Is God good?

No. No, we don't. Well, if God exists, and is omnipotent, it's him too. It shows rather greater respect for the rapist and murderer than for his victim using her last breath to beg God to intervene.But also it is strangely at odds with the picture of God given in the Bible. When forty children made fun of Elijah for being bald, God sent bears to kill them. Those children didn't ask God to intervene, nor did he "leave them to the devil's cruel power", he sent magic bears to eat them for being cheeky. But he suffers much worse horrors to take place than kids calling names, y'know, stuff like genocide, murder, rape, torture ... maybe involving actual sticks and stones and the breaking of bones ... and look, no killer bears. Not even an irritable badger.

Yeah, well again you just express your fallen mind which thinks it's so superior to God that you won't even consider you might be wrong. As I SUGGESTED, consider you might be wrong about all this, that your fallen mind can't judge such things, instead of just going on and on with your self-righteous judgment and then you might come to see things rather differently. Yeah I know you LIKE your superior judgment. Well, God ain't gonna disabuse you of it as long as you are glued to it. CONSIDER seriously that you might be wrong, and you might then find out some very interesting things. But if not, then not, oh well.

It would help me to consider that I might be wrong if you would give me a hint of a shred of an argument why I might be, instead of, y'know, just yelling at me that I am.You could start by pointing out what was wrong with the post you're ostensibly replying to.

I don't sound like I'm yelling to my own ears so I'm not sure how to stop sounding like that to you.You want me to try to persuade you what's wrong with this post? OK I'm looking at it again. Well, WE do. It would be nice if you'd consider that some people who aren't as stupid as you like to think we are do think we know this, because maybe it might cause you to stop and think it's possible for this to be true, but if not, then not. That SOUNDS so reasonable but it simply denies the whole structure of reality and God's purposes in the playing out of good versus evil. Theoretically God COULD have made the whole thing some other way completely but why should I trust my own ideas about what He could or should have done? He didn't do it my way and I have at least enough sense not to judge Him. I for one believe that what He says in His word is true, that He is good, that the way things are is the only way they could be for the best possible outcome. He is good and I am not in a position to see why He did what He did as He did it, I have to take it on faith. That's all I can do, and it's all i can offer you or anyone.I know I can't recommend just trying to have faith, that never works, so I'm suggesting a preliminary way you might start to see things differently and the first thing you might consider doing is consdering that you are wrong in your judgment of these things. Best I can do I think. Maybe jaywill could do better.Actually it's where I started. I remember making the decision to give up a particular thing/wish/idea/opinion I'd been holding onto, and things started changing from that point. It took a while, I was really blind and lost, but the more I gave over the more things looked different. So I guess that's why I suggest this as a starting place. I still try to take this advice when I'm in a muddle: Consider that you might be wrong, choose against your own wishes and opinions. All I can say is what I already said: THIS IS CAUSED BY SIN, BY OUR FALLEN NATURE, AND BY THE DEVIL WHO OWNS THIS WORLD. We inherit sin from our ancestors. You cannot judge things by their surface appearance. Things are a lot bigger, a lot more mysterious and a lot more evil than you have any idea. BUT IF WE BELIEVE GOD WE CAN REVERSE THESE EFFECTS THROUGH PRAYER AND TRUST IN HIM. As I said.Otherwise we CHOSE the devil's rule and it's the devil's rule we get until we decide to choose God's instead. I obviously can't talk you out of your moral judgment, that's why I didn't try. Things aren't as they seem. Try not judging God for a change. Consider you might be wrong about the big picture. Best I can do. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

God IS evil but you'll never see that as long as you insist on your own view of things. You are judging God according to your fallen nature, which is blind to the true situation in this world, so your judgment is wrong and if you go on sticking to it you will ultimately be condemned by it.

Ah Panda, don't talk like that, it's clever to no good purpose.

Correct.
Intelligent rebuttals are wasted on you.I suspect that my reply caused you serious mental discomfort, else you would have done what you normally do and just ignore it.Edited by Panda, : No reason given.

It'd be nice if you'd consider that there might be a reason to doubt the divine origin of the Bible beyond being "stupid." Whose ideas could you trust if not your own? Whose would you even have access to? I know you say you're down on the whole notion of using one's intellect to determine what is true, but you've never been able to explain to me what else there is. You can only think with your brain, not anyone else's. Reading and interpreting the Bible isn't a process by which you become an empty vessel, sitting there passively as scriptural truth gets poured in.It doesn't work like that. You have to interpret,. You have to participate. And ultimately, your own intellect is the only thing you can trust in that process because it's the only thing you're able to participate with. There's just no getting around the fact that whatever you think the Bible says, it's you thinking it says that. Your interpretation of the Bible is, ultimately, something you're creating, not something that has been created for you. There's a reason that people in comas can't read the Bible. Reading is a participatory act, not a passive one.I'm not telling you to start trusting your intellect to determine what is true and false, Faith. I'm telling you that you already do. Yes, it never works when you do it. That's because we look at you and see the results. Benighted, ignorant, tied up in knots trying to explain even the simplest concept about the world because of a harmful, idiotic philosophy of turning your back on your own intellect. It's like you've taken a sledgehammer to your own kneecaps and now you're telling us that's a great way to take a stroll. We can look at you and see that faith just isn't good for anything.I've always had respect for your intellect, Faith, but it's the only positive thing about you, and I've never been able to understand why it's the thing you seem to hate most about yourself. How do you square that with all the times you've told us that the existence of God is obvious on its face?

Could you quote me where I wrote that in this discussion or in any of the other 3,000 some posts I written here.Now I would say that there is a perfect will of God and what He might permit to happen. Some would say this was the permissive will of God.But I think your criticism sounds more like a complaint for Islam, that "Allah has willed it."No Drosophilla, it is evident to me that God's perfect will is not always carried out - thus the prayer Christ taught "Your kingdom come. Your will be done ..."Lol. I point out that that's your strawman argument. I never wrote it. I doubt that you can show me where anyone wrote that, though you might.And I bet you still think I'm "sick beyond the pale". What? My absolute moral conviction that "all have sinned and come short of the glory of God?"Do you mean my absolute moral conviction that ALL may be justified in Christ, ALL may be reconciled to God in Christ, ALL manner of sins may be forgiven ?That's what at least 27 of the 69 books of the Bible are quite extensively devoted to. And this extended salvation to all, I think, demonstrates that God is indeed a good God.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Excuse me Doc Adaquate, for interjecting. But the OP seems to want us to assume that.The OP says: Well, I do not read of BEGGING God to intervene in the powerful example of Abraham interceeding for the city of Sodom. What I see is Abraham CHALLENGING God.Read Genesis 18. Here is a early example of God securing someone to be an intercessor for people. Abraham does not grovel and beg. Rather He reminds God by way of challenge, of His own just nature. "Shall the Judge of all the earth not do justly ?" (Gen. 18:25) No, no, no Dr. Adaquate. God is not interesting in our BEGGING. He is interested in our BELIEVING. This is about Second Kings 2:23-25. One scholar writes that these were not little kids:

quote:

---

"'Little children' is an unfortunate translation. The Hebrew expression neurim qetannim is best rendered 'young lads' or 'young men.' From numerous examples where ages are specified in the Old Testament, we know that these were boys from twelve to thirty years old. One of these words described Isaac at his sacrifice in Genesis 22:12, when he was easily in his early twenties. It described Joseph in Genesis 37:2 when he was seventeen years old. In fact, the same word described army men in 1 Kings 20:14-15...these are young men ages between twelve and thirty."

---

So maybe these were not all such little boys as critics assume. In fact Elisha may have been in or close to their own age group.The offense seems have followed a extreme act of MERCY done by the prophet Elisha towards the nearby city of Jericho. That was about 10 miles away!

quote:

---

"Elisha's sweet memories of Jericho received a souring touch at Bethel (v. 23). The public insult against Elisha was aimed ultimately at the God whom he represented. Indeed Elisha's whole prophetic ministry was in jeopardy; therefore the taunt had to be dealt with decisively. The sudden arrival of the two bears who mauled forty-two youths to death would serve as both an awful sentence on unbelievers--and thus, too, on Jeroboam's cult city--and a published reminder that blasphemy against the true God and his program would be met with swift and certain consequences (v. 24)."

---

The confrontation of this crowd and Elisha could have been actually a contest between the false prophets of Baal and the true prophets of Yahweh.

quote:

---

"As Elisha was traveling from Jericho to Bethel several dozen youths (young men, not children) confronted him. Perhaps they were young false prophets of Baal. Their jeering, recorded in the slang of their day, implied that if Elisha were a great prophet of the Lord, as Elijah was, he should go on up into heaven as Elijah reportedly had done. The epithet baldhead may allude to lepers who had to shave their heads and were considered detestable outcasts. Or it may simply have been a form of scorn, for baldness was undesirable (cf. Isa. 3:17, 24). Since it was customary for men to cover their heads, the young men probably could not tell if Elisha was bald or not. They regarded God's prophet with contempt....Elisha then called down a curse on the villains. This cursing stemmed not from Elisha pride but from their disrespect for the Lord as reflected in their treatment of His spokesman (cf. 1:9-14). Again God used wild animals to execute His judgment (cf., e.g., 1 Kings 13:24). That 42 men were mauled by the two bears suggests that a mass demonstration had been organized against God and Elisha."

---

Public safety may have also been involved. If this gang would roam around and mock one of God's prophets, there is no telling what other hoodlum activites they might have carried out.Today, if a group of 40 or 50 young poeple were carousing around showing public disrespect to citizens the police would probably be called. They may have been a serious threat to the public.

quote:

---

"A careful study of this incident in context shows that it was far more serious than a "mild personal offense." It was a situation of serious public danger, quite as grave as the large youth gangs that roam the ghetto sections of our modern American cities. If these young hoodlums were ranging about in packs of fifty or more, derisive towards respectable adults and ready to mock even a well-known man of God, there is no telling what violence they might have inflicted on the citizenry of the religious center of the kingdom of Israel (as Bethel was), had they been allowed to continue their riotous course.

---

Assistance from Glen Miller's Christian Thinktank above used by permission.cont. latterEdited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

How can I honestly ask God anything, if God doesn't want me to be honest?That doesn't make sense at all. Being confusing about basic stuff doesn't seem like a good thing.

But it's not knowledge, it's opinion. You know, like a Muslim's opinion that the Koran is God's word. 'Cos it is. If God's omnipotent, he can intervene in anything. He chooses not to. You may think that that's a good idea, but good or bad it is (supposing he exists) what he does. Despite being allegedly unalterably opposed to sin, he lets it "play out", as you say. Unless the sin involves children being cheeky to a bald guy, then he kills them. Well, that's what you're doing, isn't it? In the end, you do all your thinking with your own brain. But don't you see that you could say that about anyone or anything? You could be worshiping the absolute quintessence of evil and have faith that despite all appearances it's really good. That's not a moral judgement, those are just facts.Fact 1: God does not intervene in many horror. He didn't smite Stalin or Pol Pot, for example, to name two people who died natural deaths after committing massive genocides.Fact 2: The Bible portrays him as being perfectly willing to intervene in certain cases. Blammo, a pestilence, ka-zap, people drop dead, hey presto, a global flood, abracadabra, ten plagues, shazam, magic bears. In the latter case, to kill children as a punishment for impoliteness. So any theological argument that says that the God of the Bible would take a non-interventionist stance in general has got to be wrong. According to the Bible, he'll use his powers to intervene in the most trivial of human affairs when he feels like it.There are two possible conclusions. One is that most of the time he doesn't feel like it, and sits back and lets things happen that a good human being would give his very life to prevent --- and which God could prevent just by wishing it. The other is that there is no God and the Bible's a load of old cobblers.Those are facts. If presentation of these facts suggests some sort of moral judgement to you, then while that may be my intention, it is not my doing. It's yours.

There is a difference between assuming something for the sake of argument and knowing is to be true.You can hardly expect everyone participating on this thread to become a Christian fundamentalist for the duration. Ah well, we can sort this whole rape and murder thing out once for all, then. You, after all, are a dyed-in-the-wool believer. Challenge God to do justly. See how that turns out. Then when we've established the principle, we can move on to war and such.Why did no-one ever think of this before?---As for the rather silly apologetics you produce concerning Elijah and the bears, I would just point out for now that it's entirely contrary to what you said to ringo.The "taunt", your apologists write, "had to be dealt with decisively [and] met with swift and certain consequences".And yet you explain to ringo that because God is merciful, he will be neither decisive nor swift when it comes to atrocities even more horrific than name-calling.

Doc, I'm a little bit limiteds this morning. But I do count God as ever idly by.Jesus says that it is His Father's will that not one of these little ones perish. While I cannot tell you I KNOW what little one has, I can at least vouch that the will of God apparently is that not one would perish.I'll will go so far to say to some of you guys that there are indeed some really tough places in the Bible. There is more than myriads of instances that warm the heart of God's longsuffering and forebearance.Is it a light thing the Christ is the propetiating offering that EVERYONE that has ever lived COULD be redeemed ? It is clear that many before His incarnation benefitted from His antitype act through the symbolic offerings prescribedd from God in the animal offerings.It is clear that it is not only those AFTER His act of obedience may benefit. It is clear that some prior to it are explained by Paul as having been also redeemed through their faith.You always want to assume the worst. I do not.
And my lack of knowledge prompts me to be like Christ in interceeding for people, for the world, for sinners. I think praying and sharing the gospel is vastly superior to sitting around and complaining and finding only fault as you are doing.God appeared as a man and had a conversation with Abraham before He judged Sodom. It was no accident. His purpose was to secure one on earth to act as an intercessor for Sodom. He sought a Christ like figure to petition on behalf of the cities.God sought a "friend" of Himself. Abraham was called a friend of God. He was one who understood God's ways and God's heart. Abraham foreshadows Christ also as every OTHER positive figure in the Old Testament does.You spend no time to befriend God perhaps. Perhaps you spend no time to pray intercessory prayers for the sinners. You devote your time to complaining against God to accuse Him because He will not drop His righteousness.I believe God is indeed good and just but will not drop His rightness. So there is the need for intecessory prayer on man's behalf.I don't think to spend one's life perfecting accusations against God is profitable. Standing in the gap as Jesus Christ did I think is more profitable.Ask yourself sometime, "Who and how many may perish because I was a prayerless person only laboring to formulate accusations against God?" Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

So for clarity here - are you in fact saying that you don't believe your God is omnipotent and omniscient? That things DO happen that are 'not in accordance with Gods will'?Because if that is the case I've got further questions of a different nature to put to you.....I'll defer answering the rest of your post until I get some clarity on the question above.Edited by Drosophilla, : No reason given.