The Riddle of Epicurus

[Jedikiller]

Ok first things first. Hahaha this may sound stupid but I am new to this site. How do you quote only part of a message, and how do you quote it half-way through your own message?

And you are right, if I saw a baby crawling in the road I would stop it, but at the same time if I watched my 12-year-old son go out with kids i KNEW weren't good for him I would express my dissaproval but let him make his own choices and screw up where he will.

If God were to exercise his omnipotency and STOP us from doing sin he would take away the greatest gift of all, which is free will. He can if he feels so inclined, but then he would be following Lucifer's plan, not Christs.

[Electron]

But what about natural disasters? How come nobody suggests that Tsunami inducing earthquakes are the work of the devil, but hold on - they're either the work of god or god has chosen to look the other way while his creation gets on with it.

None of this will ever make any sense without revealing something unpleasant about the character of god. This is what baffles me most, the faithful seem to have no problem cherry-picking the parts of the fantasy that suit them, and ignoring the unpleasantness - hence the fantasy persists. This is the sort of non-linear approach that gets mankind into most trouble most often.

If the faithful are truly following thier hearts I would expect them to exhibit a large array of neurosis because of this. It just doesn't seem healthy.

[Areopagite]

I would suggest that those on this thread read the Book of Job for a better understanding of why God allows certain things to happen.

[Electron]

Areopagite said:

I would suggest that those on this thread read the Book of Job for a better understanding of why God allows certain things to happen.

OK, I'll do you a deal - I'll read the book of job if you'll read Wonderful life by Stephen Jay Gould

[Satori]

Jedikiller said:

And you are right, if I saw a baby crawling in the road I would stop it, but at the same time if I watched my 12-year-old son go out with kids i KNEW weren't good for him I would express my dissaproval but let him make his own choices and screw up where he will.

Possibly but the comparison we're making is closer to an adult and a baby, rather than an adult and a 12 year old. In fact, even contrasting an adult and a baby doesn't come close to describing the difference between an omnipotent being and a human.

God - if such a thing exists and is omnipotent - is not 'all loving' and is irresponsible.

But that's just my take on it; a take that has no Christian bias of course.

[Areopagite]

I'm intrigued by your deal, Electron. What will Wonderful Life contribute to this particular discussion on human suffering and the problem of evil, though? I suggested the Book of Job because of it is relevant to this discussion.

[Electron]

Areopagite said:

I'm intrigued by your deal, Electron. What will Wonderful Life contribute to this particular discussion on human suffering and the problem of evil, though? I suggested the Book of Job because of it is relevant to this discussion.

The fact that you ask this question could be a sign that you do not consider yourself to be at the growing end of a single twig emerging from an ever branching bush representing every form of life that ever existed on this Earth.

Wonderful life discusse this bush by taking the very first wave of creatures to occupy this planet as the base. Anyone contemplating what such initial designs (if you like) might be like ought to at least be intrigued by the phenomenal diversity of the various forms on show.

For this not to have relevance to our discussion here, you would have to deny that you are constructed from the very same stuff of all other life, that you do not have a blueprint within you that identifies your ancestry - and if you do deny this I hope you're never have to face a DNA test to prove your innocence for whatever reason!

[Areopagite]

OK it has relevance, but only in the most indirect manner. Job directly confronts the issue of suffering, whereas Wonderful Life does not. What I'm getting at is that if we are to have a deal like this, the books need to directly confront the issue at hand. Thus, the books being read should be the direct answer to a question from two different views. So my suggestion to read the Book of Job stands, and it would make sense for me to read an atheistic or agnostic book confronting the issue of human suffering. I'd be interested in reading Wonderful Life, but if we decided to strike a deal over the issue of evolution, genetics, etc., then I would suggest a different book than the Book of Job.

[MrEusOne]

I know the story of Job, but I've got some problems with it. First of all, is there original sin? I thought that Adam and Eve sinned by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and that sin is passed down to all humans. But the bible (not just the bible, but the Lord) states that Job was perfect ( Job 1:8 ).

Not to mention the fact that this is just a bet between God and Satan. Seems a pretty cruel bet to destroy a man's life. God, whom is supposedly omnipotent, should have known how Job would respond to the torture that he was about to go through. So why let the Devil torture him. Just to prove a point to Satan?

And wouldn't Job have been justified to be mad at God, who gave Satan the power to torture him in the first place ( Job 1:12 )?

Also, why doesn't God know where Satan's been or what he's been up to. He asks him at least twice in the book of Job exactly that question ( Job 1:7 and Job 2:2 ). Is God omnipotent or isn't he?

[Jedikiller]

MrEusOne said:

I know the story of Job, but I've got some problems with it. First of all, is there original sin? I thought that Adam and Eve sinned by eating of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and that sin is passed down to all humans. But the bible (not just the bible, but the Lord) states that Job was perfect ( Job 1:8 ).

Not to mention the fact that this is just a bet between God and Satan. Seems a pretty cruel bet to destroy a man's life. God, whom is supposedly omnipotent, should have known how Job would respond to the torture that he was about to go through. So why let the Devil torture him. Just to prove a point to Satan?

And wouldn't Job have been justified to be mad at God, who gave Satan the power to torture him in the first place ( Job 1:12 )?

Also, why doesn't God know where Satan's been or what he's been up to. He asks him at least twice in the book of Job exactly that question ( Job 1:7 and Job 2:2 ). Is God omnipotent or isn't he?

I believe there is no original sin. Think of it this way. God gave Adam and Eve two commandments. One was not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. The other was to populate the earth. They could not do both. So it was not a "sin" that they ate of the fruit, because the only way for them to have kids was if they had knowledge of right and wrong, pain and pleasure.

Job was as perfect as a man could be. Noah was also called perfect, as were others. The City of Enoch was a perfect city. But the only truthfully perfect being was Christ. Job was just described as perfect. He had sins just like the rest of us, only he had MUCH less.

God was not "betting" he was proving a point. Job knew that his sacrifice was for a better cause. And he will be/already has been paid back in full whatever struggles he went through in his mortal life. His story is now inspiration for the rest of us. Whenever we have it bad, we read Job's story and it guides us and helps to keep us on the path towards God.

The whole basis of the story is that yes, Job would have been as justified as almost anyone to be mad at God, yet he wasn't, so how can you be mad at God for the things in your life which aren't so great. If any of you think you're life is as bad as Job's, go read it again.

And, about God asking Satan where he was, it's like a parent asking their child where they went last night, who they were with, and what they were doing. The parent (at least mine) already knows the answers to all of those questions, but they ask anyways so they can let the child confess all by their self.

God IS omnipotent.

I know I keep asking this but I don't get an answer. How do you quote part of messages halfway through your own message? If no one will tell me, is there at least a newbie guide somewhere on the site that will? Could I at least be directed there?

[MrEusOne]

Jedikiller, to quote a passage halfway through a message, just use square brackets [] and put the word quote inside the first set of square brackets, then copy/paste what you are quoting and then put /quote in square brackets after the end of the quote.

[Jedikiller]

Hahaha thank you

[MrEusOne]

Jedikiller said:

I believe there is no original sin. Think of it this way. God gave Adam and Eve two commandments. One was not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge. The other was to populate the earth. They could not do both. So it was not a "sin" that they ate of the fruit, because the only way for them to have kids was if they had knowledge of right and wrong, pain and pleasure.

So why not simply create them with that knowledge in the first place? I know that God works in mysterious ways, but that just seems inefficient, not mysterious.

God was not "betting" he was proving a point.

Proving the point for whom? Satan? That seems like a waste of time, really. I think it's safe to assume that God wasn't trying to convert Satan. Isn't he pretty much a lost cause, or is there a chance of reconcilliation between Satan and God? It appears that Satan just wanted to mess with someone and goaded God into letting him screw around with Job.

His story is now inspiration for the rest of us. Whenever we have it bad, we read Job's story and it guides us and helps to keep us on the path towards God.

Seems like this could have been accomplished just as well by telling a parable instead of killing a man's children and inflicting physical pain and torment on him.

And, about God asking Satan where he was, it's like a parent asking their child where they went last night, who they were with, and what they were doing. The parent (at least mine) already knows the answers to all of those questions, but they ask anyways so they can let the child confess all by their self.

I can see your point on this one. God's making conversation with Satan here and already knows what he's been up to. But the wording of Job 1:12 "So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD." does make it sound as if he is literally leaving the sight of God, and that God doesn't know what he is doing while he is away.

I know I'm being very picky about semantics, but I'm just looking at the bible as some believe it to be, which is the inerrant word of God in which everything is to be taken literally. That's the belief that I was raised in and which alot of my family still believe.

[Electron]

Well first I must say that I am very pleased to be in the company of those who take the Old Testament seriously. After all, it is far more contemporaneous with the events depicted than later editions. From the perspective of one who looks for quality in the accounts of important events, I find it offers a far greater insight into the thoughts and experiences of those that first put pen to paper to record our common heritage.

Areopagite said:

OK it has relevance, but only in the most indirect manner. Job directly confronts the issue of suffering, whereas Wonderful Life does not. What I'm getting at is that if we are to have a deal like this, the books need to directly confront the issue at hand. Thus, the books being read should be the direct answer to a question from two different views. So my suggestion to read the Book of Job stands, and it would make sense for me to read an atheistic or agnostic book confronting the issue of human suffering. I'd be interested in reading Wonderful Life, but if we decided to strike a deal over the issue of evolution, genetics, etc., then I would suggest a different book than the Book of Job.

As you know, relatively little is said about the peculiarities of human suffering in scientific books, probably due to the fact that evolution provides a higher account consisting of a rational explanation to the comings and goings of life, leaving the suffering part to be inferred as the loss of each individual organisms fight for survival.

This is why I suggest "wonderful life" - Gould chose the title very carefully and constucts his account in order to develop an interesting perspective of mans position in the tree of life.

I also encourage those convinced that all animal life was deisgned and placed on our planet by god to look into this book - not becasue I think it would persuade you from your faith (as if!) but because you would be able to marvel at his imagination - Yes you can argue that the fossils were placed there deliberately, but by the way he arranged them god must have at least wanted us to think they were the first creatures to take to the seas. As such, the unusual forms and massive diversity of design should be a delight to everyone who has an interest in nature.

[Jedikiller]

So why not simply create them with that knowledge in the first place? I know that God works in mysterious ways, but that just seems inefficient, not mysterious.

God did that so that the Earth could finish forming itself on its own. And, if you read my post on the Dinosaur thread, I talked about how the rest of the world was doing things naturally while Adam and Eve lived it out in the garden.

Another opinion is that maybe they had to learn all they could from God himself so that they could teach their children with a perfect (or almost perfect) knowledge, then they could teach their children & such. That way the gospel could have stayed on the earth as long as it did.

Seems like this could have been accomplished just as well by telling a parable instead of killing a man's children and inflicting physical pain and torment on him.

First of all, parables just don't have as much significance. Instead of saying "I read a story about it once, but it wasn't true" you can say "I KNOW I can get through it cause someone worse off than me did if before!"

Also, you are thinking of death as a terrible and horrible thing. I admit it is sad when someone you love passes away, but this life is really only the second act of a three act play. We don't remember the first act, and in the second we have no idea about what's going to happen in the third. All of Job's family was rewarded in heaven, as will Job himself.

I can see your point on this one. God's making conversation with Satan here and already knows what he's been up to. But the wording of Job 1:12 "So Satan went forth from the presence of the LORD." does make it sound as if he is literally leaving the sight of God, and that God doesn't know what he is doing while he is away.

Hey THANK YOU for actually saying you can see my point and not just flaming me. Hahahaha but back to the topic..................You are right in those couple of verses God does seem pretty cocky about Job, but I think that is as much translation error as actual scripture. But Satan DID come to visit God and DID leave the presence of God as well but I believe God saw everything that was going on.

The only reason he allowed Job to be tested as far as he was is because the Lord KNEW that Job could handle it. The Lord knows everything he could see into the future and knew that Job would not desert him, whereas Satan had no idea about the future and was playing it by ear. Maybe that right there proves God's power compared to satans.