N
Neithan
Guest
If God allows evil so that a greater good may result, how is this not a form of “the end justifies the means,” a principle which the Church condemns?
- Status
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
that principle is very biblical. like when god ‘allegedly’ commanded the israelites into skewering the infants of their enemies (the Amalekites), thats a very strong policy of ‘The Ends Justifies the Means’.
B
buffalo
Guest
Once free will comes into the picture so does evil.
R
Rbt_Southwell
Guest
Neithen;
I’m not sure this is a Catholic priniciple concerning “Godhood” or Salvation.
There is NOTHING in Catholic history (including the bringing together of Scripture after the early ‘christianoi’ left their Jewish synagogues) where the old chestnut of “the end justifies the means” has been used to explain ANYTHING.
Please enlighten us here!
Robert
R
Rbt_Southwell
Guest
Gee, AgnosTheist, all that misinterpretation of what God wants, all that ‘after the fact’ reasoning, all that imperfect understanding of what Man should do, that finally gets cleared up by Jesus (“God is Love”) and you still confuse the messengers with the Message.
Get a little, well, uh, c-a-t-h-o-l-ic, in your view of things.
Robert
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
That Amalekite thingie is a tried and tested argument. Believe me I know everything about it. Look it up yourself. See from the bible why they had to die. The crystal clear reasoning given there was allegedly from God himself. The only way around this is to deny that the whole event literally happened.
J
Joyousguard
Guest
God does not allow evil but rather tolerates evil. This is important in itself before another step is taken. Allowing evil and tolerating evil are not the same thing. Allowing evil means in some manner or another you give your permission for that evil to exist or continue. Tolerating evil in this case is very different. God tolerates evil as a result of our freedom of choice. We have the ability to choose that which is wrong and thus create evil as a result. God tolerates this because to do otherwise would be to impede our freedom of choice.
In order for an action to be considered right or just 3 criteria must be met. The intent of the person must be for the good. The means that person goes about trying to accomplish the intent must be good. Lastly the end itself must be right.
I could blow up a building. The end result is that I blew up and abandon building and now a park can be built. This is a just ends. However, my intent was to blow up the building to collect the insurance money and the way I went about blowing it up was to use stolen explosives. My intent was to defraud the insurance company. The “means” I went about doing this was to use stolen explosives to blow up the building. The end result is me going to jail and the blown up building becoming a park. My intent and means were wrong but the ends turned out alright.
B
buffalo
Guest
Well done!
R
Rbt_Southwell
Guest
AgnosTheist;
I find it fascinating that throughout Hebrew and Jewish scriptures there is this thread that doesn’t change about God, the God of the New Testament.
I find it fascinating that prophets and judges and kings and commentators point to what has occurred and either put it into God’s mouth or claim it is because of God’s wrath that this has happened.
It may be not so much that El the Wrathful One has evolved into the merciful God of the NT, but that throughout biblical history, Man’s encounter with the Ineffable has matured and evolved.
A nutshell example would be Jesus teaching that there are only 2 commandants: Love God with your whole heart, whole mind and whole body, and, Love your neighbor as yourself; when in fact He is telescoping the first 3 Commandants into one and the second 7into another.
Protestants (and others) misunderstand Scripture. Most think it is a how to book to be ‘saved’ or to become a ‘Christian.’
It (the Bible) is a result of our liturgy in the Church. And our liturgy is from our Jewish and Hebrew traditions.
That is why there are so many references to the Law and what is appropriate for the New Covenant. That is why there is Emmaus and other references to the ‘Scriptures being opened and explained.’
Too many Christians, IMHO, flop around like fish on a deck trying to figure out “What the Bible means” when the concern should be (as it is in our Church) with following Jesus and seeking to become perfect by becoming merciful.
Don’t get bogged down in bad exegesis, or you’ll end up using the Bible to justify all sorts of bad and evil things (like many do today: handling serpents, using the Bible like a ouija board, controlling women in society,etc.)
Heck, we got enough of that from the Koran and other quasi-Judeo-Christian sects.
Robert
I find it fascinating that throughout Hebrew and Jewish scriptures there is this thread that doesn’t change about God, the God of the New Testament.
I find it fascinating that prophets and judges and kings and commentators point to what has occurred and either put it into God’s mouth or claim it is because of God’s wrath that this has happened.
It may be not so much that El the Wrathful One has evolved into the merciful God of the NT, but that throughout biblical history, Man’s encounter with the Ineffable has matured and evolved.
A nutshell example would be Jesus teaching that there are only 2 commandants: Love God with your whole heart, whole mind and whole body, and, Love your neighbor as yourself; when in fact He is telescoping the first 3 Commandants into one and the second 7into another.
Protestants (and others) misunderstand Scripture. Most think it is a how to book to be ‘saved’ or to become a ‘Christian.’
It (the Bible) is a result of our liturgy in the Church. And our liturgy is from our Jewish and Hebrew traditions.
That is why there are so many references to the Law and what is appropriate for the New Covenant. That is why there is Emmaus and other references to the ‘Scriptures being opened and explained.’
Too many Christians, IMHO, flop around like fish on a deck trying to figure out “What the Bible means” when the concern should be (as it is in our Church) with following Jesus and seeking to become perfect by becoming merciful.
Don’t get bogged down in bad exegesis, or you’ll end up using the Bible to justify all sorts of bad and evil things (like many do today: handling serpents, using the Bible like a ouija board, controlling women in society,etc.)
Heck, we got enough of that from the Koran and other quasi-Judeo-Christian sects.
Robert
J
Joyousguard
Guest
Could you please elaborate on this a bit? I want to be quite clear as to what your saying before I respond.
A
AgnosTheist
Guest
Around 1200 B.C. the Hebrews escaped from Egypt. During their exodus an arab tribe -the Amalekites raided them. Some 200 years later when the Israelites finally had their first king the prophet samuel gave him this mission:
1 Samuel 15:2-3
*"Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'I will punish Amalek for what he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way while he was coming up from Egypt. ‘Now go and strike Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has, and do not spare him; but **put to death **both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey.’ " *
R
Rbt_Southwell
Guest
N
Neithan
Guest
So we can say that God does not justify the end with the means because he never directly wills the evil means himself, but tolerates it as a byproduct of a good end (free-will)?
How about the evils of a determinate natural world causing suffering on free-willed self-conscious beings? So-called ‘natural evil’? Certainly this can’t be traced back to a poor use of free-will.
In fact, one might go so far as to say that the very act of creation requires an evil means toward a good end, since metaphysical evil is inherent in everything which is not-God. Thus, in creating anything, God necessarily causes evil!
H
Hellisreal
Guest
J
Joyousguard
Guest
I understand the historical incident but am not very clear on what analysis you you are trying to make from it
H
Hellisreal
Guest
God allowed the killing of those, just as he did elsewhere in the OT in horrific ways.
What is the confusion?
M
Mattcos
Guest
Gentlemen and Ladies,
I am an amateur when it comes to these sort of questions. However, I believe that Jesus came and told us that he is the new covenant. Therefore, Skewering children from the old testament is unacceptable in Jesus’ eyes.
As far as good coming from evil, yes there is some truth to that Chile is a prime example. However, I believe that Evil is an Ego driven desire, AKA for Power, Wealth, or Fame. That being said, we always have a choice. I have found in my personal life that the more difficult the choice is the more correct it is.
If any of you are A Course In Miracles fans you might find the following Excerpt interesting. “The Holy Spirit will direct you only so as to avoid pain. Surely no one would object to this goal if he recognized it. The problem is not whether what the Holy Spirit says is true, but weather you want to listen to what he says. You no more recognize what is painful than you know what is joyful, and are, in fact, very apt to confuse the two”
I believe that when the decision is made to hurt someone, it is because there is confusion between what is joyful, and what is painful.
I am very interested in your thoughts.
Matt Cos
I am an amateur when it comes to these sort of questions. However, I believe that Jesus came and told us that he is the new covenant. Therefore, Skewering children from the old testament is unacceptable in Jesus’ eyes.
As far as good coming from evil, yes there is some truth to that Chile is a prime example. However, I believe that Evil is an Ego driven desire, AKA for Power, Wealth, or Fame. That being said, we always have a choice. I have found in my personal life that the more difficult the choice is the more correct it is.
If any of you are A Course In Miracles fans you might find the following Excerpt interesting. “The Holy Spirit will direct you only so as to avoid pain. Surely no one would object to this goal if he recognized it. The problem is not whether what the Holy Spirit says is true, but weather you want to listen to what he says. You no more recognize what is painful than you know what is joyful, and are, in fact, very apt to confuse the two”
I believe that when the decision is made to hurt someone, it is because there is confusion between what is joyful, and what is painful.
I am very interested in your thoughts.
Matt Cos
R
ribozyme
Guest
I guess anything is allowed if it advances “the glory of god” even if it involves immense suffering.
J
Joyousguard
Guest
While living in the Garden of Eden, mankind enjoyed no death, suffering or hardships. Life was essentially perfect. The grace from God that mankind was born with ensured this. When mankind chose to disobey and reject God they lost this supernatural garce which granted them so many perks as it could be called. Living without fear of being killed or harmed is pretty nice. As a result of disobeying they were cast out of the garden and forced to live in a more harsh world.
The natural evil that befalls us is a consequence of being thrown out of paradise. We rejected God and thus we lost our place to stay. Natural evil befalls us as a result of our own choice to reject God, its just one part of the continual effects of that decision.
If you throw a brick off the empire state building, you must be prepared to accept all consequences that result from that action. Adam and Eve chose to throw the brick and thus accept all the consequences there after. Natural evil could not affect humanity when they were in the garden. Only when they broke God’s law did it begin to affect them . Natural evil is a result of human freedom of choice as well.
- Status