Is God evil, just because he fails to prevent suffering? (page 4)

Fernando

Hey defender of truth!

No, a different point is being made.

The phrase "the gospels" is not really Biblical either and creates confusion as to what "the gospel" is.

"The gospels" is obviously a reference to the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

However "the gospel" is a composite message, map, medicine, framework and blueprint which is detailed throughout scripture.

Therefore one can speak of the gospel according to Paul, Moses, Isaiah, Psalms, and/or the apostles.

Whilst we are rejecting, or ignorant of, God's ultimate solution and map, the Kingdom cannot come to pass in full on earth without in some way overriding legal impediments, human autonomy, and our free will.

I believe God has put his solution forward and wants us each to individually and personally examine it and make an informed and free choice for or against.

I have personally experienced significant transformation as a result of embracing this solution and map (despite threats from the Watchtower hierarchy).

Therefore I believe it would be game changing if we humans devoted just as much time to this solution and map as we have to its nemesis religion.

Fernando

Of course your point is valid defender of truth.

And I'm asserting that the Kingdom will benefit humans and animals alike, in ways we may find hard to imagine until we are more familiar with the solution/medicine/map.

How can we know if we are making headway against the obstacles?

When we can personally read, understand and explain Romans and Galatians (without human "help").

designs

Fernando- Romans is 'Paul's' revisionist view of Judaism and his blueprint for his new religion. So many blatant errors in romans I am surprised you think it holds any value.

Fernando

Designs, I accept that our views of Paul's message are opposite.

For me his position against any and all religion is clear in his expounding law vs grace, and faith vs works, especially in Romans and Galatians.

The introduction to Galatians, and Galatians itself, makes for interesting reading in the Message Bible for those so inclined.

defender of truth

"Of course your point is valid defender of truth.
And I'm asserting that the Kingdom will benefit humans and animals alike, in ways we may find hard to imagine until we are more familiar with the solution/medicine/map."

Your child has just swallowed some poisonous liquid that you left out (but many years ago you warned them not to touch it). Would you sit there and watch as your child, failing to understand the instructions (or just not being able to read them) on how to prepare the antidote, dies horribly of poisoning?
(As a side note, you also watched as the child deliberately poured some of the poison into the dogs water bowl. Would you just let the dog die, or clean the bowl?)
Then compare your decision to God's inaction and indifference today.

defender of truth

Did what I said to Fernando in the last post make any sense at all?
My illustrations generally suck, or they are very unclear.

The 'warning the child many years ago' was meant to represent the Bible from some believers perspectives, being a very old book and supposedly a warning for today.
The 'poison' was meant to be whatever we are supposedly doing to bring all of these disasters and illnesses upon ourselves.
The 'antidote' was meant to represent Gods message to us, telling us how we should be acting and what we should believe in order to fix all the worlds problems, as supposedly taught in the Bible according to people like Fernando..
And finally, the 'child either failing to understand or read the instructions to the antidote' was meant to be the human race (from a Bible believers perspective) not being able to understand how to cure all of our problems by means of the supposed ''one true message" in the Bible.

My point was: even taking all of these things into account hypothetically speaking, that God of the Bible's inaction still seems sickeningly callous and unjust, even if people in general are 'ignoring the gospel'.
(Obviously the poison in the dogs water bowl represented how we have supposedly been responsible for all animal suffering, deliberately or otherwise, yet God allows them to reap the consequences of our 'wicked course'.)
........
Sorry for the long explanation, I just worry that I've talked nonsense and killed a decent thread.. Good points so far.