• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I Can Only Conclude That God Doesn't Care

Skwim

Veteran Member
Oh, Spirit has said a lot more. Just cause some think Revelation stops with a book, doesn't mean all who have knowledge/understanding of Abrahamic God believe this. I find it blasphemous to believe that God has stopped speaking with humanity. Not shy about debating this with orthodox types.
Okay, but just how does this blaspheme (speaking irreverently about God or sacred things) arise from a belief?

Because of all that went into this post, would it be fair to surmise that you don't care to understand the FACT that God has never stopped communicating with humanity? I think it would actually be unfair to you to surmise that, but is turning the type of question you are asking on itself.
Not talking about anything other than what appears in the Bible. Want to talk about your personal messages from god, or those messages others have received, then please construct your own thread.

The keys to understanding any divine message is being open to listening (truly open), discernment and seeking clarification where anything is confusing.
And just how is it you happen to know for a fact what these keys are?

The answer(s) lie within.
Within what? The constructions of one's imagination so as to meet a personal need?

To whatever degree that is seen as unhelpful, then realize God has sent nothing but angels (fellow humans)
Angels are fellow humans? Where does this odd bit of knowledge come from?

to try and help with clarification in way that would plausibly be most beneficial to where you are now.
"Try to help" and " plausibly most beneficial"? Sounds as if god's intentions come with potential failure and disappointment. If I was god, I think I could do better than trying and plausibility.

Again, that communication has never stopped. For those with ears with which to listen. Be open, patient and willing and you'll realize Who is it that actually cares and who is it that is constantly claiming there are other things to be done that are somehow more important (right now) that gaining greater clarification/understanding from your Creator.
So which interpretation has god said about the Hebrew word רַע, ra` in Isaiah 45:7 is correct?

evil ?
disaster ?
calamity ?
doom ?
trouble(s) ?
bad times ?
discord ?
woe ?
hard times ?

:shrug:


.
 

First Baseman

Retired athlete
Let's just say I'm astute enough to know what not to believe . . .


. . . and wise enough to know that need is a foolish basis for truth.


.

It sounds as though your purpose is just to poke fun at the the idea that a god might exist. You are not to be taken seriously at all. What do you have to say to that?
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
It sounds as though your purpose is just to poke fun at the the idea that a god might exist.
Sorry that my approach to god claims comes across as poking fun, but no one is twisting your arm to come up with them. If you have a problem with people doubting or analyzing your beliefs then perhaps this isn't the place for you. You might want to try the choir in one of the christian DIR forums.

You are not to be taken seriously at all. What do you have to say to that?
Don't care enough about your opinion to make any difference. :shrug:


.
 

linr05

New Member
Let's just say I'm astute enough to know what not to believe . . .


. . . and wise enough to know that need is a foolish basis for truth.


.
1. Roman Catholicism is much more than merely another "Abrahamic religion". Christ claimed He is God and gave His human life as an offering for Adam & Eve's and all repentant humanity's sins. By His Resurrection over death He proved His dominion over sin and death.
2. Proverbs declares the beginning of wisdom to be fear of the Lord. You appear to think you can skip the first step?
3. The straw man you call god doesn't come close to anyone anyone could respect!
4. Catholics have an obligation to use approved interpretations of Holy Scripture called Commentaries.
5. cf. BetrayedCatholics.com The mainstream actors and buildings calling themselves Catholic are a schismatic simulacrum. Bergoglio is an imposter.
6. Are you a free-thinker? You sound like one and sound proud of it.
7. God loves you even though you disdain Him. You sadden Him. He never forces anyone to love Him in return.
 

Acim

Revelation all the time
Okay, but just how does this blaspheme (speaking irreverently about God or sacred things) arise from a belief?


Not talking about anything other than what appears in the Bible. Want to talk about your personal messages from god, or those messages others have received, then please construct your own thread.


And just how is it you happen to know for a fact what these keys are?

Within what? The constructions of one's imagination so as to meet a personal need?


Angels are fellow humans? Where does this odd bit of knowledge come from?

"Try to help" and " plausibly most beneficial"? Sounds as if god's intentions come with potential failure and disappointment. If I was god, I think I could do better than trying and plausibility.


So which interpretation has god said about the Hebrew word רַע, ra` in Isaiah 45:7 is correct?
evil ?
disaster ?
calamity ?
doom ?
trouble(s) ?
bad times ?
discord ?
woe ?
hard times ?
:shrug:


.

Many questions. Unfortunately, I do realize this is wrong thread/sub-forum for such discussion.
 

First Baseman

Retired athlete
Sorry that my approach to god claims comes across as poking fun, but no one is twisting your arm to come up with them. If you have a problem with people doubting or analyzing your beliefs then perhaps this isn't the place for you. You might want to try the choir in one of the christian DIR forums.


Don't care enough about your opinion to make any difference. :shrug:


.

Deflection. Hmm... You ask a question and poke fun at those who answer it. Exactly as trolls do. That's no coincidence, troll.
 

linr05

New Member
Take Isaiah 45:7 where the Hebrew word רַע ra` is translated as
evil
disaster
calamity
doom
trouble(s)
bad times
discord
woe
hard times​

So, which is right?
And how would one know?
.

7 I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.

The Holy Bible, Translated from the Latin Vulgate (Bellingham, WA 2009) Is 45:7.

"How to know which is right?"

SESSION IV (April 8, 1546)
The Sacred Books and the Traditions of the Apostles are Accepted1
783 [DS 1501] The sacred and holy ecumenical and general Synod of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Spirit, with the same three Legates of the Apostolic See presiding over it, keeping this constantly in view, that with the abolishing of errors, the purity itself of the Gospel is preserved in the Church, which promised before through the Prophets in the Holy Scriptures our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God first promulgated with His own mouth, and then commanded “to be preached” by His apostles “to every creature” as the source of every saving truth and of instruction in morals [Matt. 28:19 ff., Mark 16:15], and [the Synod] clearly perceiving that this truth and instruction are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which have been received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the apostles themselves, at the dictation of the Holy Spirit, have come down even to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand, [the Synod] following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives and holds in veneration with an equal affection of piety and reverence all the books both of the Old and of the New Testament, since one God is the author of both, and also the traditions themselves, those that appertain both to faith and to morals, as having been dictated either by Christ’s own word of mouth, or by the Holy Spirit, and preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous succession. And so that no doubt may arise in anyone’s mind as to which are the books that are accepted by this Synod, it has decreed that a list of the Sacred books be added to this decree.
784 [DS 1502] They are written here below:
Books of the Old Testament: The five books of Moses, namely, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first book of Esdras, and the second which is called Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Psalter of David consisting of 150 psalms, the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets, that is Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michaeas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachias; two books of the Machabees, the first and the second.

DENZINGER, HENRY – RAHNER, K. (ed.), The sources of Catholic dogma (St. Louis, MO 1954) 244.

The Study of Holy Scripture
[From the Encyclical, “Providentissimus Deus,” Nov., 1893]
1941 [DS 3280] Since there is need of a definite method of carrying on interpretation profitably, let the prudent teacher avoid either of two mistakes, that of those who give a cursory glance to each book, and that of those who delay too long over a certain part of one.… [The teacher] in this [work] will take as his text the Vulgate version, which the Council of Trent decreed [see n. 785] should be considered as authentic in public lectures, disputations, sermons, and expositions, and which the daily custom of the Church commends. Yet account will have to be taken of the remaining versions which Christian antiquity has commended and used, especially of the very ancient manuscripts. For although, as far as the heart of the matter is concerned, the meaning of the Hebrew and the Greek is well elucidated in the expressions of the Vulgate, yet if anything is set forth therein with ambiguity, or if without accuracy “an examination of the preceding language” will be profitable, as Augustine advises.1

DENZINGER, HENRY – RAHNER, K. (ed.), The sources of Catholic dogma (St. Louis, MO 1954) 488-489.

I take it you're having trouble with the concept that "God" "creates evil"?

Or are you really so petty as to quibble over the alternate concepts of "
disaster
calamity
doom
trouble(s)
bad times
discord
woe
hard times?

I refuse to read people's minds and I don't know Greek so I'm frankly at an impasse as to what you're attacking other than either God Himself or the vagaries of the Greek language?

[I'm reminded of a recent quip from a fellow by the name of John Corapi who advised: "Don't box with God; your arms are too short..."]


 

Skwim

Veteran Member
1. Roman Catholicism is much more than merely another "Abrahamic religion". Christ claimed He is God and gave His human life as an offering for Adam & Eve's and all repentant humanity's sins. By His Resurrection over death He proved His dominion over sin and death.
2. Proverbs declares the beginning of wisdom to be fear of the Lord. You appear to think you can skip the first step?
3. The straw man you call god doesn't come close to anyone anyone could respect!
4. Catholics have an obligation to use approved interpretations of Holy Scripture called Commentaries.
5. cf. BetrayedCatholics.com The mainstream actors and buildings calling themselves Catholic are a schismatic simulacrum. Bergoglio is an imposter.
6. Are you a free-thinker? You sound like one and sound proud of it.
7. God loves you even though you disdain Him. You sadden Him. He never forces anyone to love Him in return.
Your whole point being, what?


.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
7 I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.

The Holy Bible, Translated from the Latin Vulgate (Bellingham, WA 2009) Is 45:7.

"How to know which is right?"

SESSION IV (April 8, 1546)
The Sacred Books and the Traditions of the Apostles are Accepted1
783 [DS 1501] The sacred and holy ecumenical and general Synod of Trent, lawfully assembled in the Holy Spirit, with the same three Legates of the Apostolic See presiding over it, keeping this constantly in view, that with the abolishing of errors, the purity itself of the Gospel is preserved in the Church, which promised before through the Prophets in the Holy Scriptures our Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God first promulgated with His own mouth, and then commanded “to be preached” by His apostles “to every creature” as the source of every saving truth and of instruction in morals [Matt. 28:19 ff., Mark 16:15], and [the Synod] clearly perceiving that this truth and instruction are contained in the written books and in the unwritten traditions, which have been received by the apostles from the mouth of Christ Himself, or from the apostles themselves, at the dictation of the Holy Spirit, have come down even to us, transmitted as it were from hand to hand, [the Synod] following the examples of the orthodox Fathers, receives and holds in veneration with an equal affection of piety and reverence all the books both of the Old and of the New Testament, since one God is the author of both, and also the traditions themselves, those that appertain both to faith and to morals, as having been dictated either by Christ’s own word of mouth, or by the Holy Spirit, and preserved in the Catholic Church by a continuous succession. And so that no doubt may arise in anyone’s mind as to which are the books that are accepted by this Synod, it has decreed that a list of the Sacred books be added to this decree.
784 [DS 1502] They are written here below:
Books of the Old Testament: The five books of Moses, namely, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Paralipomenon, the first book of Esdras, and the second which is called Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Esther, Job, the Psalter of David consisting of 150 psalms, the Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Canticle of Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Jeremias with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel, the twelve minor Prophets, that is Osee, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michaeas, Nahum, Habacuc, Sophonias, Aggaeus, Zacharias, Malachias; two books of the Machabees, the first and the second.

DENZINGER, HENRY – RAHNER, K. (ed.), The sources of Catholic dogma (St. Louis, MO 1954) 244.

The Study of Holy Scripture
[From the Encyclical, “Providentissimus Deus,” Nov., 1893]
1941 [DS 3280] Since there is need of a definite method of carrying on interpretation profitably, let the prudent teacher avoid either of two mistakes, that of those who give a cursory glance to each book, and that of those who delay too long over a certain part of one.… [The teacher] in this [work] will take as his text the Vulgate version, which the Council of Trent decreed [see n. 785] should be considered as authentic in public lectures, disputations, sermons, and expositions, and which the daily custom of the Church commends. Yet account will have to be taken of the remaining versions which Christian antiquity has commended and used, especially of the very ancient manuscripts. For although, as far as the heart of the matter is concerned, the meaning of the Hebrew and the Greek is well elucidated in the expressions of the Vulgate, yet if anything is set forth therein with ambiguity, or if without accuracy “an examination of the preceding language” will be profitable, as Augustine advises.1

DENZINGER, HENRY – RAHNER, K. (ed.), The sources of Catholic dogma (St. Louis, MO 1954) 488-489.
Just so you know, what YOU may believe here is irrelevant.

As I said in the OP, "...one has to wonder why god went to the trouble having his word recorded and then not care how it was passed along. Either it wasn't meant to impact anyone other than those who read the original text, or he simply doesn't care what later readers get out of it."

I take it you're having trouble with the concept that "God" "creates evil"?
No trouble at all; however, in light of the Christian claim that god is love, good, righteous, and omnibenovelent, creating evil does seem quite out of character. But then Christians have a propensity to put the theological contradictions and difficulties of their belief out of mind while at the same time fiercely holding on to all the "good stuff." It's an interesting psychological ploy to retain the "harmony."

Or are you really so petty as to quibble over the alternate concepts of "
disaster
calamity
doom
trouble(s)
bad times
discord
woe
hard times?
Quibble? Although it may suit your peace of mind to play down the meaning of god's words, dismissing them as trivial when they present themselves as difficulties or conundrums, it shows a lack confidence in your beliefs. But whatever. . . . . .
I refuse to read people's minds and I don't know Greek so I'm frankly at an impasse as to what you're attacking other than either God Himself or the vagaries of the Greek language?
Then I suggest you reread what I wrote, take it at face value, and leave it at that. Why you are at a loss to pin down my objective isn't of any interest.


.
 

linr05

New Member
U asked where/how 2know about Isaiah's use of a Greek word. I supplied reliable sources. Your example doesn't support UR assertions.
 

linr05

New Member
As I said in the OP, "...one has to wonder why god went to the trouble having his word recorded and then not care how it was passed along. Either it wasn't meant to impact anyone other than those who read the original text, or he simply doesn't care what later readers get out of it."


No trouble at all; however, in light of the Christian claim that god is love, good, righteous, and omnibenovelent, creating evil does seem quite out of character. But then Christians have a propensity to put the theological contradictions and difficulties of their belief out of mind while at the same time fiercely holding on to all the "good stuff." It's an interesting psychological ploy to retain the "harmony."


Quibble? Although it may suit your peace of mind to play down the meaning of god's words, dismissing them as trivial when they present themselves as difficulties or conundrums, it shows a lack confidence in your beliefs. But whatever. . . . . .

Then I suggest you reread what I wrote, take it at face value, and leave it at that. Why you are at a loss to pin down my objective isn't of any interest.


.

I assure U I don't take God's Word nor His Bride lightly!

Approved Commentary from Haydock:

“Ver. 7. Create evil, &c. The evils of afflictions and punishments, but not the evil of sin. Ch.—I afflict and comfort my people.”

If a loving parent inflicted evil--afflictions and punishments--on a rebellious, disobedient child, would U accuse them also of being indifferent or ill-minded?
 

james dixon

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
If a loving parent inflicted evil--afflictions and punishments--on a rebellious, disobedient child, would U accuse them also of being indifferent or ill-minded?


If a loving parent inflicted evil

Your statement contradicts itself. A loving parent does not inflict evil on their child PERIOD. No if bits or what’s. All I ask is that you use a different term other than “evil”.

In religion, ethics, philosophy and psychology "good and evil" is a very common dichotomy. In cultures with Manichaean and Abrahamic religious influence, evil is usually perceived as the dualistic antagonistic opposite of good, in which good should prevail and evil should be defeated

Evil, in a general context, is the absence or opposite of that which is described as being good. Often, evil is used to denote profound immorality. In certain religious contexts, evil has been described as a supernatural force. Definitions of evil vary, as does the analysis of its motives. However, elements that are commonly associated with evil involve unbalanced behavior involving expediency, selfishness, ignorance, or neglect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_and_evil

All I ask is that you use a different term. It is not a concept a parent would feel towards their child.


:)-
 

linr05

New Member
Try~~~~~~

dis·ci·pline


ˈdisəplən/

noun

1. 1.

the practice of training people to obey rules or a code of behavior, using punishment to correct disobedience.

"a lack of proper parental and school discipline"

synonyms:

control, training, teaching, instruction, regulation, direction, order,authority, rule, strictness, a firm hand; Mo
Skwim started this thread. I suggested he use approved Commentary to settle his quandary over his assertion that "evil" as used in Isaiah 45:7 was ambivalent. He wouldn't /I did. Now you reject the approved useage for evil and suggest an alternate useage. That is your prerogative but it is not the Christian one.

I rest my case that God is not indifferent. He allows admonishments to occur to bring repentance.

If you call that discipline that's fine. It was Skwim who thought such evil displayed indifference on God's part. I wholly object to his blasphemy.
 

linr05

New Member
Skwim started this thread. I suggested he use approved Commentary to settle his quandary over his assertion that "evil" as used in Isaiah 45:7 was ambivalent. He wouldn't /I did. Now you reject the approved useage for evil and suggest an alternate useage. That is your prerogative but it is not the Christian one.

I rest my case that God is not indifferent. He allows admonishments to occur to bring repentance.

If you call that discipline that's fine. It was Skwim who thought such evil displayed indifference on God's part. I wholly object to his blasphemy.
afflictions... not admonishments.
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
I assure U I don't take God's Word nor His Bride lightly!

Approved Commentary from Haydock:

“Ver. 7. Create evil, &c. The evils of afflictions and punishments, but not the evil of sin. Ch.—I afflict and comfort my people.”


If a loving parent inflicted evil--afflictions and punishments--on a rebellious, disobedient child, would U accuse them also of being indifferent or ill-minded?
I have absolutely no idea of what this means. Are you saying that someone, this Haydock person perhaps, has decided that the evil god created only applies to certain kinds of evils? That although god didn't qualify the evil he created, others are free to do so?


.
 
Top