Questioning God and the Devil

Khuzarrz · October 2006

I've been studying classical theism/the augustinian theodicy lately, and have come up with a couple of ideas that I think I'll work into one of my 'free' essays. I've stripped these ideas down to being quite simple for you, and want to know what people think of them/any arguments against them you have.

Please note these ideas are purely revolving around the idea that there is a God/Devil. If you do not believe in such things, fair play to you, but please try and keep on topic...

======--- First Idea ---=====

Quite simply, is the Devil a more prominent force in today's world than God is?

Daily, we see evil, suffering, natural disasters etc. etc. etc. which are all (in most theodicys) attributed to actions of the devil/his angels. Furthermore, how strong is temptation to sin - have sex, drink, be gluttonous, be rich etc - compared to the temptation to go to church and worship, or help and old lady across the street? How much more rewarded do we feel having had sex for example, than we do having gone to church?

How many actions do we see each day that are attributed to God? And I do not mean attributed to by creation - like you could argue we can see God's actions in the rising of the sun... But that was set in motion millenia ago. You could of course argue that all of the actions we see in the world are God's intentions (due to the idea of cause and effect), however that would imply that God is the route force behind all evil, and did create evil. This would present you at the logical conclusion that Hume's triad (Omnipotence+Omniscience+Omnibenevolence of God) is inconsistent and God is either non-existant or not all 3 of those - or, as Dostoyevsky presented in 'The Brothers Karamazov' God is manevolent.

=====--- Second Idea ---=====

The idea of an imperfect God.

The pretense for almost all theodicys as well as almost all arguments against the existance of God, is that if there were a God, he would be perfect. Why though? The obvious answer is that for God to be the most powerful, knowing and loving being in existance, he would have to be perfect or else something would be better than him. But question that further and you arrive at my conclusion. Just because God isn't perfect, does not mean he is not the greatest being in existance. Think about it. If a person were to be absolutely perfect, except that they used the word 'fuck' a little too often, does that immediately mean there is a person somewhere that were exactly the same as them, except they did not overuse 'fuck' (and thus were 'perfect')? No. Of course that person exists in concept, but they needn't exist in reality. The same goes for God. And so I reitterate, why does God need to be perfect?

=====--- End of Ideas ---===

What do you all think?

Draenor · October 2006

if you decide to do the imperfect God one, you could talk about the old polytheistic Gods of the Romans and Greeks, who were FAR from perfect....just an idea.

Aelfinn · October 2006

I think you'd better dive under cover, fast. Well thought out concepts, and I believe they are probably closer to the truth than established doctrine. But this forum isn't exactly known for peacefull discussions on religious topics.

Khuzarrz · October 2006

Originally posted by Draenor
if you decide to do the imperfect God one, you could talk about the old polytheistic Gods of the Romans and Greeks, who were FAR from perfect....just an idea.

I'm gonna do both, i'll flip a coin for which to do first. Good idea with the polytheistic religions - hadn't thought about that. Cheers! I just posted to see if I could get some heads up of other ideas (like you just gave me) as well as to see if I could spark off some interesting discussions.

Originally posted by Aelfinn

I think you'd better dive under cover, fast. Well thought out concepts, and I believe they are probably closer to the truth than established doctrine. But this forum isn't exactly known for peacefull discussions on religious topics.

Cheers for that ^^ I don't mind less peaceful discussions though, so it's all good ^^

Finwe · October 2006

Originally posted by Khuzarrz
I've been studying classical theism/the augustinian theodicy lately, and have come up with a couple of ideas that I think I'll work into one of my 'free' essays. I've stripped these ideas down to being quite simple for you, and want to know what people think of them/any arguments against them you have.

Please note these ideas are purely revolving around the idea that there is a God/Devil. If you do not believe in such things, fair play to you, but please try and keep on topic...

======--- First Idea ---=====

Quite simply, is the Devil a more prominent force in today's world than God is?

Daily, we see evil, suffering, natural disasters etc. etc. etc. which are all (in most theodicys) attributed to actions of the devil/his angels. Furthermore, how strong is temptation to sin - have sex, drink, be gluttonous, be rich etc - compared to the temptation to go to church and worship, or help and old lady across the street? How much more rewarded do we feel having had sex for example, than we do having gone to church?

It has always been harder for man to do the right thing over the wrong thing. It seems almost to be innate for us to primally swing to the side of evil.

As for the devil being a more prominent force in the modern era, I would say yes. We are no more cultured, civilized, or humane than we were two or more millenia ago, if not more so barbaric. When you have people lobby to actually make it legal to pierce the skull of an unborn infant and suck it's brains out, that is factual information showing the limitless barbarism of the human mind.

How many actions do we see each day that are attributed to God? And I do not mean attributed to by creation - like you could argue we can see God's actions in the rising of the sun... But that was set in motion millenia ago. You could of course argue that all of the actions we see in the world are God's intentions (due to the idea of cause and effect), however that would imply that God is the route force behind all evil, and did create evil. This would present you at the logical conclusion that Hume's triad (Omnipotence+Omniscience+Omnibenevolence of God) is inconsistent and God is either non-existant or not all 3 of those - or, as Dostoyevsky presented in 'The Brothers Karamazov' God is manevolent.

First you must find out what evil is. Do we judge it on a individual human basis, or a cosmic basis? If we do it individually, then it is relativistic and really is not a force, but rather a concept that no human mind views identically, and therefor holds no solidity in an argument. But if it is on a cosmic basis, then we must find out what is it's origination.

Evil is created by free will. If we are presented with Path A, and Path B, one of those will be the path of evil. If God is good, then how can there be evil? Evil is the absence of God, or the defiance of his will. Path A is in line with the will of God, whereas path B is straying away from. It is the act of evil because if God is good, and you are not in the will of God, then in what will are you in? Evil.

Evil, in essence, is the absence of God. It is not Satan or the Devil, he is not the originator of evil, for he himself was originally of good intent; he became evil when he decided to stray away from, to rebel, to try to attack, God. His goal is to be "The Enemy", to cause others to do the same.

So then the argument is, "Why would God create a being, He knows would end up corrupted. And if he creates a being that he knows will turn to evil, is that the same as creating evil?"

The first problem is, if you're taking this from Christian Theos, is that God, The Father, the one who is Omniscient, did not create anything, nor everything.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

John 1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.

John 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Christ(The Word) is not Omniscient, therefor that argument fails.

God the Father is Trini-Omni(Omnipotent, omniscient, omnibelevolence), but God the Son is not Omniscient.

On an ending note, I am not a trinitiarian, and do not believe them to be "One", I believe them to be separate entities, of separate minds.

=====--- Second Idea ---=====

The idea of an imperfect God.

The pretense for almost all theodicys as well as almost all arguments against the existance of God, is that if there were a God, he would be perfect. Why though? The obvious answer is that for God to be the most powerful, knowing and loving being in existance, he would have to be perfect or else something would be better than him. But question that further and you arrive at my conclusion. Just because God isn't perfect, does not mean he is not the greatest being in existance. Think about it. If a person were to be absolutely perfect, except that they used the word 'fuck' a little too often, does that immediately mean there is a person somewhere that were exactly the same as them, except they did not overuse 'fuck' (and thus were 'perfect')? No. Of course that person exists in concept, but they needn't exist in reality. The same goes for God. And so I reitterate, why does God need to be perfect?

=====--- End of Ideas ---===

What do you all think?

Perfection is the idea of being without mistake. The creator cannot make a mistake, because the mistake, is not being in line with the creator, and the creator, can not be out of line with himself, because whatever he does, is in line with who he is.

Aelfinn · October 2006

Originally posted by Finwe
Perfection is the idea of being without mistake. The creator cannot make a mistake, because the mistake, is not being in line with the creator, and the creator, can not be out of line with himself, because whatever he does, is in line with who he is.

Congratulations on the use of circular logic with no basis whatsoever.

Gamewize · October 2006

Actually I think evil exists because mortals like us could not comprehend good without it. If you've ever watched papillion you'll know where I get this from. Also for God to perceived as good you must have an anti-god, aka Satan. So evil isnt a mistake, its just there so we know what good actually is.

Khuzarrz · October 2006

Originally posted by Gamewize
Actually I think evil exists because mortals like us could not comprehend good without it. If you've ever watched papillion you'll know where I get this from. Also for God to perceived as good you must have an anti-god, aka Satan. So evil isnt a mistake, its just there so we know what good actually is.

So God created Evil? Or God created Satan? Or God and Satan are equal and constant? And what hand did Satan have in creating the world, if he is God's equal (and opposite:P)? Or is it that God is the creator and Satan is the destroyer? If so, does that mean 'judgement day' (if within your beliefs) will actually be because of Satan's doing, rather than God's?

^^ Gotta be pernickerty!

And finwe, I'll get back to your post when I get back from watching TV hehe. Great post (except the circular logic which I'm gonna pull apart in a minute )!

Cheers for both of your inputs.

Gamewize · October 2006

Originally posted by Khuzarrz

Originally posted by Gamewize
Actually I think evil exists because mortals like us could not comprehend good without it. If you've ever watched papillion you'll know where I get this from. Also for God to perceived as good you must have an anti-god, aka Satan. So evil isnt a mistake, its just there so we know what good actually is.

So God created Evil? Or God created Satan? Or God and Satan are equal and constant? And what hand did Satan have in creating the world, if he is God's equal (and opposite:P)? Or is it that God is the creator and Satan is the destroyer? If so, does that mean 'judgement day' (if within your beliefs) will actually be because of Satan's doing, rather than God's?

^^ Gotta be pernickerty!

And finwe, I'll get back to your post when I get back from watching TV hehe. Great post (except the circular logic which I'm gonna pull apart in a minute )!

Cheers for both of your inputs.

More or less either he created evil or Satan or didnt do either, and actually there is a Judgement Day notion that yes, Satan ends the world, I personally dont follow this notion. Satan may or may not have done any creating, thought I think he's more the guide-to-evil, and not really evil itself. Satan cannor really destroy anything, most beleifs say he doesnt have any hand in any real disaster or cataclysm, one again, he's more a guider.

Of course, from my universalist stand point I reiterate that Evil is an unfortunate necissity if human are to percieve acts of good. God wont do anything for you, besides, to have true free will you must be able to do anything you wish, and evil needs to be there, this is the one thing I agree with finwe upon.

Draenor · October 2006

Khuzarrz, to clear up your misconception about evil and satan...Satan is a fallen Angel, prior to him falling from God's grace, he was said to be the most beautiful of all Angels...but his vanity eventually got the better of him and he fell from Heaven. He was given domain over hell BY God...his power is like that of a child compared to God...the difference is, humans are more prone to listening to the Devil because the Devil tells us what we want to hear. Satan is not some horned beast with wings, in the Bible he is refered to as "the prince of air" Because he is formless, and invisible during the times that he tempts us. Does that mean that he does not have a physical form? No, but the common conception of Satan has become some red beast with wings and a tail, that's fairy tale stuff(probably perpetuated by Dante's inferno). It is also important to remember that Satan cannot do anything without the permission of God...That doesn't mean that he goes and asks God every time he wants to do something(maybe he does, but i kinda doubt it) it simply means that the power of God has absolute control over the power of Satan, and Satan can do nothing unless God lets him...it's all part of the process of people coming to God rather than Satan, that is the choice that humans are given, follow the temptations, or follow what God wants you to do.

But as I have said before, I'm just some religious whack job Jesus freak, so I'll probably get flamed for this post, but that's okay, hopefully if your question was a serious one, then this sheds some light on it for you.

Boozbaz · October 2006

Who defines perfect? What sets the par for what is considered perfect? We have nothing better than God to compare him to. By your example nothing is better than him, so he is perfect in comparison to everything else.

If you believe God could be better or that there is possibility for him or anything else to be closer to what is "perfect", for one: thiking like that is kinda out of our zip-code, since he/ultimate perfection is so beyond human comprehension; and two: who defines perfect?

"How many actions do we see each day that are attributed to God? And I
do not mean attributed to by creation - like you could argue we can see
God's actions in the rising of the sun... But that was set in motion
millenia ago. You could of course argue that all of the actions we see
in the world are God's intentions (due to the idea of cause and
effect), however that would imply that God is the route force behind
all evil, and did create evil. This would present you at the logical
conclusion that Hume's triad (Omnipotence+Omniscience+Omnibenevolence
of God) is inconsistent and God is either non-existant or not all 3 of
those - or, as Dostoyevsky presented in 'The Brothers Karamazov' God is
manevolent."

Just because God allows evil to be on our world doesn't mean he doesn't love us. It is the blackness around us that brightens our spirits, the conflict our flesh provides strengthens the soul.

Draenor · October 2006

Boozbaz is on to something

Boozbaz · October 2006

Originally posted by Draenor
Boozbaz is on to something

People've been complaining about immature posts so I guess it's time we take it up a notch ^_-

PS: Khuzarrz you're just 16?! These are insightful and well-worded questions for a 16 y/o.

Khuzarrz · October 2006

Originally posted by Draenor

Khuzarrz, to clear up your misconception about evil and satan...Satan is a fallen Angel, prior to him falling from God's grace, he was said to be the most beautiful of all Angels...but his vanity eventually got the better of him and he fell from Heaven. He was given domain over hell BY God...his power is like that of a child compared to God...the difference is, humans are more prone to listening to the Devil because the Devil tells us what we want to hear. Satan is not some horned beast with wings, in the Bible he is refered to as "the prince of air" Because he is formless, and invisible during the times that he tempts us. Does that mean that he does not have a physical form? No, but the common conception of Satan has become some red beast with wings and a tail, that's fairy tale stuff(probably perpetuated by Dante's inferno). It is also important to remember that Satan cannot do anything without the permission of God...That doesn't mean that he goes and asks God every time he wants to do something(maybe he does, but i kinda doubt it) it simply means that the power of God has absolute control over the power of Satan, and Satan can do nothing unless God lets him...it's all part of the process of people coming to God rather than Satan, that is the choice that humans are given, follow the temptations, or follow what God wants you to do.

But as I have said before, I'm just some religious whack job Jesus freak, so I'll probably get flamed for this post, but that's okay, hopefully if your question was a serious one, then this sheds some light on it for you.

I do understand the basis for the creation of 'satan'/lucifer, yes. (Thanks for clarification on what exactly he was before hand... I knew he was an angel, but did not remember him being the 'most beautiful' - also it may clear up that misconception for others, so it's all good). Now just to be an arse, I have to question what you've said ^^

Why is it that we desire to sin more than to do 'good'? The idea that we are inherently evil from creation leads me personally back to the notion that God is not all good, or how would he have created beings more inclined to cause suffering and evil than good? Secondly, the idea that Satan can't do anything without God's permission... In some ways this strikes me as a brilliant 'get-out-clause' (for lack of a better word - i mean no offense) but in others, again, leads me to the conclusion god is manevolent/wants us to suffer... It effectively (on the notion that he is omniscient) means that he has pre-planned every bit of temptation, suffering and evil we experience in our lives... Not a great thought imho :P

Originally posted by Boozbaz

PS: Khuzarrz you're just 16?! These are insightful and well-worded questions for a 16 y/o.

Hehehe I am indeed only 16. Thanks for the props ^^

Originally posted by Boozbaz

Just because God allows evil to be on our world doesn't mean he doesn't love us. It is the blackness around us that brightens our spirits, the conflict our flesh provides strengthens the soul.

OK, to use an example straight from the book I mentioned earlier 'The Brothers Karamazov', how can you justify the suffering of innocent children with an all-loving God (all-loving not only means loving everything, but loving everything more than anything else ever could love)... I don't mean suffering in the sense of feeling unhappy, being bullied etc... I mean truely horrible things... One example in the book is that of the first world war (I think :P I can't remember exactly which war tbh) where twelve and thirteen year old girls are taken from their villages into a Nazi barracks, where the soldiers then repeatedly gang-rape them (in some cases, ending in death). The idea that we learn from it, or are made stronger, is a great one for ordinary 'tests' (losing your job or what have you), however can you justify that kind of action in line with an all-loving God?

Originally posted by Boozbaz

Who defines perfect? What sets the par for what is considered perfect? We have nothing better than God to compare him to. By your example nothing is better than him, so he is perfect in comparison to everything else.

If you believe God could be better or that there is possibility for him or anything else to be closer to what is "perfect", for one: thiking like that is kinda out of our zip-code, since he/ultimate perfection is so beyond human comprehension; and two: who defines perfect?

Perfect is not on the 'Sh*t, crap, awful, mediocre, ok, good, very good' scale though. Perfect is on the 'very faulted, faulted, less faulted, almost perfect, perfect' scale. Being perfect is having no fault at all. Perfection is a concept that is eternal (and technically, inachievable - part of the mysticism of God). Nothing being better than God does not mean that God has no faults, it merely means that a being does not exist that has the same qualities as him but without those faults.

.

I've just thought of a fault in that argument in fact... If God is omnipotent, and omniscient, God could change himself to erase those faults... Hmmm... I guess there's a number of ways to argue out that one.

1. God does not want to get rid of those faults - he likes them (perhaps he created them ?!?!).

2. The very nature of God's faults lies within the triad of omnipotence, omniscience and omnibenevolence, and thus, without sacrificing those traits, he could not become perfect.

3. Perfection is merely an eternal concept, and is impossible to achieve, because by erasing one fault, you create another. Or perhaps, perfection is a fault?!?!

Cheers for all the input so far ^^

Khuzarrz · October 2006

OK finwe, I WILL get back to your post, I promise. I just wrote 2-3 pages reply to it, and as I hit post IE crashed. I'm REALLY not amused, and as such (and it being 2:11am here), I'm gonna get myself to bed and rewrite it in the morning! Sorry!

Cheers for all of your input once again!

Finwe · October 2006

Originally posted by Aelfinn

Originally posted by Finwe
Perfection is the idea of being without mistake. The creator cannot make a mistake, because the mistake, is not being in line with the creator, and the creator, can not be out of line with himself, because whatever he does, is in line with who he is.

Congratulations on the use of circular logic with no basis whatsoever.

The basis was already outlined in my post.

[Edit]

Khuz, trust me, been there, done that. Hence why C&P has become second nature to me whenever writing anything of worth.

Howdy, Stranger!

Questioning God and the Devil

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Questioning God and the Devil

Comments