that God transforms us then, steadily perfecting his loved ones. If Jesus was God and died to save us from our sins, as experiential, historical and statistical evidence all indicate, he clearly is a loving God.

It's basically faith I guess. (and I suppose we have different evidence and expirience then )

One more thing I'll mention again, something RÃ*an has been bringing up. We know for a fact that we are all at least somewhat bad. However, we like to look at ourselves as completely good. We like to justify our bad actions. Granted?

Now, if we justify bad actions but God does good things that run contrary to those bad actions, doesn't it seem logical that from our perspective, God must appear to be bad?

Lief, it makes no sense. Unless you think murdering billions is good in God's opinion... which is indeed contrary to our basic understanding of good and bad...

[Spock]

I'm a 'light-weight' in this discussion but if I may add my pennies worth of thought:
I believe God gives us choices knowing what the various outcomes may be but still allowing us to choose. As for the injustice man does to man (kind) that too is a reflection of a choice. I truly believe that we weren't created to be automatons whose every action has been predetermined, although I do believe that some of us have a predestined point to reach. ...hope that isn't too confusing.

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally Posted by Spock

I'm a 'light-weight' in this discussion but if I may add my pennies worth of thought:
I believe God gives us choices knowing what the various outcomes may be but still allowing us to choose. As for the injustice man does to man (kind) that too is a reflection of a choice. I truly believe that we weren't created to be automatons whose every action has been predetermined, although I do believe that some of us have a predestined point to reach. ...hope that isn't too confusing.

But Spock, we know - (1) God created us and our personalities and our thoughts and (2) God knows everything. Surely he could predict the "incident" with the snake and the fruit and Adam and Eve would occur. IMO he can see everything that will happen as he knows everything basically. Or do you suggest he doesn't know everything?

So I think it may seem we have free will.. but we don't.

[That's all if God exists, of course]

[Spock]

As we approach 1000 posts, this section is closed and Part II is now open.