How can we be expected to trust a God who Himself has gone against the morals that He teaches? In Elizabeth Anderson’s article “If God Is Dead, Is Everything Permitted” Anderson brings up many arguments as to why the moral understanding of the bible and religious scripture brings up multiple examples of unreliability. Both in the writings and of God Himself. Throughout the article Anderson mentions the inconsistencies and inaccuracies within the bible and other religious writings, and how their moral teachings which were considered right are now considered wrong in the present day. The religious stories from all sorts of different religions have been shown to cause countless events that have made a number of people suffer, and these were seen …show more content…
This is an important point, because if our understanding of God is that He is purely good, then why would so many of this heinous events occur. “Theist reply that because God is necessarily good, He would never do anything morally reprehensible Himself nor command us to preform heinous acts.” (Anderson, 2007). However, God is seen punishing not only those who are considered to be evil, but also those who are innocent, He causes floods, plagues and death to many people because of one person’s act, or if He was angry. This is completely opposite to our understanding of God loving us all and to our most important idea that God is perfectly good. Even if these acts were seen as punishing those who are considered evil, then God would have not done any act that would harm someone, nor would He permit us to do so. The bible is filled with these inaccuracies, is God loving of all, or just the few that follow Him, it states different allowances in stories (Infidels.org, 2016). It is my understanding that these stories are proof that God is not purely good, which itself is an argument for Him not to exist or that the stories themselves or false. Murder was perfectly fine for the soldiers of the First Crusade, who slaughtered every man, woman, and child, however it is written in the bible that murder is prohibited, it is a sin. Many other events like this occurred. When we look …show more content…
However, when you look at the times that these events occurred and transcribed, these were times of a lack of scientific understanding. The people didn’t have the tools or capability to understand how volcanoes or plagues worked, so in order to come up with a satisfying answer, they turned to God. Meaning that disastrous natural events, were not understood as natural, and the people of the time attempted to come up with reasons as to why the occurred, and that a God being angry and causing pain on them would be a satisfying reason. As Anderson pointed out there are no geological evidence of great floods, and many events that could have occurred such as plagues, most likely would have occurred without the existence of God, yet God made a great scapegoat. If an event happened that caused suffering then God was clearly angry, and if brought generous periods then God was happy with what people were doing. For example, the 10 plagues of Egypt were caused by God for the Pharaoh refusing his will, yet there are many scientific explanations as to why these could have occurred or similar events. Unfortunately, we cannot know the full truth since the stories are the only accounts we have. Since we have no other accounts, it makes sense as to why people would start to question the stories
... passage to suggest the essential role natural evils play in this story: "People who do not believe in God do not, of course, see our living to ourselves as a result of a prehistoric separation from God. But they can be aware – and it is a part of God’s plan of Atonement that they should be aware – that something is pretty wrong and that this wrongness is a consequence of the intrinsic inability of human beings to devise a manner of life that is anything but hideous" (203). Nowhere does experience prove this inability of human beings to escape the hideousness of the world more than in the case of natural disasters. They have existed as long as the human race, and though it may be possible for a person to delude him or herself into believing he or she is living a good life in a seemingly good world, no one can deny the horrible dangers that natural disasters present.
Most of us have probably heard the famous bible story about Noah’s Ark and The Flood. What most may not know, is that this story is just one of a great many. A variety of ancient cultures, from the Greeks and the Middle East, to Asia and the Americas, have in their mythologies a story of a Great Flood that drowns the earth. These stories mostly contain the same themes: a god or group of gods becomes angry; they flood the earth but save a small group of people. These people build a boat to survive. After the flood they repopulate the earth.
In the first chapter of God Behaving Badly, David Lamb argues that God is unfairly given a bad reputation. He claims these negative perceptions are fueled by pop culture and lead many to believe the lie that the God of the Old Testament is angry, sexist, racist, violent, legalistic, rigid, and distant. These negative perceptions, in turn, affect our faith. Ultimately, Lamb seeks to demonstrate that historical context disproves the presumptuous aforementioned. In addition, he defends his position by citing patterns of descriptions that characterize God throughout the Old Testament. “Our image of God will directly affect how we either pursue or avoid God. If we believe that the God of the Old Testament is really harsh, unfair and cruel, we won’t want anything to do with him” (Lamb 22). Clearly, they way Christians choose to see God will shape their relationship with Him.
It also follows that God, not as benevolent as could be hoped, prefers the maximization of good (2) as opposed to the minimization of evil (1). This is disquieting for the individual who might be the victim of suffering a “greater good.”
The devastating plagues were imposed on specific nations of group of people who displeased God. He asserted that the present economic condition is not some sort of wrath of God. They need to help themselves and their ability to recover from this situation does not need an act of God, but this is their own act and determination that will get them out of this situation. He also pointed out that the money chargers are not kind and honest in their practices; the word money chargers refers to those who take interest on the loans. He blames the bankers and the financial institutions for the economic problems of the
On our planet, phenomena’s occur occasionally in nature. Tornadoes, earthquakes, and flashfloods are all types of phenomena’s that could occur. Most of these mysterious events are small and go unnoticed; however, on a rare occasion these sorts of event can be horrendous. One such occasion occurred back around 4,000 BC (Werner Keller, 48). As the story goes, God’s population was growing rapidly on earth. At this point, he had been growing bored with the same people on earth so he made sure no man would live past the age of 120. Given this time, the people of earth started to take advantage of the human race; these acts of selfishness disgusted God. He decided to destroy everything on earth. A man by the name of Noah had lived his life by God’s nature, which eventually led to a close relationship between the two. God had told Noah to build a boat with exact measurements. God had instructed Noah to put two of every kind of animal into the boat; one had to be male and the other female. Then God told Noah to get into the boat with his family, their families, and the animals. Then for forty days and forty nights the clouds seemed to have poured endless amounts of water onto the earth (Genesis 6:1-9). Floods rushed through the landscape, destroying everything in its path. The waters were higher than the tallest mountains, standing above the highest peaks. All living things on earth had died. The water covered the earth at this level for five months (Paul S. Taylor, 1). In time the water began to dry up. Eventually Noah was able to leave the ship and release all he had brought with him. From this point, evolution occurs.
In a world of chaos, he who lives, lives by his own laws and values. Who is to say that the death of millions is any worse or better, for that matter, than injuring a cockroach. And in the case of an existing power in the form of God, who is presumed to be all which is good, presiding and ruling an organized universe, why then does evil exist? The prosaic response of “without evil, there is no good” no longer holds any validity in this argument as the admitted goal of good is to reach an existence without evil. So even if a God does exist, I think it is fair, at this point, to say that he is the embodiment of both good and evil. And if humoring those who would answer the previous question with the response that there can be no good without evil, then can we assume that evil is simply a subsection of a defined good? Or perhaps even a good thing? If it is essential, those who chose the side of evil are simply abiding by good values. In the case of a world ruled by Chaos, evil is a non-existent word or value, rather. The system upon which a person’s actions are judged also disappears leaving nothing but an instinct for natural survival as basic and primary as the life within the forests which we tear down to build our houses.
We hear about the murders, assaults, robberies, natural disasters and all other evil or natural destructive events in the world, we have to ask the question, how could God let such bad things happen to good people or to let these disastrous events happen at all. Now think about the world and its population if evil or natural disasters did not exist; the world population would be unimaginable. Natural disasters are beyond human control, but murders, assaults, robberies and all other evil or bad deeds committed by human beings is a matter of exercising bad choice or misuse of free will.
The first objection, with God anything is permissible, means that with God, people can do anything they want because they will always be forgiven. That is not the case. God will forgive people, but only if they ask for forgiveness and truly regret what they did. He also holds Christians accountable for their actions. Since Christians are supposed to be examples of Jesus, we are held at a much higher standard of behavior, as stated in Ephesians 5:3-4. So with God, everyone is held to a certain
After creating a pure and perfect world which he declared “good,” God experienced His first disappointment in humans. When He placed Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden and instructed them not to eat from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil, Adam and Eve made the decision to disobey God and eat from it. According to the Old Testament, this decision gave Adam and Eve’s descendants (all humans) their sinful human nature, which as a result separated those who did not repent from God’s grace. Eventually the world was full of wickedness and a new side of YHWH came out. The God of unconditional love who is often thought of tended to be a God ...
...did not resist Satan's temptation. By not knowing Job would curse him, God disproved omniscience. The cruelty on the part of God, justified or not, is confirmation against omni benevolence. God's actions are not only out of the presupposed nature associated with and taught, but they also show God to be childlike in his actions. God plays a game with the life of Job and later thinks he can make everything better by giving Job twice as much as he had before. These are not the actions or attitude of a perfect entity.
God is the source of evil. He created natural evil, and gave humans the ability to do moral evil by giving them a free will. However, had he not given people free will, then their actions would not be good or evil; nor could God reward or punish man for his actions since they had no choice in what to do. Therefore, by giving humans choice and free will, God allowed humanity to decide whether to reward themselves with temporary physical goods, and suffer in the long run from unhappiness, or forsake bodily pleasures for eternal happiness.
To begin with, God’s faithfulness is displayed in the Pentateuch. One example is found in the opening chapters of Genesis. Even though Adam and Eve disobeyed his command, God does not let sin prevent him from being faithful. Instead, God enters the garden and asks the couple, “Where are you?” (Genesis 3:9) This example displays the theme that God remains involved in the lives of his followers even when they disobey him. Another example of God’s faithfulness is found in his interactions with Abraham. When God and Abraham establish a covenant that promises the man land, descendants, and blessings for all people, God completes the ratification ceremony for both parties. This act signifies that God is entirely responsible for upholding the covenant. From this passage, the faithfulness of God is highlighted. God makes a deal that only he can uphold; therefore, his faithfulness to Abraham and his descendents is crucial. In addition to Genesis, God’s faithfulness is displayed in the events of the Exodus and subsequent wanderings of Israel. God rescues Israel from slavery in Egypt, just as he promised Abraham, then establishes a covenant with the people at Sinai. This agreement, known as the Mosaic covenant, was conditional in nature because it required the faithfulness of Israel to God. While this stipulation seems to detract from God’s f...
People view the statement “God is dead” as an aesthetic statement. They do not journey into the underlying or more obvious meanings of the quote. Even though Fredrick Nietzsche may have been an atheist, I do not believe he meant “God is dead” in a literal or aesthetic way. Nietzsche was pointing out that in society the cultural expansion of other religions and introduction of nihilism have changed Western society morally.
One view of the gods’ intervention in the mortal conflict was that they were just setting events back onto the course of fate. For example, when Patroclus was killed outside of Troy, Apollo felt no guilt for his actions. It had already been decided by fate that Patroclus would not defeat the Trojans. As a god, Apollo was just setting fate on a straight line again. After this event, Achilles blames Hector and the Trojans, not even considering Apollo, who was the one who was mostly responsible for the death. Apollo’s part in the matter was merely accepted as a natural disaster would be accepted today in our