Why is God so mean?

[One]

My knowledge comes from direct experience. If you would like a link to where I have spoken of this experience, here it is -

Thanks. I read that. It reads like a real peak experience.

It would be near impossible to live day-to-day like that (burning), but once you see, there’s no forgetting, is there?

It is in my bones the understanding that only God HAS TO EXIST and God did not need to create anything. God could have continued in BEING for all eternity without ever creating anything.

Since you were kind enough to answer my questions, I’ll respond in kind:

This seems to be in line with my own experience/beliefs, such as they are today.

God is completely and totally OTHER than me. I need not exist.

I’d agree with that as well, although our specific way of framing it would likely differ.

God is willing my existence and yours moment by moment by his sheer will and thought. If God should cease to think of creation, it would cease to exist.

Again, I wouldn’t disagree.

When I enter deep, dreamless sleep each night, everything ceases to exist. There are no objects, no thoughts, no people, no pain, no joy. Pretty easy to grok that.

Why? Now you are asking something that really baffles me.

And again I’d agree (not that it matters that I do.)

Why? Guess that’s why they call it The Mystery.

 

[LSK]

So you don’t think that their is unnecessary poverty, sickness, pain and suffering?

Love and prayers,

Well, to my finite mind it may seem unnecessary…but I do know, from personal experience, that God permits evil because from all evil comes great good. I may not always see it or experience it myself, but I do know that God is not mean. We are, but not God. God is Love.

 

[jkiernan56]

JK - you wrote, in part: “God is completely and totally OTHER than me” - and, of course, you are completely correct in this, as you are in the other points you made. (you are a person of deep faith.)

And yet…I know you’ll agree that there’s another aspect, even more wonderful and mind-boggling, that is at the heart of our hearts!!

This most high God…truly, as you say, so ‘other’ from us - in kind and in nature - that it makes the gulf / chasm that exists between the highest archangel and the lowly earthworm seem like just a hair’s breadth – this God, so burns with love and so desires our love in return that His most amazing and awesome feat barely has words to adequately express it…

“Other” though He may be, He desires our love and presence so much, He loves us so much, so incomprehensibly, that He ‘bridged the chasm’ that should have been (and is, actually) infinite! Yes, He was / is OTHER…but He became one of us (in all but sin), taking on our nature and being incarnate in the human body, form and nature.

This would have been the ‘move of ages’, and enough to keep us busy with our minds blown forever, don’t you think? But, then He bears our sins; He heals us by HIS stripes; He suffers the weight of our transgressions as His example of what He really MEANS by Love!!

I know you know all this, so I’ll stop now…but I sure don’t know ‘how’ we come to understand something like that! Your faith, I believe, is a fruit of these actions of His…and gives a little light, anyway, into the ‘why’ of things…

God bless you…thank you for your faith and your expression of it. I will remember you in my prayers; please do the same for me. Thanks !!

Thank you for your kind words. You and I are on the same page. Our God who is so completely OTHER wants to have a Personal relationship with each of us - and is intensely in Love with each of us. God (the 2nd Person of the Trinity) joined Himself to a Human Nature and is now visible in a Human Being - Christ. We no longer have to wonder what God looks like by inferring it from what He created - the stars, mountain tops, beautiful meadows with flowers, running streams of water. We now can see God in a Human Person - Christ. God so wants to have a relationship with each of us - that He became a Human Being. This God who is so OTHER is now one of us. “The WORD became Flesh”. Christ invites us to have the same relationship with His Father as adopted sons and daughters. His Father is now Our Father. And that kind of relationship is so opposite the OTHER aspect of God mentioned earlier. Our God who is so OTHER is also so very close and Personal.

 

[jkiernan56]

Thanks. I read that. It reads like a real peak experience.

It would be near impossible to live day-to-day like that (burning), but once you see, there’s no forgetting, is there?

Since you were kind enough to answer my questions, I’ll respond in kind:

This seems to be in line with my own experience/beliefs, such as they are today.

One - if you wouldn’t mind, I’d really like to hear more about your story and experience(s). What have you learned and what is the foundation of your belief? Thank you.

 

[jkiernan56]

Alacoque - thank you for your prayer. I have no illusion about thinking that spiritual experience is any indication of personal holiness. Personal experience is no indication whatsoever as I’m sure you know. “If I have not love, I am NOTHING at all”. Lets pray for each other to grow in Christ’s Love - and bite our tongue when we want to snap at an annoying driver or co-worker … lol

 

[tonyrey]

Right, but it can be set up with regular constraints preventing natural evils.

You need to justify that statement with a specific example.

We cannot even begin to understand quite how powerful omnipotence truly is.

Do think omnipotence entails the power to create a being more powerful than oneself?

You seem to think that omnipotence is extremely limited.

Does omnipotence entail the ability to do something that entails a contradiction like ensuring that coincidences never occur in a physical world?

 

[PJM]

Originally Posted by jkiernan56
In my world, reality starts with acknowledging God exists.

The responce

And in turn (and especially being new here), I’m curious as to what that means to you, j.

You’ve acknowledged that it’s your belief. Is it your experience, as well, or just a belief? Is God separate and distinct from “you?” Is God a part of you? Is God you? Are you “God?”

I only ask because when we “acknowledge that God exists,” I would tend to think that we have something to base that on, and I’m curious as to what that is for you.

With respect,

*** I agree with the validity and logic of the opening remark.***

**What this means to the WORLD is that there are absolute rights and wrongs.

For example Aborition is always worng when it has as its goal the killing of the baby!

Charity from the heart is always right!

It us because there is a GOD, that humanity is able to discern [usually; depending on how informed ones conscience is] what is the moral right and what is the moral wrong.

Evidence that this God is “all and only all good perfectly” lies in the fact that God permits humanity, which I will demonistrate shortly, are possessed with a mind, a intellect and a freewill, to use these attributes freely and unemcumbered, is evidence of a “perfect good.”
"A perfect good can only come from that which I [we] choose to call “Our God.”

Their are billions of human beings on planet earth, each with their own mind, intellect, and freewill. Yet no two are identical!

Proof of what we choose to call “Our God” others may have other names, titles, identification for?

Something can only be what it is
Something cannot be what it is not
Something can only give of what it [the something] has
Something cannot give what the something does not posess

So all of humanity have a mind [not brain; mind], intellect and freewill. [Lesser or geater.] Science can prove that we have these attributes, yet they cannot be seen, we cannot smell them, nor can we touch them, or photograph them.

So we conclude using our minds and intellects that they must be “SPIRITUAL THINGS.”

What is there origin? Can’t be from our bodies which are “MATTER” [not spiritual.]

Scientiest tell us that there are millions of galaxies, abd billions of stars, all the size of planet earth. Where did they come from? And where did [the first cause] the stuff that "went bang? come from? And what keeps them in existence?

If we are honest with ourselves, nothing short of a “Super Being,” and "unknown enity of enormous power and intellect could be responsible. We choose to call it “Our God.”**

I hope this leads to further discussion.

Love and prayers,
Pat

 

[anEvilAtheist]

You need to justify that statement with a specific example.

God could have made water behave identically to water in our universe, except without it ever rising up to cause hurricanes, floods, or tsunamis. God can make water behave however he likes, just look at the passage of the Red Sea. He is clearly not limited in the number of times he can do things like this. So he could constantly be performing miracles behind the scenes to prevent these three types of natural disasters. But if God is omnipotent, he could make this the natural state, so he would not have to constantly intervene. But in actuality, it doesn’t really matter, since there would be no substantive difference between a perpetual miracle and making it behave that way naturally. Since God has one eternal will, and is omnipotent and so can do everything with no effort, these two would not be appreciably different, from either God’s perspective or our perspective.

Do think omnipotence entails the power to create a being more powerful than oneself?

No, because that’s a logical contradiction.

Does omnipotence entail the ability to do something that entails a contradiction like ensuring that coincidences never occur in a physical world?

What do you mean by coincidences and how would eliminating them be a contradiction?

 

[Detales]

OK, PJM, let’s star with basics: How do you know you have a mind that thinks about God or anything else?

 

[Charlemagne_II]

If God is so mean, why did He send the Son down to die for our sins? If God is so mean, why does the Son undergo for our sake so many horrors far and away more terrible than any we could suffer? If God is so mean, why doesn’t he strike anyone dead for calling Him “so mean”?

I have never heard such ridiculous whining in my whole life.

 

[Oreoracle]

If God is so mean, why did He send the Son down to die for our sins?

If you sent your son to die for others’ wrongdoings (wrongdoings, I might add, that you could just as easily overlook) I would consider you mean.

Besides, who deemed it necessary for sins to be counterbalanced by this act? Who deemed it necessary for suffering to be inflicted so that past evils can be overlooked? That was God wasn’t it? Yeah, I’m pretty sure that was God.

I have never heard such ridiculous whining in my whole life.

I’ve never heard such brazen apathy in my life.

 

[Detales]

Charlie,

The story of God sending his Son to Earth for most of history has born an entirly different significance than the christianist one.

How does it make sense to you that God sacrificed Himself to Himself? Is the suffering of the Son really what you think it is? There is a perfectly logical and acceptable explanation for this, but it is emphatically not the christianist explanation.

God as God, short of an anthropomorphic concoction, could not be invlolved personally in the dynamic you describe as “being called” and “striking dead.”

Have you read Maurice Nicol’s interpretation of the miracle of water inot wine?

 

[tonyrey]

God could have made water behave identically to water in our universe, except without it ever rising up to cause hurricanes, floods, or tsunamis. God can make water behave however he likes, just look at the passage of the Red Sea. He is clearly not limited in the number of times he can do things like this. So he could constantly be performing miracles behind the scenes to prevent these three types of natural disasters.

It sounds simple in theory but physical reality is unimaginably complex. Such interventions would probably lead to earthquakes, avalanches and other causes of disasters. Not only that. The total number of miracles required to prevent every other type of disaster would be so colossal that the world would become chaotic. To specify one change is quite different from co-ordinating a biosphere to provide the necessary conditions for the origin and development of living organisms. Only a complete blueprint would demonstrate its theoretical feasibility. You underestimate the number of factors involved in designing an entire universe. The incredible complexity of one microscopic cell and the DNA code illustrates the immense difficulty of the task.

What do you mean by coincidences and how would eliminating them be a contradiction?

A convergence of causal chains, e.g. two or more objects moving to the same place at the same time. How would you arrange for harmful collisions never to occur?

 

[anEvilAtheist]

It sounds simple in theory but physical reality is unimaginably complex. Such interventions would probably lead to earthquakes, avalanches and other causes of disasters. Not only that. The total number of miracles required to prevent every other type of disaster would be so colossal that the world would become chaotic. To specify one change is quite different from co-ordinating a biosphere to provide the necessary conditions for the origin and development of living organisms. Only a complete blueprint would demonstrate its theoretical feasibility. You underestimate the number of factors involved in designing an entire universe. The incredible complexity of one microscopic cell and the DNA code illustrates the immense difficulty of the task.

So you think that God could not calm the waters, or part the seas without causing a disaster elsewhere in the world?! That makes no sense whatsoever to me. I would be really interested in hearing your argument for why God’s hands are tied. If God is omnipotent and there are any unnecessary evils, that is a contradiction. So I do not need to show that all natural evils are easily preventable, just that there is at least one that is preventable. I have given you an example of an easily preventable evil. Merely maintaining calm seas when a natural disaster might otherwise happen would not be chaotic at all. In fact, as long as he did it every time, it would be completely normal, and we would incorporate that knowledge of how weather works into our natural laws. You are thinking of it from the perspective of our universe’s natural laws. An omnipotent being can actualize whatever set of natural laws he wants, as I explained in my previous message.

A convergence of causal chains, e.g. two or more objects moving to the same place at the same time. How would you arrange for harmful collisions never to occur?

I don’t understand how this has anything to do with what I am talking about (calming the waters to prevent natural evils).

 

[One]

One - if you wouldn’t mind, I’d really like to hear more about your story and experience(s). What have you learned and what is the foundation of your belief? Thank you.

JK –

Actually, I’ll decline to answer that, for several reasons.

First and foremost, I have little time to peruse fora these days. I just stopped in to CAF for a bit, as this topic interested me. I can only respond within the limited constraints of my free time.

Second, to the extent that I can write, I’d prefer to let my comments, questions, and observations speak for themselves, allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions based on what is said, which they inevitably will do (if they care at all… they might not.)

Third, trying to encapsulate such a story will only diminish its importance in both my mind and yours. It simply becomes too easy to pigeonhole a person based on a few short paragraphs and a short attention span, and I’d rather not be subjected to that. Your story was yours to tell, and I’m glad you did. I feel no such inclination. Every time I try to encapsulate “my story” with words, it only distances me from that story.

Along those lines, I don’t think it would serve any purpose except to draw people farther away from the point being presented, and hence from one another, which would not be my intent.

And finally, although we likely share some of the same experiences in terms of their scope and flavor, the interpretations that we give them – the lens through which we see these experiences – will undoubtedly be different, based on the limited amount I’ve heard so far. I’ve long ago realized that this is a difficult gap to bridge unless the circumstances are ripe for holding such experiences in a crucible of love, respect, understanding and compassionate care.

Besides… my “story” is ever-evolving. What I write today may not be true tomorrow – if I’m lucky. It comes from my own understanding that all beliefs are false, I suppose.

Respectfully,
Rob

 

[One]

Jk once said, “In my world, reality starts with acknowledging God exists.”

Ahhhh, but what is that? What a Mystery!

I have no problem with the notion that God exists. We could also call it Truth. Or, The Void. Or, IS. Whatever… they’re all just our dualistic pointers, and can’t possibly capture what we’re talking about. (And yet we continue to try.)

The responce

*** I agree with the validity and logic of the opening remark.***

Strength in numbers, I’m sure.

What this means to the WORLD is that there are absolute rights and wrongs.

For example Aborition is always worng when it has as its goal the killing of the baby!

So, your premise is that “God exists”, and from that, you continue on to lay value judgements over that premise. There is a disconnect in that logic; the two points do not relate to one another… unless you believe that they do. That’s okay if you do, of course.

"A perfect good can only come from that which I [we] choose to call “Our God.”

First the language suggests that there is a split between “us” and God, even though someone here has suggested that God could eliminate us just by willing it. If God can willfully whack any one of us, then clearly we are part and parcel of that God, not separate and distinct from God (although I’ll admit that this is our perspective at the time.) I don’t think anyone here would dispute that. “In his image…”, right? (And yes, I realize we’re not talking about corporeal image.)

Second, choosing to call God “Our God” creates another split, mainly between those who think they have a lock on the “right” God, and anyone else’s conception of God. So be it; wars have been fought, and will continue to be fought, on this very position. It’s only my opinion, mind you, but I think uttering “Our God” is the height of human arrogance, no matter who says it, especially when they can be smited (smote?) at any time.

God (Void, abyss, emptiness/shunyata, Truth, Absolute) exists, we can be pretty sure about that, I think (“therefore I Am.”) Beyond that, all is belief overlaid on that realization, and is not to be trusted.

 

[PJM]

PJM,
This is really a comical question.
Do you think your mother was mean when she disciplined you?
Or were you a perfect child?
How are you doing with the Ten Commandments?
If you have mangaed to get through this day without breaking any, your perfect.
God punishes those that he loves, just like your mother did.

God bless,
jean

Of course I was a perfect child. If you don’t believe me, ask me again

So the answer to the OP is?

Love and prayers,

 

[jkiernan56]

JK –

Actually, I’ll decline to answer that, for several reasons.

First and foremost, I have little time to peruse fora these days. I just stopped in to CAF for a bit, as this topic interested me. I can only respond within the limited constraints of my free time.

Second, to the extent that I can write, I’d prefer to let my comments, questions, and observations speak for themselves, allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions based on what is said, which they inevitably will do (if they care at all… they might not.)

Third, trying to encapsulate such a story will only diminish its importance in both my mind and yours. It simply becomes too easy to pigeonhole a person based on a few short paragraphs and a short attention span, and I’d rather not be subjected to that. Your story was yours to tell, and I’m glad you did. I feel no such inclination. Every time I try to encapsulate “my story” with words, it only distances me from that story.

Along those lines, I don’t think it would serve any purpose except to draw people farther away from the point being presented, and hence from one another, which would not be my intent.

And finally, although we likely share some of the same experiences in terms of their scope and flavor, the interpretations that we give them – the lens through which we see these experiences – will undoubtedly be different, based on the limited amount I’ve heard so far. I’ve long ago realized that this is a difficult gap to bridge unless the circumstances are ripe for holding such experiences in a crucible of love, respect, understanding and compassionate care.

Besides… my “story” is ever-evolving. What I write today may not be true tomorrow – if I’m lucky. It comes from my own understanding that all beliefs are false, I suppose.

Respectfully,
Rob

Thank you Rob for responding and your honesty. I sincerely mean that. I was not trying to pigeon hole you or judge the kind of person you are by one’s experiences. You write and express yourself very well. A person’s experience is not an accurate barometer of the person.

If a person’s beliefs and undersanding of the world do not bring about a sense of humility and deeper respect for others (regardless of what they believe) , they have missed the boat. I differ with you that all beliefs are false, but rather see a continuum that some are closer to the truth than others. For me, I put all my chips on the Person of Christ.

Gratefully yours, Jim

 

[PJM]

=LSK;5335147]Well, to my finite mind it may seem unnecessary…but I do know, from personal experience, that God permits evil because from all evil comes great good. I may not always see it or experience it myself, but I do know that God is not mean. We are, but not God. God is Love.

I really like your thought process abd belief, but ALL

Love and prayers,

 

[Charlemagne_II]

Detales

What on earth is a christianist? Do you mean Christian?