1Dude said:
Josh,
For me to “despise” God, as you put it, for my own ignorance of the full matter of something that happened centuries ago would be completely illogical. In addition, I cannot judge the heart of any man living, let alone a man who died a thousand years ago. Can you? There is but one Judge and I am not He. Also, just because I do not know the answer to something does not mean that there is no answer. Neither does my ignorance, turn God into something that is evil; especially when there is great evidence to the contrary. There is that little matter of Him sending His Son to die on a cross to save us from Hell, after all.
I think my concern is not that Christians, in their hearts, despise <i>God</i>. I am referring to the plethora of verses wherein God acts quite barbarically, killing innocents, flooding the entire Earth, ordering the genocide of "evil" groups including children. If these things did not trouble many Christians, we would not see volume after volume of apologetics dedicated to explaining them away. Why is it that today the vast majority of Christians would say slavery is <i>inherently</i> evil, but yet they are not repulsed by God's outright endorsement of it in the Old Testament? Granted, these are different times, but was slavery somehow less wrong a long time ago? And if so, why? If one suspends one's ability to judge the atrocities of the Old Testament, then I believe one cannot judge today's atrocities either. One cannot say something like, "9/11 was evil and wrong," because perhaps -- just perhaps -- you simply did not understand the divine <i>reason</i> for 9/11. Who's to say?
And I am not asking you to judge Gandhi -- or anyone else. I'm asking why anyone (not necessarily you) who feels, in his heart of hearts, that a man like Gandhi should not be judged by his faith but by his words and deeds, would submit to belief in a God who <i>would</i> judge solely on faith? It's one thing to say "God is good and I trust his judgment," but why, if you trust so much in God's goodness, would you adhere to a book that says otherwise? The Bible calls God good no doubt, but point me to the verse that says men like Gandhi will be spared from Hell despite their nonbelief. How am I supposed to reconcile my fervent belief that men should not be judged solely by their faith with a God who casts nonbelievers into Hell on just that basis?
Here is my own paradox I see operating in this world:
Men see evil in this world and wonder why God seemingly does nothing about it and so they blame Him for doing nothing. But then, they read an account in the Bible where God actually does destroy evil, and they blame Him for that as well. Please tell me how this makes sense.
That may be an oversimplified version of the state of affairs, but I understand your frustration. On this, I can only speak for own view, since there are millions of different opinions on this matter:
I've stated my problem with the idea of eternal Hell. I see it as niether fair, nor meaningful. I do not blame God for evil in the world because, as you said earlier, free will necessitates evil. I think the problem arises when we see, in the Bible, God interfering in man's affairs. After reading this, people are bound to ask, "Why does he not do this today?" A valid question.
As for those who blame God for "destroying evil" in the Bible, their problem is of another sort. To understand, you must view the Bible through the eyes of a skeptic. History is filled to the brim with barbarism and atrocity. Many cultures have fought wars over their gods -- some of the bloodiest on record, in fact. The God of the Old Testament does not merely erase evil, or zap it out of existence; rather, he seems to deal with it in the fashion that a dictator might: Find the dissenting faction. Burn their village. Kill the population, including mothers and children. Make them suffer. A real "That'll teach 'em!" brand of justice at work there.
Indeed, God -- if he chooses to intervene -- is in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Just like in politics, one can never please everyone. But I think it's the outmoded methods (the ones we know today only bring about more violence) God employs that trouble people like myself. We can still see this today with those who so fervently believe that one country can easily bomb another country into civility. Undoubtedly, there is no sure way to know the facts about every Bible story -- what crimes were really committed, how severe certain problems were, who did what to whom, etc. So that will forever be a topic of debate.
But, at the end of the day, the Bible seems to produce a very undecided and quirky deity. For a few thousand years or so, he demanded blood sacrifices, interefered in man's world in spectacular fashions, and apparently realized eventually that it just wasn't working out. So he switched tactics drastically by sending his own sacrifice -- a carpenter who goes around preaching the "Turn the other cheek" and "Love thine enemy." For an all-knowing being, God certainly undertook a very trial-and-error type approach when it came to mankind. To the skeptic, this anthropomorphic behavior is very suspicious -- and hints at a deeper problem. God may have created us in his image, but we start to wonder just how much we've returned the favor.
I Hope You Have a Great Week!
And you as well, Ken.
Josh