Unaware, I don’t think so. We still don’t know the correct physical theory, so we cannot tell how physical things function. We don’t know how organic emerges from inorganic. We have no good understanding of spiritual reality… Our ignorance might be limitless. Whoever created the universe must be extremely intelligent, therefore. Good and Evil are two fundamental features of reality. God should know how love and hate feel, for example, otherwise, how could He create a reality in which love and hate exist? The capacity to experience Good and Evil means that God has a mixed nature.
Thanks for the writing. I, however, don’t think that God is that ignorant.
I already mentioned that I am not interested in discussing any proof for God as creator in this thread. I don’t have any complete proof for the existence of God yet. In this thread, I am only interested in discussing the nature of God when it comes to Good and Evil.
You are talking about a malevolent God who is responsible for evil in this thread.
Everything that God created was good. God’s good creation can sometime become bad. Mankind was created to be good, but their abuse of their desire for knowledge, power, and freedom led some to evil. God did not create evil.
Existence of God is part of nature of God. Without the proof of existence of God, it is not possible to know nature of God.
Because no one really knows which God you are talking about. You need clear agreement with everyone which God you are talking about. There are many different Gods people talk and think about.
Even in the OT, people have different interpretations and ideas on what God is, and which God it could be.
How God exists, in what form God exists, and if God exists at all, will dictate the nature of God.
I am talking about the reference to people who worship a Malevolent God that encourages lies, betrayals, rapes, tortures, etc.
Sure, but not only Omni-Malevolent because both Good and Evil exist in creation.
Yes, but I am not interested in discussing the first sin here. I think we can make an argument for a Malevolent and Benevolent God from the fact that Good and Evil exist in our world, so we don’t need the story of Adam and Eve.
I recommend that you read my other thread on the original sin. There, I argued that God is responsible for the original sin.
Yes, but I was clear that I am not interested in discussing the existence of God in this thread. I may open a new thread on the existence of God sometime soon. I am quite busy with many threads that I have right now.
Free will allows a free agent decides when there are options. A free agent can live in a Good universe and have options. The question is, why are there Evil options if we accept that God is Benevolent?
In a roundabout way it supports your argument. (God, suffering) constitutes a discordant dyad.
I’m also contemplating your conclusion that God is both malevolent and benevolent. If this is the nature of God then the world is the way it is.
I was told that God loves me. Yet the reality of the darkness, the coldness, the emptiness is so great that nothing touches my heart ~ A nun experiencing a crisis of faith
The Pope is an atheist ~ Some Comedian
Good doesn’t pay as well as evil. This is fallen world and we are fallen beings.
We fall short of our own moral standards ~ A youtuber
God is not a good hypothesis. A square peg in a round hole.
If Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless, so is your faith ~ Paul the Apostle
There is a child in Africa at this very moment with a worm in his eyes that’ll make him totally blind by the time he hits 8 ~ (Atheist) Naturalist
The vale of tears we inhabit is exactly what turns people off. Yet, there are stories of suffering fortifying faith.
Eli, Eli. lama sabachthani ~ Jesus, as he was dying on the cross
Many people view “existence” as a quality of the subject. Hence they are all the same topic.
That is, omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence(<-here where the existence of God could be discussed) are parts of the nature of God with the other qualities.
Although I would use more neutral terms, that is similar to how the hypothetical First Cause of our Cosmos is imagined in my BothAnd philosophy1. The creative power (energy + laws) behind the big-bang-beginning-to-space-time-evolution is neither Good nor Bad, but impartially programmed the Potential for both positive and negative values [for example : electrons & positrons ; matter & antimatter] that allow the exploration of a full range of possibilities in a physical cosmos, limited (circumscribed into a universe) by logical boundaries of Space and Time.
1.Both/And Principle : My coinage for the holistic principle of Complementarity, as illustrated in the Yin/Yang symbol. Opposing or contrasting concepts are always part of a greater whole. Conflicts between parts can be reconciled or harmonized by putting them into the context of a whole system (holism). https://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page10.html
There are two points here: 1) Why did God create the universe in which both Good and Evil are possible?, 2) God must have an apprehension of Good and Evil, otherwise It could not create the universe with such Good and Evil potentialities.
Are you talking about people who believe that God condones and encourages human sacrifice, like the Aztec? Or people who believe that God condones and encourages slavery like the Southern Confederacy?
Just because good and evil exist in our world does not mean that God created both. The Malevolent God that you are talking about is not “The One True God”.
This is my reply to you in my previous post.
God is perfectly good. God did not create evil. Evil is man-made.
So, firstly you assume that there is a creator, which is not something I assume. I think God is real as a psychological, mythological fact of human life. So, we tell stories about the God we have created in our own image in my view.
If God has a mixed nature then he is akin to the Manichean deity, and perhaps the God of the OT. He is not “omnibenevolent” as the NT (on certain interpretations and perhaps not on others) paints him.
I have not requested “any proof”; I only question your assumptions (1) of a “created universe” and (2) that “creator” implies any (theistic) attributes other than “omnipotence”.
