Discussion for debate with Pawnokeyhole

Please discuss the debate here. Thank you.

Originally posted by Darfius
Please discuss the debate here. Thank you.

This looks like a good idea to me too. Oblige us.

Bests,

Aiden

My apologies. His lengthy and very cliched essay touched on a subject that I take somewhat seriously.

Ahem.

. . . you see a God that goes from loving and guiding His new creation to one that is forced, as a Holy being, to banish His children to a plane that includes suffering.

FORCED??? So much for the omniscient, omnipotent being that is your perception of God. It seems that God is not in control and had only a tenuous hold on his grand creation.

... --- ...

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
My apologies. His lengthy and very cliched essay touched on a subject that I take somewhat seriously.

Ahem.

[b] . . . you see a God that goes from loving and guiding His new creation to one that is forced, as a Holy being, to banish His children to a plane that includes suffering.

FORCED??? So much for the omniscient, omnipotent being that ...[text shortened]... s that God is not in control and had only a tenuous hold on his grand creation.

... --- ...
[/b]

Well, if God is ineluctably good, He might have no option but to act in a certain way--"forced" in a sense.

Or would it be more correct to claim that He is free to do evil, but consistently chooses not to, so that He is not forced at all?

What do you think?

(This leaves unanswered the question of whether banishing people to a plane of suffering, if He did this, was justified, on whatever grounds.)

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
My apologies. His lengthy and very cliched essay touched on a subject that I take somewhat seriously.

Ahem.

[b] . . . you see a God that goes from loving and guiding His new creation to one that is forced, as a Holy being, to banish His children to a plane that includes suffering.

FORCED??? So much for the omniscient, omnipotent being that ...[text shortened]... s that God is not in control and had only a tenuous hold on his grand creation.

... --- ...
[/b]

A good example to clarify might be this. God commanded Adam not to partake of the forbidden fruit. He did so, but if God would have let him stay in the garden, he would have been a liar. So, he "forced" Adam out.

Maybe that helps?

Originally posted by Draxus
A good example to clarify might be this. God commanded Adam not to partake of the forbidden fruit. He did so, but if God would have let him stay in the garden, he would have been a liar. So, he "forced" Adam out.

Maybe that helps?

Yes. That is one reason.

God is infinitely benevolent. But He is also infinitely just. Doesn't that make sense? He can do no evil. He can't be in the presence of sin because sin is something that leeches from all that is honorable. When Adam ate that fruit, He was saying to God that something other than God mattered more to him. As a result of this disobediance and this lack of love, God had no choice but to punish Adam or He would have been a liar, a joke, and unworthy of praise.

If it had ended there, then He would be cruel. But He sent us hope. And even hope in the form of a servant would have been sufficient. But He came Himself to show His love. He felt that no other sacrifice would be worthy of our love. When you look at Him and see anger, I look at Jesus and see love.

Originally posted by Darfius
Yes. That is one reason.

God is infinitely benevolent. But He is also infinitely just. Doesn't that make sense? He can do no evil. He can't be in the presence of sin because sin is something that leeches from all that is honorable. When Adam ate that fruit, He was saying to God that something other than God mattered more to him. As a result of th ...[text shortened]... would be worthy of our love. When you look at Him and see anger, I look at Jesus and see love.

Well that doesn't make any sense. He kicked out Adam because he couldn't be around sin, and then he solved the matter by coming as a man and hanging around sin for thirty years or so? Very inconsistant behavior.

I suggest a different ending to the Eden "tragedy." Adam thought he had insulted God somehow by what he had done, for in eating of the fruit of Good and Evil he recieved something unexpected: guilt. So Adam felt guilty of the evil he now knows about and flees the wrath of God that he expects, like a teenager who just blew up his dad's car. He percieves himself as kicked out, for what choice did he really have? God's love never disappeared, however; it always has been available and always will be. All we lost sheep have to do is stop running and turn around. Then we would see that God has always been with us, and he is not angry.

Sure, this version doesn't match what is in the Bible, but I think everyone knows by now what I think of that document--it can be a beginning, but it most certainly should not be an end.

One other thing: You seem to paint God as a human in human terms. You suggest that it would bother God to be called "a liar, a joke, and unworthy of praise." God does not have a sense of honor. He doesn't need one. He is God.

... --- ...

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
Well that doesn't make any sense. He kicked out Adam because he couldn't be around sin, and then he solved the matter by coming as a man and hanging around sin for thirty years or so? Very inconsistant behavior.

I suggest a different ending to the Eden "tragedy." Adam thought he had insulted God somehow by what he had done, for in eating of th ...[text shortened]... praise." God does not have a sense of honor. He doesn't need one. He is God.

... --- ...

When God was "hanging around sin", He was also in human form. In essence, He could handle being in the presence of sin and He could have sinned Himself if He wanted, but He didn't.

Basically, you're saying that we don't have to admit we're sinners or turn away from sin, we just have to "come back to God."

Sounds too New Agey for my tastes.

Hi Darfius,

You wrote that:


As a result of this disobediance and this lack of love, God had no choice but to punish Adam or He would have been a liar, a joke, and unworthy of praise.


Isn't this a matter of moral opinion?

For example, why would it have been less moral of God to take Adam's disobedience in His stride, and not take punitive action?

In my view, this would have shown God to be more moral. I think I'm right here, and you are wrong.

Not taking punitive action cannot make God a liar. He merely issued a directive. If someone violated that directive, that does not make God a liar.

Nor does it make God a joke. If anybody does not have to worry about being a joke, it is an omnipotent being. He doesn't need to prove anything to us, to make sure his honour is satisfied. That's an imperfect human need.

I would tend to praise God more if He were to tolerate Adam's petty willfulness, and display his magnanimity.

(Note: The whole Adam and Eve tale is symbolic, not literal, anyhow.)

Originally posted by Darfius
When God was "hanging around sin", He was also in human form. In essence, He could handle being in the presence of sin and He could have sinned Himself if He wanted, but He didn't.

Basically, you're saying that we don't have to admit we're sinners or turn away from sin, we just have to "come back to God."

Sounds too New Agey for my tastes.

We are sinners. It always helps to admit what we are. But remember Jesus' own story of the prodigal son: The son was ready to admit his sinful ways, but he never had to. His father was watching for him, and before the lost son had a chance to repent he was embraced in his father's love.

All he had to do was return.

Really a great story. Or is it too new-agey?

Originally posted by Pawnokeyhole
Hi Darfius,

You wrote that:

[b]
As a result of this disobediance and this lack of love, God had no choice but to punish Adam or He would have been a liar, a joke, and unworthy of praise.


Isn't this a matter of moral o ...[text shortened]... te: The whole Adam and Eve tale is symbolic, not literal, anyhow.)[/b]

"And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, 'Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.' " Genesis 2:17

"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:" Hebrews 6:18

"In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;" Titus 1:2

Originally posted by thesonofsaul
We are sinners. It always helps to admit what we are. But remember Jesus' own story of the prodigal son: The son was ready to admit his sinful ways, but he never had to. His father was watching for him, and before the lost son had a chance to repent he was embraced in his father's love.

[b]All he had to do was return.

Really a great story. Or is it too new-agey?



[/b]

The only way you can return to God is through the one and only Mediator between Him and us: Jesus Christ.

Repent of your sins. Ask God for forgiveness. And call Jesus Lord.

Then you are saved for eternity.

Pawn, if God tells us to do something, and we choose to disobey Him all the time, not fearing punishment, how does that not make Him a joke?

Originally posted by Darfius
The only way you can return to God is through the one and only Mediator between Him and us: Jesus Christ.

Repent of your sins. Ask God for forgiveness. And call Jesus Lord.

Then you are saved for eternity.

I take your sudden duck into dogma to mean I won the point. Cheers.

... --- ...

Originally posted by Darfius
Pawn, if God tells us to do something, and we choose to disobey Him all the time, not fearing punishment, how does that not make Him a joke?

It strikes me that you are vastly overestimating the power of fragile smidgens of creation like men to make a joke out of a hypothetically supreme being like God. That would surely be the definition is misplaced vanity! God has nothing to prove: He is God for God's sake!