tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post2771349644722382468..comments2024-03-29T06:51:58.481-07:00Comments on Winging It: God Is GoodStanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-21968377024176833332009-11-20T10:38:34.505-07:002009-11-20T10:38:34.505-07:00Yes, God defines "good" by His nature. I...Yes, God defines "good" by His nature. I remember how jarred I was the first time I heard, "What is justice? It's whatever God does." I thought, "No! That's not right!" and then I realized, "Yes! That's the only possibility." (And evil is <i>not</i> a thing.)Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-88050100615433912212009-11-20T09:40:23.369-07:002009-11-20T09:40:23.369-07:00Hey just some thoughts on how there is evil if God...Hey just some thoughts on how there is evil if God is omni- benevolent. First two things have to be pointed out I think. If God is God there cannot be a moral code to which he subscribes to or has to adhere to, second God does not define what good and evil is in the sense that he abitrarally appoints what is good and what is evil. In other words God did not say thou shalt not commit murder because he looked at a higher moral standard to see if it was right or wrong, but God could not have said either that murder was ok. What is good and right then is a reflection of God's character, we know that telling the truth is good because it reflects God's character and we are commanded to live according to God's character. The ultimate standard for good and bad right and wrong then is God and his character, anything that is not in line with God's character is bad or evil because it is a rejection of the only standard of goodness. St. Augustin grappled with this very question and he developed some interesting thoughts and realizations. 1) God created all things;2) evil is a thing;3) therefore, God created evil, if the premises are true than the conclusion is inescapable and devastating to Christianity. Augustine realized that this argument depends on the second premise being true, that evil is a thing, so he needed to define the nature of evil by asking what it is. Augustine took a different approach to find the source of evil; if evil was not a thing than it did not have a creation, therefore the second premise of the argument needed to be refined. Augustine also asked if there was any evidence that a good God existed; if so than it would not be possible for evil to be created by God; therefore, evil’s origin must be found somewhere else. This approach led to a different pair of syllogisms that still made it possible for God and evil to exist. First: 1) all things that God created are good; 2) evil is not good; 3) therefore, evil was not created by God. Second: 1) God created everything; 2) God did not created evil; 3) therefore, evil is not a thing. The conclusions of these arguments are based on the truthfulness of the premises. Augustine did believe that God existed as creator and He was a good God which meant the original premise that evil was a thing was false and therefore the conclusion was false. For Augustine evil was not a thing created but the abscence of good, like darkness is the absence of light or cold is the absence of heat. I think Augustine set some of the groundwork for pressupositional thought on this subject as well. A pressupositionalist might ask if there is no God than what exactly is the problem of evil? Without the existence of God evil has no meaning and condeming one thing over the other becomes arbitrary and meaningless, evil becomes relative to the values chosen by individuals, cultures or societies. So to say God cannot exist if evil exists is contradictory, because evil would not exist if there was no God, calling anything evil without pressuposing the standards of God would not make any sense.stuart elliotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09825746827932317476noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-33987356197082991842008-05-21T19:41:00.000-07:002008-05-21T19:41:00.000-07:00C.S. Lewis referred to pain as "God's megaphone." ...C.S. Lewis referred to pain as "God's megaphone." We don't always understand it and we rarely appreciate it, but suffering has its good purpose.Stanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04523232247971115247noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30006406.post-39442274080888204212008-05-21T19:30:00.000-07:002008-05-21T19:30:00.000-07:00I think you are on target in saying that God is go...I think you are on target in saying that God is good, and that He defines the standard of what is good.<BR/><BR/>We can have our opinions and viewpoints, and they differ between ourselves. Two people do not necessarily agree on what is good, so it is natural that people will not agree with God on this issue. Yet God does teach men what is good, and we can learn, if we are willing to believe and trust what God tells us.<BR/><BR/>As I explain in my book, part of the lesson of faith is learning to believe not only that God exists, but believing what God says.<BR/><BR/>Many people do not understand why God allows suffering, but I believe God is using the tool of suffering to teach the human race painful lessons that will pay off in benefits for all eternity.author@ptgbook.orghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13775228362728122027noreply@blogger.com