…I think that understanding those things is contingent upon recognizing God’s sovereignty first and that human beings are not in a position to judge the actions taken by a supreme being that created all things.
If the Catholic god is real, I can accept his sovereignty. This does not mean I accept abuse of power. Abuse of power contradicts god’s perfection. I do not accept the sentence “human beings are not in a position to judge the actions taken by a supreme being that created all things”. We are not dumb, we can think and rationalize, and if something sets off the alarm of our low moral standards (in compared to god), then there is a serious problem. I would be doing god a disservice if I did not carefully examine a religion to ensure that it was the proper way to go by. Truncating a conversation with “you can not judge/understand god” is dismissing an important issue.
Besides, I kill animals not because I’m sovereign, nor is it because I have the power or ability, its because of biology. Your analogy doesn’t completely apply here, IMO
I am not convinced that either of you have “reconciled” human actions and dominion over animals which we all consider to be okay, with your views concerning God’s actions toward man. I will cut to the chase here. Any answer that does not directly reconcile the two points is not an answer. It seems to be more of a dodge or maybe just a nonsequiteur. Admittedly, from your position and point of view, it is difficult to answer without condemning yourself or conceding that God has every right to do what he does and is above being criticized for it in the same way that you are.
Show me a rational reason why a perfect god would
purposefully cause innocents, such as a child under the age of reason unnecessary suffering. What is the point?
I do not want this stage of our discussion to become an impasse. I would, however, like to see you concede the point. You are justified in doing what you do, and God is justified in doing what he does.
No, I have logical reasons for killing - self defense and food to satisfy biology. Biology shows that man was made to be an omnivore. Unless you are saying our biology is immoral, it is acceptable to eat meat… simply do it in the best way possible. God on the other hand has no readily visible logical reason for causing mass suffering when other options are available to him. A person is not justified for causing undue suffering, nor is god. Therefore, I do not concede your point.
Your personal views on Michael Vick and his punishments do not exonerate you from actions you take against other living creatures. Some people think that you and I are no better than Michael Vick because we are not vegetarians. They look at us as cruel and beastly. From a purely secular point of view these are nothing more than competing value judgments. In a purely secular sense, it is rather arbitrary to condemn Michael Vick while letting the rest of us slide for killing living creatures for food or any other reason.
It is true that explicit moral understanding is not shared by the world, i.e. just because there is someone out there that thinks pedophilia is fine does not make it so. And this may be a sticking point in the conversation for us, what is the true moral code, as yes, humans can and do err.
If you are deciding to bop around the definition of evil and sin, and say something like god can’t sin against himself therefore god could do anything and it would be right, I can’t agree. And would you honestly say that a logical vegetarian would equate quick killing for food as equal to Michael Vick’s torturing for pleasure? I gave valid reasons for killing animals for self defense or food to satisfy biology. I can not give valid reasons for causing animals pain simply for my pleasure.
In my next post I will begin to address your criticism of God’s actions in the OT. My answer will, I hope, be accepted with an open mind toward scripture and the explanations. My explanations will not be designed to convince you to believe in God. Instead, I hope that you will appreciate the validity of the explanations and perhaps see that the events described in the OT are not incompatible with the concept of a supreme being that is all good. You do not have to be a believer to accept the explanations. Please keep that in mind as I proceed.
I look forward to your explanation. I have been searching for years to reconcile this. The only explanation that I have ever been able to use to partially reconcile this issue is if the majority of the OT is to be considered as allegory.
Have a restful sleep
