God Is Evil

[Drich]

Maybe God is simply not bound to your definition or understanding of the word love.

Okay then, let's look at a definition of love that I agree with:

love
ləv/
noun
1. an intense feeling of deep affection.
synonyms: deep affection, fondness, tenderness, warmth, intimacy, attachment, endearment;

Let's see how that holds up in the Bible:

1 John 4:7-8 Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God. Anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love.

Okay, that sounds nice. Let's try another word:

e·vil
ˈēvəl/
noun
1. profound immorality, wickedness, and depravity, esp. when regarded as a supernatural force.
synonyms: wickedness, bad, badness, wrongdoing, sin, ill, immorality, vice, iniquity, degeneracy, corruption, depravity, villainy, nefariousness, malevolence

Let's see how this holds up in the Bible:

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.
—Isaiah 45:7

Wait, wait, wait! Hold the phone! I thought "God is love." How can God be love and yet be a creator of evil? How can someone that is supposed to, by a standard definition, be "an intense feeling of deep affection," and yet create "profound immorality, wickedness, and depravity?"

You make some really good points! IF the bible was originally written in English. (FYI it wasn't originally written in King James English.)

Konie, Greek is what we will look at because this is the language the NT was written. So it is to these words we must look to define the terms in question. After all It is the Bible's word for 'Love' that is actually beingdiscussed here and not the modern English understanding of the term.

There are 4 very different words the bible use in the Orginal Greek, that all get translated into the English word, "love."
Eros, Phila, Agape', and storge.
In short, Eros is passionate/feeling/physical love.
Phila, is a brotherly/Intelectual form of Love.
Storge, is the form of love a Father may have for a son
Agape, is God's love for man. This form of Love is express however God wishes to express it WHEN He offers it to us. Know not all receives God's Love.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_words_for_love

So when I originally said God's definition of Love and your definition of Love may not be the same.. This is exactly what I meant, in that you simply do not understand the Love/Agape God offers.

This statement from a website (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/daylightath...ates-evil/) says it better than I can:

"The text offers numerous occasions where God could have intervened to turn events to good and chose not to. He could, for example, have obliterated Satan and the rebel angels entirely, or at the very least confined them to Hell and not allowed them to escape, so that they could never have escaped to lead humanity into temptation. And God’s behavior in the whole Eden affair, in any case, smacks strongly of either extreme incompetence or deliberate malice – not least, his choice to transmit the curse of original sin to all subsequent generations rather than letting every human start off with a morally clean slate."

Again God is not offering Phila He offers Agape'. (Phila is what you are trying to describe.)

You say God is not bound by "my" interpretation of love. The Word of God says that he is love.

No. It says God is Agape'.

How else am I supposed to understand it? What other definition is there?

See above.

I've asked this on other threads: why would God make the Bible so confusing?

It's a translated text. there are two primary forms of translation. A Literal translation (Where the message is pretty well in tact, only correcting for grammar and syntax.) and a Contextual translation, where the original message is not presented, but an interpretation of the text of the message is presented.

Most translations of the bible are considered literal. Which means all 'commentary' is omitted or posted along side the original text. The only draw back here is cultural distinctions, sayings, poetry, and intended literary meanings are sometimes lost.

The world did not revolve around the English speaking world 2000 years ago. All it take is a mid intrest and a lexicon and concordance to get the understanding that you seek.
Blueletterbible.org is an easy one to use.

Shouldn't he have written it, or at least guided the human writers so that it was clear, concise and unable to be debated?

The 'debates' generally found in Atheist argument rarly go past a look to the Original Greek or Hebrew. The vast majority of debates are based on the presumption that the whole bible was originally written in the King James English. Once the fallacy of that presumption is Broken then an intelligent Can potentially begin, but few do.
What generally happens next is the atheist argument from a position of faith. Faith in that the 'website' that they have spent all of their time pouring over, that has somehow justified their break from Christianity is not wrong. and has not just been proven wrong with a simple turn to Greek or Hebrew texts.

Once they the newbies do some checking they generally discover that there is a whole field of study dedicated to understanding the original texts better. Then the argument has to shift in disproving that all 25,000 hand written manuscripts are ALL wrong.

If I am in error in some way, please, tell me what your definition of the love of God is, because if you think that I don't understand something, I honestly want to know what that is!

Careful what you wish for Ole' Sport.

---

So, if your 14 year old daughter wants her 22 year old boy friend to move into her room in your house and you tell her no, then proceed to call the cops on the child predator, is it because you do not love her? What if she says "if you love me you won't call the cops and will allow him to stay?" Does that change your love for her even though you do not meet the CONDITIONS of her specific understanding of 'love?'

Of course it doesn't, because no matter how her mind has been twisted to only understand a love that serves her selfish wants and desires, the absolute standard and meaning of agape in this case does not change. Which brings me back to my orginal point. Perhaps God's love is not your version of love.

The fact that they're boyfriend and girlfriend does not prove that he is a child predator. that's only if they have sex. Some couples practice chastity, and in that case the parents' consent is required if they are to marry. How does that love only serve her selfish wants and desires?

That's why one calls the cops. To sort these types of things out with a cool head. If anyone needs to goto Jail and be labled a sex predator of a minor under the age of 16, then that decision is best left up to law enforcement..

If it were left up to me and I were the 14 year old's Father. I would be judge jury and executioner. So again, better have someone like a cop figure things out than a angry Father.