The Evangelical Universalist Forum

The Commands Of The Monster God Of The Old Testament

Bob said…I perceive that much of the Bible assumes this happens in various ways. E.g. I think the notion that God disciplines and chastens those he loves, and that we will all appear for judgment as well as the warning that we’ll reap what we sow assumes that we can face punishing consequences for doing evil things.

My contention is that you’ve been taught this… Your professors or who ever have taught you this is what the scripture says… And you believe it, and rightly so.

My understanding is that you are right within the context of the history of the scripture you quote. If you want it to mean that the verbiage is relevant to today, we’ll go to war. I will disagree with you.

Hope you will have a good new year brother.

Love you Chad.

Well…first of all, God doesn’t ALLOW evil (in the sense of giving his permission for it to occur). It’s just that he usually does nothing to prevent it.

I disbelieve that God bears ANY responsibility for the evil acts that people do. It’s true that He COULD prevent the murder, torture, and rape of little girls. But at what cost? The cost would be the removal of the free will of mankind.

If God prevented intervened in some of the acts of people, and not in others, there would be an inconsistency in nature. For example, suppose one of God’s choice saints unwittingly was about to fall over the edge of a cliff, and God arranged it so that he would float down like a feather instead of falling down and getting killed by the impact. Then we would never know when ordinary gravitational pull would operate, and when it wouldn’t.

Well, most bible believing Christians would turn to stories like Shadrach Meshach and Abednego, as places where God delivers. Same as the Egypt story of Moses and the Israelites. And we can’t forget Daniel in the lions den. Gideon is another good example, Abraham was delivered from having to sacrifice Isaac. And a host of other deliverances of Israel by YHWY,

It’s not that I disagree with you it’s that you don’t have a leg to stand on. At some point, God himself does denote that He is the author of calamity, so I’ll leave it at that.


That right there IMO is the nub of the issue… where EVIL is portrayed either as SIN or CALAMITY; depending on the given context BOTH can be correct. God does not sin but He can bring calamity — humans can do both.

Chad, No one misses that you oppose anyone finding Scripture relevant in our theological discussions. It’s easy to hear your regular refrain as, leave any external data aside, and just open your mind to my ideas. I like many of your instincts, but if it’s illicit to wrestle with Scripture citations, there is less common ground for us to sort out together. I appreciate you and hope that you have a good new year also.

Yes, that’s true, and sometimes even the word evil is used in place of the word calamity. For example, consider Isaiah 45:7, “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.”

But then there is this example, which seems to counter the above version of the Isaiah verse. What’s a person to think?

1 John 2:15-16: “Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, love for the Father is not in them. For everything in the world–the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life–comes not from the Father but from the world.”

1 Like

[quote=“Origen, post:163, topic:13832, full:true”]

“God bears responsibility for sinful acts (as if He had committed the acts themselves) since He… chose to allow the sinful acts to be committed, thereby making Himself complicit in the act.”

“My position is that God does not sin in watching the killer kill (e.g. Israel slaughtering its ungodly enemies).” [/quote]

Origin, I fear we speak past each other. I already realized that you do not see God as sinning in the O.T. slaughters, such as the genocide of innocent children at issue, but see such deeds as righteous. But I never presented my rationale for questioning that here. My query to you followed your first statement above about what you called sinful acts,” which you followed with the assertion that God is “no less sinful” than those who committed the sinful act.

Specific examples cited were rape and abortion. So to refocus my query: Do you consider those who do such acts like the abortionist to be sinful, and committing sinful acts? Or in saying that God bears responsibility for allowing such ‘sins,’ and yet remains non-sinful, andno more sinful” than the perpetrator, are you implying that those committing such deeds are not sinful? Or if you take the traditional stance that doing such deeds does make one sinful, how can you in such evil deeds equate the sinfulness of God and those who commit the deeds?

Those are rare instances of God’s intervention. I have never denied such. That’s why I said He USUALLY He does nothing to prevent evil. I agree that occasionally He does—but such occasions are rare.

I suggest that it is not wise to unquestioningly accept the Hebrew Masoretic text and the translations made from it. The Masoretic text was not completed until the tenth century. Jesus and all the NT writers quoted either from from the Greek Septuagint translation, or from the more ancient Hebrew such as has been found in Cave 4 of the Dead Sea Scrolls. I suspect that it was the former, since Greek was widely spoken in the first century, and the NT writers wrote in the language.

The Greek word (in its lexicographical form) is “κακος.” This word sometimes means “bad” or “troublesome” but never “calamity.” All of God’s judgments are remedial. He may create that which is troublesome to people, not to punish them, but in expectation that they will learn from it.

The translators of the Orthodox Study Bible translates the Old Testament from the Greek Septuagint.
Isaiah 45:7 reads as follows:

I am He who prepared light and made darkness, who makes peace and creates troublesome things.

1 Like

Jeez Bob, I kind of thought I was wrestling. And I see I am getting under your skin. :roll_eyes: And I do find scripture relevant, though just in a different way.:wink:

And I like the banter!

Peace Brother.

It is interesting that as I go through the various postings on this forum, that Bob you really think that God ‘WILL’ through his love ‘Redeem’ all of humanity. Somehow in the disconnect, you fail to realize that I believe he has ‘ALREADY’ done this. Our difference is very small.

It’s always obvious that you believe all humanity is already redeemed. What made you think I don’t realize that?

[quote=“maintenanceman, post:182, topic:13832, full:true”]

Bob quoting Chad. We need a video, to emphasize this sentiment! :wink:

Hey, Hey, Too shay.

Since you already know how I’m going to react, why respond in case?

You already know, and I already know, so we do these things for what reason?

My position is (well must be by your admission totally clear,) somewhat known. Yet you respond not by telling me ‘where’ I am wrong but by simply saying I am saying the same thing over and over. And I will continue. (that is the go to war part) :grinning:

So we can be reconciled to the understanding that we see things differently.

O K by me. What say you?

My view is that rape and abortion are sinful. Those humans who commit such acts are sinning, If God committed those acts He would not be sinning. God is equally responsible for such acts since He could have easily stopped them at no risk to Himself or others. While a human would be sinning if he could have stopped such acts at no risk to himself or others, God does not sin in deciding not to stop such sinful acts since He is acting for the greater good & will make it right by working all such things for good. Humans are incapable of doing that.

Have I ever doubted that? I am fine with being different. It keeps life interesting :slight_smile:

Thanks, I agree completely (and think that’s the Bible’s basic outlook). As I repeated, it seemed we affirm the same points, except for semantics. Again I only didn’t see how your clear paragraph above was consistent with your apparent language that equated the sinfulness of God and the one who does sinful acts (they each being “no more and no less sinful”). I would put it as you affirm above that perpetrators of sins are considered quite sinful, but God is not seen as sinful at all for allowing it.

Thanks Bob, you are a Gentleman.

So what’s the “greater good” in God “allowing” rape and abortion? Whatever you think it is, does God not have the power to bring about that greater good without “allowing” pre-born children,to be killed or “allowing” women as well as little girls to be raped?