Is God always "just"?

[Watson]

I think fr0d0 summed it up pretty nicely there.

[reverendjeremiah]

It doesnt matter what some book says. there are so many books out there that make the same premise (god exists) yet other than that, everything else is based on their opinions.

One only need look at the world to realize if there is a creator, then that creator is malevolent.

[Cinjin]

It doesnt matter what some book says. there are so many books out there that make the same premise (god exists) yet other than that, everything else is based on their opinions.

One only need look at the world to realize if there is a creator, then that creator is malevolent.

when you say "look at the world" what are you referring to? I agree that the xtian god is definitely malevolent in his dealings with the human race, but even he doesn't seem to hold a grudge against the other parts of his creation.

[reverendjeremiah]

when you say "look at the world" what are you referring to?

I mean look at our world, the planet Earth

I agree that the xtian god is definitely malevolent in his dealings with the human race

of course, the bible is pretty much disgusting and confusing when it comes to that

but even he doesn't seem to hold a grudge against the other parts of his creation. but even he doesn't seem to hold a grudge against the other parts of his creation.

Since when? The bible says all animals were vegetarians before "the fall", and because of a choice that Adam and eve made, he punished EVERYTHING, including the plants.

As far as malevolence goes, shall I start with Virology? How about Anencephaly? How about Natural selection and extinctions?

This VERY short list is not what I expect on a benevolent creators resume. At most you can try to argue that the creator is uncaring.

If the creator is uncaring, then why care enough to make a Cosmos to begin with. If the creator is uncaring, why care for it enough to make it in the first place?

The argument of an uncaring god doesnt fit the facts. An uncaring god would not have cared enough to create a cosmos. So you have to say he cares enough to create what we see. So if that is true, then look at the world around you. If a creator is responsible for THIS, then that creator is malevolent. What creator who is capable of making perfection refuses to make nothing but perfection?

[Watson]

One only need look at the world to realize if there is a creator, then that creator is malevolent.

Really? Please, explain to me what sort of evidence for a malevolent god exists in this world.

[reverendjeremiah]

One only need look at the world to realize if there is a creator, then that creator is malevolent.

Really? Please, explain to me what sort of evidence for a malevolent god exists in this world.

Anencephaly is a cephalic disorder that results from a neural tube defect that occurs when the cephalic (head) end of the neural tube fails to close, usually between the 23rd and 26th day of pregnancy, resulting in the absence of a major portion of the brain, skull, and scalp.[1] Children with this disorder are born without a forebrain, the largest part of the brain consisting mainly of the cerebral hemispheres (which include the neocortex, which is responsible for higher-level cognition, i.e., thinking). The remaining brain tissue is often exposed—not covered by bone or skin.[2] Most babies with this genetic disorder do not survive birth.

So, you can discuss this as much as you want, as I have before. In the end, it always comes down to two options:
#1 - If there is a creator god, then he/she is malevolent. An uncaring god who allows this to happen is malevolent.
#2 - This is EXACTLY what we would expect from a godless universe.

..by all means, feel free to try and rationalise it. You will always come to the 2 conclusions.

[Captain Scarlet]

It's all very nice you twisting and re-inventing your God Scarlet. And I love the way you don't want to find out for yourself what defines the Xtian God, but would rather keep plugging away at the misconceptions you concoct. RTFM. Jerk.

Personal invective and failure to address the issues. Feel better now your toys are out the pram? Play a different record old chap theres a good fellow.

---

I think fr0d0 summed it up pretty nicely there.

Instead of hiding behind Frodo you could actually answer the points. You have a different concept of god to him, you beleive god can commit evil but chooses not to, Frodo beleives this is logically impossible becuase being maximally good is part of gods nature (but doesn't want to explain why this trumps another part of his nature ie omnipotentence. If theists cannot be consistent on your god/s concept/s then it becomes hard to understand it or not, criticise it or not. Maybe thats how you like it?

[Watson]

I'm not hiding behind fr0d0, I'm agreeing with his assertion that your concept of God is flawed at best and intentionally twisted to suit your views at worst. You've created this image of God in your head as some little bearded tyrant in the sky, when that is not even remotely true to Christianity's vision of God. You have failed to think critically, and that is why I refuse to answer your points. They are simply not worth the time.

As for mine and fr0d0's differing perceptions of God, so what? Ultimately I can't 'give' you my experiences with , my perception of, or my definition of God. Nor can fr0d0 'give' you his experiences, his perception or his definition of God. He and I may differ in opinion on certain things but in the end, reality stays the same. Fr0d0 and I are simply two different individuals experiencing the same reality in two different ways. It is fair to say that our opinions will differ slightly, even on matters such as God, but it is dishonest conclude from that that there is no God.

Faith is a personal matter and is limited to the individual. It's like breathing. I can't do it for you. Fr0d0 can't do it for you. You must do it for yourself, and right now you aren't even trying. You're just prattling on about what you think it means to have faith and what a God is like when you have closed your eyes to the experience of God. I will not engage points which make no attempt at better understanding and instead hammer an inappropriate and poorly informed opinion on the topic at hand.

[Minimalist]

Children with this disorder are born without a forebrain, the largest part of the brain consisting mainly of the cerebral hemispheres (which include the neocortex, which is responsible for higher-level cognition, i.e., thinking).

Typically, they grow up to be theists or FOX news commentators.

[Statler Waldorf]

---

This is based on some stuff I read in this thread: http://atheistforums.org/thread-4428.htm...light=evil
The thread is from last year, so I didn't want to comment on it, and I don't really want to discuss it's actual topic, but more what some of the responses were about. Mainly, the idea that God is always "just" and even the genocide and slaughter of the Old Testament can be justified given that God is always "just", or good.

So the question I'm asking is, if we assume first God is real, then what reason do you have to believe that God is always "just", when he himself seems to deny that.

Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not evil and good? (Lam. 3:38.)

Thus saith the Lord, Behold I frame evil against you and devise a device against you. (Jer. 18:11.)

I make peace and create evil. I the Lord do all these things. (Is. 45:7.)

Shall there be evil in the city, and the Lord hath not done it? (Amos 3:6.)

Wherefore I gave them also statutes that were not good, and judgments that they should not live. (Ezek. 20:25.)
For this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie. (2 Thes. 2:11.)

Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee. (1 Kings 22:23.)

And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I the Lord have deceived that prophet. (Ezek. 14:9).

With the above being in the Bible, how can you claim God is always "just" and cannot "lie"? It seems like God himself refutes that. If the problem is that we aren't capable of understanding how that could be justified, then what's the point, anyway? Why would God deal in such powerful human emotions such as rape and murder, and lies, and expect us to rationalize it somehow when we're not given any tools to do so? I don't see how, even if God is real, you'd want to deal with that in the first place.

---

I am assuming you were wanting to hear from Christians on this as well?

Injustice is giving someone something worse than they deserve. In Christian theology all humans are conceived into original sin. Since this sin was committed against a being with infinite authority only an infinite punishment would be just. God could justly issue this punishment at the moment of conception, but instead he has given all men a form of common grace. He allows men to live a life that is far better than they really deserve. So I would argue that even if God ordains pain and suffering it is still far less than the person deserves and is not injustice at all, but rather grace which is a form of non-justice.

Objecting to this would be like calling someone unjust for asking you to pay them three dollars when you really owed them 1000. This would be completely irrational. Hope that helps.