Originally posted by NemesioI thought Ivanhoe was objecting to the ends justifying the means. Perhaps I read it wrong.
I never said there was evil. However, Jesus was used as a 'means to an end' which is the very
thing that Ivanhoe just objected to.
Nemesio
EDIT:
Going back and reading both his and yours, I now see what you meant. I'd have to agree with LH, that--- depsite following the Father's plan---- Jesus was not a means to an end. The plan was the means, however.
To Pawnokeyhole:
Humans make educated guesses everyday about things such as these. The guesses are fairly good when it comes to short term obvious things; however they are ridiculously off when you consider all the influences an action creates and how they spawn other reactions, this ripples for eternity (chaos theory). In the long term humans are not accurate at all. The war on Iraq was an educated guess that most of America thought was right; however now, most of America sees the war as wrong now. A guess is still a guess.
Now if a human did “get lucky” and did the greater good by committing “evil” then I suppose they did not actually do an evil act did they? Also even if you did an evil that turned out to be for the greater good, your intent is very important. If you try to do evil and the greatest good is the result… you are still doing evil.
Hopefully the above can clarify the problems with your next claims
If God can be justified in committing an evil to bring about the greater good,
Once again that “evil” act would not be evil, God intended to do good and did so.
then--rather frightening I think--some other agent, including a human, can be also justified in committing the same evil for the same greater good.
Once again no human can work for the greater good since we are not omniscient, we are only able to do best guesses.
To Sum
1. For someone to work for the greater good requires them to be All Knowing. Otherwise you do not know what the greater good is
2. God is All Knowing and thus can work for The Greater Good.
3. An act that is intended to be good and does the greater good is not evil be definition.
4. Not being All Knowing leaves you only able to take your best guess at doing The Greatest Good, which is all a Human can do.
5. Doing evil (with the intent to do evil) and having things turn out well does not take back that evil you committed.
6. Basically do the best you can, because that is all you can do. The difference between a Christian and a Non-Christian is just that a Christian has a book that is the word of God (non changing standard) telling them what is the best actions to take. The 10 Commandments are but a small part of the bible.
Hope this was clearer
Elliott
Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
Theists seem to be suffering from a severe mental block here. If God can be justified in committing an evil to bring about the greater good, then--rather frightingly I think--some other agent, including a human, can be also justified in committing the same evil for the same greater good.
So, on this view, maybe Hitler was an unwitting agent of the Lord, moving in mysterious ways, to bring about a greater good.[/b]
Sorry. I accidentally clicked on the post button.
God doesn't commit evil acts. He allows them to happen, but the devil sends them. God doesn't want anyone to die. It just has to happen. Many people think God is all powerful. And he is, to a point. He made laws that he himself has to abide by. In the garden of Eden, he turned control over to Adam and Eve, and they turned control over to the devil. Since the devil is "the prince of this world", almost anything he wants to happen can happen. God still has a lot of control because Jesus died on the cross. By dying, Jesus provided a way for people to go to Heaven. If people believe in God and ask him to come into their hearts, the can be saved.
Now, I know what you're gonna say. You're gonna say that I'm advertising my religion, that I'm insane, that I'm stupid, that an omnipotent God doesn't need an impudent pipsqueak like me to defend him(all real posts)etc... But if you'd listen t what I'd said and debate it with actual facts, we might have an actual discussion.
Just wanted to say that i agree with alot you say but i find myself disagreeing with a few things. Let me explain
I’m only quoting my disagreements
Many people think God is all powerful. And he is, to a point. He made laws that he himself has to abide by.
I just want to clarify this statement. God is all powerful and made the laws. God does not “have” to abide in them, but chooses to abide in them since they are just laws.
For example:
I own a business and say that we must dress formal for work. As the boss I still could dress in jeans if I wanted to but I would choose not to since it would be wrong when I force everyone else to conform.
Since the devil is "the prince of this world", almost anything he wants to happen can happen.
The devil can only do what God allows him to do, and even has to ask permission in regards to a person of faith. (Job 1:12)
God still has a lot of control because Jesus died on the cross
God does not have lots of control because of Jesus, God simply has control. God did not put his son on the cross for control.
Elliott
Originally posted by AcemasterAll-powerful to a point? That's like saying that He is partially omniscient.
God doesn't want anyone to die. It just has to happen. Many people think God is all powerful. And he is, to a point.
Things happen that God doesn't want? That's wrong! When you have competing desires, the
stronger desire wins. For example, you may really want to go out and get drunk tonight because
it is fun. But you may also want to stay sober tonight because you have an important meeting
tomorrow and you want to be at your best.
These desires are mutually exclusive and you can only pick one. You cannot simultaneously be
drunk and sober at the same time; you cannot simultaneously be fresh tomorrow and have a big
night on the town.
The greater desire -- the one which you evaluate as the more important 'want' -- is the winner.
God may not want anyone to die, but He doesn't want it badly enough to give them indisputable
evidence of His existence or the means by which to avoid death.
I mean, there isn't an atheist on this forum -- no matter how hardcore anti-God s/he is -- who
would say 'Flip off' if God came down to him/her in person and said 'Do this and do that.'
So, God may not want people to die, but not as badly as He wants to adhere to a system you
believe He has put in place. If God's priority was to convince people He existed, it would be
trivial for Him to accomplish this.
Nemesio