Theodicy

I stand on the premise that from the beginning men sought to know good and evil and to be the judge between them, this goes to not only explain the reality of free will/volition of the creature, but also how that the ways of God are righteous judgment and the necessity that He is without moral evil. The problem for those that think/wish to attribute evil to the nature of God comes from that which originates in pride from within their knowledge (Gen 3:23) yet, there is only One that is perfectly Good and He is the Righteous Judge of all things. Some can not willingly bow to that concept of Divine existence (of God being Omnibenevolent) so they attempt to side step it or discount it in many ways (yet the Truth is there so in pride they might claim to be forced to believe, not to have the ability of volition, will deny or reassign the origin of evil and thereby dispute true creaturely responsibility, claim not to have the ability to reason, and as Luke says...I could go on and on and on… )…but God has His ways to sort “it” (the truth concerning responsibility and judgment, and He makes that judgment through His real nature of Omnibenevolent grace offered through real ability of faith that all creatures have the ability to obtain by His Loving divine design and thereby no creature has an excuse but to really respond in love of the truth of God’s Goodness or be condemned) out, again, Deut 32:4. I trust God is Only Good and His judgment is real and righteous. My eyes behold a God that is Omnibenevolent and thereby full of Grace for all His creatures through the faith with comes from love of the Truth (God is Truth in Love). I have died of that aforementioned pride of being judge between good and evil because I have seen the light of who He is and have believed in an Omnibenevolent God. I love this Truth with all my heart and soul because He is Love.

I don't think we're far apart and have put a lot of thought in God's purposes. I openly state that God is Only Good and His creation is very good, (Gen 1:31) for only good can come from Him. He is without moral evil (Deut 32:4). He allows evil to exist but is never the cause of it, the agency of evil can not or should not be attributed to Him any way by those who truly know Him, those that understand that His nature is Only Good and know that He truly does exist in and because of knowing and believing in love of that truth, in that sense I say faith is a gift. Concerning the P.O.E. it is common that the Calvinist cannot/or will not attribute the existence of God as Only being Good (Onmibenevolent) to the skeptic, but gladly I can and do.

 

Okay, I gotta say that I actually lean more towards what Luke is saying in this thread; his problem is his use of analogies that are muddying the waters terribly.

It isn't the darkness that is the cause of an accident; it is the inability to see because of the darkness that causes the accident. If the driver stopped and proceeded no further, there would be no accident.

The darkness analogy, however, provides for the driver to make a choice, and thus doen't fit the hyper-calvinist view that the driver has no choice but to continue driving.

To keep this conversation on Luke's point, focus on the definition of evil: the absence of good. Without good, the only choice is evil. The only intent is what's best for the individual, with no regard for others or God. I believe this is the point Luke is trying to make. Please feel to correct me, and/or clarify further.

 

:applause::laugh::thumbsup::applause:

 

Nothing in scripture says free will exists..so your whole premise is false to begin with.

 

http://thereignofchrist.com/a-biblical-theodicy/

A Biblical Theodicy

 

Not sure why you're applauding Luke on this one. It was a personal, derogatory attack.

The truth of the matter is, there's a chance--however miniscule--that the individual actually is smarter than all the theologians that came before him. I may not agree with this person; Luke certainly doesn't; and apparently you don't. But Calvin had to defend his position with his contemporaries of the time; Luthor had to defend his position with his contemporaries of the time; etc., etc.

Frankly, Icon, you're one of the smarter individuals on this board; to applaud a personal attack on someone...well, I expect better of you. I hope you expect better of yourself.

 

EWF - the final part of your 2nd point: Here's what has to be explained. If God is absolute good, then how does God control even their own abominable wickedness?

The explanation from Luke (that all things are worked to His glory) doesn't satisfy those that believe that God is ultimate good; because if, as Luke stated, the definition of evil is the absence of good, which is God removing his goodness (see Page 2 of this thread, post #19), how can God tolerate evil, much less control the abominable wickedness of His creations? The only answer is that whatever God does is not evil.

A possible answer is: if God does evil (orders the murder of women and children), then it is *our* perception that this action is evil, not God's. In other words, if we do it, it's evil; if He does it, it's not evil.

To fit the argument, we have to change the human perception. If God orders His people to murder women and children, and we keep in mind that God doesn't work evil--He only works things to His glory--then when we follow His commands, we are not working evil, even if others use their perception to classify our actions as evil.

This necessarily can lead to a "hyper" conclusion that whatever we do, if we can justify that it's from God, then it's not evil. And I think we can all see the trap that leads to.

The other confusion point about this is, if God controls the abominable wickedness of His creations, but whatever He does is not evil because it is worked to His glory, then how can we say that anyone is evil? They're only doing what God controls.

I welcome more education and instruction from everyone on this subject; I may have missed some alternatives that will put things in a different light. As it stands, the conclusion I draw is that this argument hinges on the difference between and understanding of God's sovereign (or perfect) will and permissive will.

 

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

Baloney, God himself said men have their "own voluntary will" in Leviticus 1:3. To say otherwise is to directly contradict the word of God.

 

Wherever the Spirit is present, as in a heart that has had the law written upon it, there is light and good.

 

Luke, you're smart; don't focus on the fact that you and I barely agree on anything. Focus on your analogy. You're trying to "place the blame" on the darkness.

In your own words, darkness is nothing but the absence of light (page 3 of this thread); therefore, darkness cannot be the direct cause of anything; it can only cause us to make choices. For example, the bus went over the cliff because the driver couldn't see the cliff; if the driver couldn't see, why did he continue driving?

The darkness is the indirect cause of the unsafe condition. The direct cause of the accident is the driver's decision to continue driving in unsafe conditions. To say that the darkness caused the accident is to deny the driver's unwise decision, and his multiple choices that could have avoided the accident.

Now, let's take note: Of my entire post, you chose to focus on what you thought of my criticism of your analogy. How about providing an analysis of the rest of the post?

 

Well stated, Don! :thumbsup: I've been attempting to make this point for months, but you did a much clearer job. I hope it is understood now. Thanks!

 

Didn't God though have Evil already 'worked" into His master Plan from Eternity past?

That God would use Evil in the sense that all things that He predestine to pass for His glory would come to pass?

That He would be working all things so that despite the Falls of satan /adam, that God would bring everything together in the End for His glory?

 

Reply to Benjamin

If I understood your post, we pretty much agree. I would never use the term Omnibenevolent, because of the way it is used (unbiblically) in Theodicy discussions. God brings calamity and allows men to do evil in His eyes. But from God's perspective, His treatment of mankind is "good" in that it suits His purpose of creation. God Bless

 

Sadly, Calvinism, at least the TULI part is a complete contradiction of the word of God. Calvinists tell us a "free will offering" does not mean an offering made without compulsion. Just another rewrite of scripture.

Scripture - God sets before us the choice of life or death. Calvinist rewrite, God sets before some, the "choice" of life only, and before others the "choice" of death only. Note that this premise has to rewrite the meaning of "choice" to include non-choice. Sad indeed.

 

:laugh:Fiddlesticks :laugh:

 

Luke - your cold analogy is better than your darkness analogy.

Analogies aside, go read post #42, and compare it to the parts of your response that I bolded.