Christians don't go around saying we are allowed to judge God like Jar did.
This idea used to bother me. How, I wondered, would it even be proper...not to mention possible to question and/or challenge God?
Then I thought of an analogy of a martial arts teacher and his student. The teacher has the motivation of always challenging his student to become better and better. Does the student have a right to challenge the teacher? My answer was that if the student ever expects to learn anything he has to challenge someone better than he is, or he himself will never improve.
Just because God may set Himself up to be questioned or challenged in no way detracts from His position or ability. In my opinion, the motive would be for the edification and training of the human individual and/or race.
This topic is evolving, Percy. If I were required to summarize the entire discussion so far, I would label it as an evolving debate which clarifies or at least showcases my personal beliefs. I am one of the few who enjoys sparring with jar, though he can be anything but polite. I will say that I have advanced my beliefs since starting this thread over two years ago. I suspect, however, that we will end up with a Final Question long before we arrive at any Final Answer.
Add By Edit: For those of you who see jars debating style as brusque , it is probably the reason that Admin censored some of his words. I dont mind him challenging me intellectually and personally, however, so for me brusque is fair cricket.
But God cannot know that Its knowledge is so perfect.
Would it be more evil for God to assume It has perfect knowledge and only create heaven-bound folk, thus denying the potential to prove It wrong to all the folk it thinks will be hell-bound; or, for God to simply create all creatures it plans on creating without respect to whether or not It thinks they will be hell- or heaven-bound?
Since 'good' and 'evil' are relative terms that only have meaning to moralistic individuals—and for humans are even different from one person to the next—, I think it is not likely you can define 'God' in such a way that It won't be found evil by someone.
You think Phat's God is evil. Phat thinks your God is heartless.
If the God has foreknowledge then that God knows even before that critter is created that that critter will go to hell.
Such a God is simply evil.
This kinda ties in with your belief that humans were given awareness of good and evil and a charge to do good. I can hardly imagine a scenario whereby my judging God would ever be considered a right move...but I look at God more as a standard of perfection and infinite wisdom rather than a teacher who expects me to challenge Her.
About the idea of willful ignorance....is it wrong to hold on to beliefs that seem logically crazy or irrational? For example, saying that God can do whatever God wants to do and that it is always a right move....
It is a given that I prefer fantasy over reality, as do many. My question to you is this: If GOD exists (based on your framework of GOD, God, and god) Is it not quite possible that not very many humans would then like or worship such a Deity?