Sign in to follow this  
Brother Kaman

Free Will And Thanking God

Recommended Posts

We cannot agree on this one

Yes, correcting children who misbehave, along with order and beauty in the world, are excellent reasons not to believe? :)

Would you prefer a god who said "Do not murder" and then after you go out and commit a murder, that same god says "Good for you"?

That to me is chaos, and just plain crazy.

Christians don't see a psychopath because they don't think that punishing sin is crazy. God corrects those he loves (Hebrews 12:6), just as any good parent would discipline their own children. So from that perception, there's nothing to reconcile. What would be difficult for me to reconcile is if God allowed people to sin, commit evil, and harm others with impunity.

.I had framed an argument and then realized how futile it would be. I have been around Christians (once professed to be one myself) for a long time. I have read your replies to many posts on this forum. I have closely followed the "Pete - Dan56" saga and could already anticipate the reply I would receive. I will stick to my thoughts as I know you will yours. I certainly do not wish to start a "Brother Kaman - Dan56" saga.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, correcting children who misbehave, along with order and beauty in the world, are excellent reasons not to believe? :)

Would you prefer a god who said "Do not murder" and then after you go out and commit a murder, that same god says "Good for you"?

That to me is chaos, and just plain crazy.

Christians don't see a psychopath because they don't think that punishing sin is crazy. God corrects those he loves (Hebrews 12:6), just as any good parent would discipline their own children. So from that perception, there's nothing to reconcile. What would be difficult for me to reconcile is if God allowed people to sin, commit evil, and harm others with impunity.

I can't accept this logic. You give this example and think it chaos and crazy, yet believe in a God who commanded not to kill and then ordered a genocide?

I suppose you'd claim this was okay because those being killed offended God or were heathens. So, it'd be perfectly okay to kill those who believe differently.

I can't wrap my head around this. Mayhaps this is the reason for my own walk towards enlightenment and don't feel any connection with any brand of christianity thus far, despite my past leanings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The closest I have been able to reconcile free will and an all powerful God who is still good: God has split personalities, and with an all powerful being, that would mean he was in the beginning capable of every good and every evil, but split himself into two beings, one ultimately good and one ultimately evil. With that frame of reference, every evil act in the world can rightfully be attributed to God's evil twin, Satan, while every good in the world could be attributed to his good twin, who is so pure as to be unnamed even. The evil part has control of all evil, the good half has control of all good. Still, it doesn't seem right to me, whatsoever, really, until you remove consciousness from both forces, and then it might as well be Rathar and Mythar, the mythological names given in the Raymond Feist series of books for order and chaos I believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had seen a brief mention of the now lost Book of Angels, which supposedly mentioned the fall from grace of a few Angels, one being named Lucifer, who became Satan. Lucifer then fancied himself a God for the underworld.

Even so, whether God split Himself, or created an angel who then became fallen, it is still attributable that God had created the possibility of evil, it seems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We cannot agree on this one

.I had framed an argument and then realized how futile it would be. I have been around Christians (once professed to be one myself) for a long time. I have read your replies to many posts on this forum. I have closely followed the "Pete - Dan56" saga and could already anticipate the reply I would receive. I will stick to my thoughts as I know you will yours. I certainly do not wish to start a "Brother Kaman - Dan56" saga.

No problem.. Admittedly, my thinking on such subjects is pretty transparent, and rather unshakable. But feel free to state your opinion

without thinking you need to engage in an argument. What you wrote seemed extremely illogical to me, so I was just trying to analyze what you meant.

I can't accept this logic. You give this example and think it chaos and crazy, yet believe in a God who commanded not to kill and then ordered a genocide?

I suppose you'd claim this was okay because those being killed offended God or were heathens. So, it'd be perfectly okay to kill those who believe differently.

I can't wrap my head around this. Mayhaps this is the reason for my own walk towards enlightenment and don't feel any connection with any brand of christianity thus far, despite my past leanings.

God gave no order not to kill, in fact He often inspired his people to kill. Yes, God killed, and yes, I believe it was necessary and justified. No, its not okay to kill those who think differently, you may be confusing Christianity with Islam? :). God killed heathens for their wickedness, rebelling, attacking his people, and a host of other things. All righteous kills imo, but of course, I'm biased.

The closest I have been able to reconcile free will and an all powerful God who is still good: God has split personalities, and with an all powerful being, that would mean he was in the beginning capable of every good and every evil, but split himself into two beings, one ultimately good and one ultimately evil. With that frame of reference, every evil act in the world can rightfully be attributed to God's evil twin, Satan, while every good in the world could be attributed to his good twin, who is so pure as to be unnamed even. The evil part has control of all evil, the good half has control of all good. Still, it doesn't seem right to me, whatsoever, really, until you remove consciousness from both forces, and then it might as well be Rathar and Mythar, the mythological names given in the Raymond Feist series of books for order and chaos I believe.

Christians believe that God is good, and there's no split personality about it. Satan is not God, never was his twin either :). Your correct, they are polar opposites, but Satan is a fallen cherub angel and God is God. I honestly don't understand why people don't get that, its not a difficult concept to grasp? We are not good, we are all sinners who freely chose to be disobedient, so we were introduced to evil (our choice). God created everything and it was good, but God separated himself from sin and Satan became the prince of this world. It may seem like God split himself into 2 beings, but the story clearly indicates that it was us who split from God. But the good news is that God did not forsake us, he made a promise and Jesus kept it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I didn't say I didn't grasp the Christian concept of a God, I understand how they portray him to be. I simply cannot reconcile that image with reality, friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No problem.. Admittedly, my thinking on such subjects is pretty transparent, and rather unshakable. But feel free to state your opinion

without thinking you need to engage in an argument. What you wrote seemed extremely illogical to me, so I was just trying to analyze what you meant.

God gave no order not to kill, in fact He often inspired his people to kill. Yes, God killed, and yes, I believe it was necessary and justified. No, its not okay to kill those who think differently, you may be confusing Christianity with Islam? :). God killed heathens for their wickedness, rebelling, attacking his people, and a host of other things. All righteous kills imo, but of course, I'm biased.

Christians believe that God is good, and there's no split personality about it. Satan is not God, never was his twin either :). Your correct, they are polar opposites, but Satan is a fallen cherub angel and God is God. I honestly don't understand why people don't get that, its not a difficult concept to grasp? We are not good, we are all sinners who freely chose to be disobedient, so we were introduced to evil (our choice). God created everything and it was good, but God separated himself from sin and Satan became the prince of this world. It may seem like God split himself into 2 beings, but the story clearly indicates that it was us who split from God. But the good news is that God did not forsake us, he made a promise and Jesus kept it.

Um...the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" was not an order not to kill? Or perhaps it only applied to the Hebrews. Hmmm? Care to elaborate this one?

I seem to recall something somewhere in the Bible that the Hebrews were ordered to eliminate a village or city, and specifically were told to kill everything therein: men, women, children, livestock, and crops. But they didn't. All were wicked? I somehow doubt that accusation.

Edited by Keystrikr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another conflicting sentiment within the bible, Keystrikr. Perhaps, someone could stretch the words so that they don't conflict in their minds, but not me. And, I like to account for the spirit of the law, as well as the written word. When you look at the spirit of the words within the bible, they often conflict and contradict.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A narrower translation is "You shall not murder", which creates a distinction between lawful and unlawful killing.

Edited by mererdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between lawful and unlawful is slim. Sure, a system of government could approve of a specific instance of killing. Funny how the Christians who cite this, fail to cite this when the same system allows a person who is terminally ill to end their own life, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between lawful and unlawful is slim. Sure, a system of government could approve of a specific instance of killing. Funny how the Christians who cite this, fail to cite this when the same system allows a person who is terminally ill to end their own life, though.

The Bible also makes a distinction between laws of man and laws of God. So "Do not murder" becomes "Do not kill without God's permission." Places in the Bible where God orders people to kill do not violate that (fairly common) interpretation of the commandment, but some killings the government doesn't consider murder might violate it. Edited by mererdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My beliefs don't condone killing... of one's self, or another... legal, or illegal... and doesn't consider ANY killing to be "justified".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can respect that Songster. How do your beliefs handle someone who doesn't respect that sentiment, or perhaps is the antithesis of that sentiment? Say, someone who goes out with a machine gun and opens fire in a crowd? I am not asking out of disrespect, its just something I am legitimately curious about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you asking how I would react if present at the attack? Or whether my core beliefs would change if confronted by that situation?

Since I've never been placed in those circumstances, I can only speculate....

If placed at the scene, I honestly don't know how I would react...

I don't know that I'd be capable of confronting the attacker... and though I like to think I'd at least be brave enough to sacrifice my life to save the life of another, I cannot claim with certainty that I'd act honorably...

As for whether witnessing a mass killing would alter my beliefs and make my killing of a killer acceptable... The Law of Karma (as well as the Law of Moses) demands retribution for injury (an eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, a life for a life). I believe that if I took the life of that individual, it would bind our souls together forever (or until the karmic debt could be satisfied). Since he would be dead, retribution in this life would be impossible, so once this life was over, we would both have to return to this sphere to work it out and sever the bond... (I loathe the thought of having to endure an even longer separation from my Creator.)

The followers of Christ are aware of the penalties imposed by the Law of Karma, and He taught His disciples how to free themselves from Karmic debt by applying the Law of Forgiveness. (The Law of Forgiveness annuls the Law of Karma.) If we are faithful in following and practicing His teachings, we are not only able to refrain from incurring karmic debt through our own actions, but able to break the Karmic bonds created by others.

Edited by Songster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thank you for your response. I didn't have a clear intention when asking the question as to whether you were present or whether such an event occurred so I appreciate you including both responses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Brother Kaman,

I was skimming a book that had a section dealing with witchcraft and magic in Elizabethan Wales. A Calvinist minister writing in that time period was lamenting the way the Welsh people were still turning to the village wizards or cunning folk in times of need instead of God. The minister's position was that God intentionally visited calamities on people as a means to make them turn to him (as if to remind them he was still around). Since the family you mentioned above did just that, I guess it worked. Seems like a horrible way to get someone's attention.

This is interesting. If people were turning to the wizards and cunning folk for help; does that mean they were getting help? It sounds like a validation for magic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was watching a program on TV today that examined the murder of a teenage girl and the subsequent investigation, arrest and trial of the murderer. Near the end of the program, the family of the murdered young lady thanked God (God of Abraham) for answering their prayers to apprehend and bring to justice their daughter's murderer. My first thought was, "Why would God allow her to be murdered in the first place?" Then I knew the handy answer most Christians would use would be to blame the free will of the murderer and that God had nothing to do with the murder. Sounds like Pontius Pilate, washing his hands, doesn't it of the wicked deed, doesn't it? Why was it not the "free will" of the police investigators and the "free will" of the court and jury that apprehended and punished their daughter's killer? How is "free will" at one end and God answering prayers at the other end? Any thoughts? I would like to hear from a few Christians on this topic.

I am very thankful to Mammon. He has blessed ( and hopefully bless me MORE). I don't see in the Christian wrritings anything close to Mammonism. I distrust it because only a priest can live it. You have to be good all the time, and I feel your morals have to be adaptive, not like a stone wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem of God's relation to good and evil is based on our understanding of omniscience. We assume he does not have the power to not know something, or to create something that is random.

Something to remember when framing these specifically anti-Christian topics, no religious or spiritual stance stands up to logical scrutiny. They are not supposed to. That is not their purpose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this