Theodicy: God hates everyone

[Mono no aware]

You are eloquently and magnificently proclaiming reality to those who are Catholics and believe in Revelation.  I thank you for this.  But this isn't going to reach Pon de Replay (his belief is shaky at best). You can't argue when there is no common ground.

I agree.  Vetus Ordo has been very good at offering the orthodox Catholic theology on this thread.  I've always admired the measured, learned, and unapologetic style that gives his writing such force.  It's not surprising that he has a great appreciation of the doctrine of God's justice and God as the judge, because Vetus Ordo has the temperament of a jurist.  "The law is the law."

But after ten pages, I think we may be close to saying everything that can possibly be said from our respective sides, so I am going to bow out, and will leave the last word to anyone who would like to have it.  Interestingly, Kirin who made the OP never made a single post in response.  Kaesekopf has accused him of "sh!t-posting" in the past, and this may be another such instance, but it made for a productive thread.

[Maximilian]

I think reason can be overwhelmed by suffering that is so intense and unending as Chestertonian's. 

Reason is not the problem here. Chestertonian seems able to reason fine.

Don't judge him (leave that to God); be compassionate. 

God can judge Chestertonian's soul, but that has nothing to do with whether he should continue to make post after post attacking the faith of all the Catholics who come here to a Catholic discussion board. It's not compassionate to look the other way while people blaspheme God.

[Mono no aware]

God can judge Chestertonian's soul, but that has nothing to do with whether he should continue to make post after post attacking the faith of all the Catholics who come here to a Catholic discussion board. It's not compassionate to look the other way while people blaspheme God.

There's talk on another thread of having the five most annoying posters be banned on the forum's fifth anniversary.  I suppose it will be either put to a vote or left to the discretion of Der Kopf.  I think I would probably make the cut myself, and am actually looking forward to it as I have exceeded three thousand posts and that's an obscene amount; I can offer nothing other than irritation anymore besides.  But I don't think Chestertonian would be included.  He is (deservedly) quite popular.

[Maximilian]

God can judge Chestertonian's soul, but that has nothing to do with whether he should continue to make post after post attacking the faith of all the Catholics who come here to a Catholic discussion board. It's not compassionate to look the other way while people blaspheme God.

There's talk on another thread of having the five most annoying posters be banned on the forum's fifth anniversary.  I suppose it will be either put to a vote or left to the discretion of Der Kopf.  I think I would probably make the cut myself, and am actually looking forward to it as I have exceeded three thousand posts and that's an obscene amount; I can offer nothing other than irritation anymore besides.  But I don't think Chestertonian would be included.  He is (deservedly) quite popular.

I've never been in favor of banning anyone. But I am in favor of people having a conscience, along with a self-awareness of the destructive nature of their own behavior.

[Chestertonian]

God can judge Chestertonian's soul, but that has nothing to do with whether he should continue to make post after post attacking the faith of all the Catholics who come here to a Catholic discussion board. It's not compassionate to look the other way while people blaspheme God.

and this is a theodicy thread in which we discuss the probem of evil and suffering.  how can an all good, all powerful, all loving God, allow so much evil and suffering?  unless i'm misinterpreting you and Vetus Ordo, your argument is that there is no problem, that suffering is not a problem at all, in fact, it's just great.  It's the same philosophical conclusion as Pete the Cat, which is: "No matter what you step in, it's all good."  so according to you, suffering is just great because it's  a manifestation of gods justice, justice is great, and everyone gets what they deserves so if it happens, God wants it to happen and they deserve it. but the picture of God that you paint just does not fit the definition of "benevolent" by any stretch of the human imagination.  God is accountable to no one, so "benevolent" can mean whatever He wants it to mean, I supppose, but at that point evil stops being evil, it becomes good simply by virtue of the fact that God allows that.  "It's all good," as Pete the Cat would say.  i'm not even going to call that mental gymnastics.  It's mental rhythmic gymnastics.   

whereas I think, no, it isn't all good, bad things are bad--not good. I am still struggling with the unresolved problem and I have long expanses of downtime to think about it.  as for the blasphemy accusation, you are entitled to your own opinion but I don't think this is God's first wrestling match in this regard. 

[Non Nobis]

I think reason can be overwhelmed by suffering that is so intense and unending as Chestertonian's. 

Reason is not the problem here. Chestertonian seems able to reason fine.

Don't judge him (leave that to God); be compassionate. 

God can judge Chestertonian's soul, but that has nothing to do with whether he should continue to make post after post attacking the faith of all the Catholics who come here to a Catholic discussion board. It's not compassionate to look the other way while people blaspheme God.

His logic may be OK but the realm of things he thinks about is shrunken by his suffering and mental state.  I just see myself in his state having similar anguish. Yes, I can see myself tempted even to blasphemy.  May God help me by His grace.

Probably you are right that his objective blasphemy (I think it is, Ches), and Pons' attack on God are bad for this forum.  But it is hard to fight evil ideas (and tragic ideas) unless you hear them; and I always hope that one of us will finally give a little bit of light (and comfort) (which God may work with, as He can).

I think the issues are worth discussing (God's goodness is meant to be defended, even philosophically); but perhaps it should be in a different situation (e.g. with priests and scholars), not a public Catholic forum.

I'm glad I don't have to make any decisions as to what needs to be done. 

[Chestertonian]

your slapping analogy doesn't sound so bad.  i'm sure we've all been slapped at some point or another.  for most of us it was our own mothers that did it.  but suppose you cross out "slapped" and replace it with "murdered" "tortured" "raped" "molested" "abused" "physically mutilated and disfigured" and so on.  it's difficult enough trying to love a  God who allows these things to happen.  But saying that God actively wanted these traumatic events to happen to us and/or our loved ones.  Again, what kind of "maximum good" could possibly come from things like rape, child molestation, and so on.  the picture you paint of God sounds more like Allah to be honest.

  When I ponder the idea of loving a God who wants me to experience horrifyingly traumatic events, it becomes impossible to love God.  Because then God becomes the ultimate perpetrator of the horrific act, the sinner who committed it was just the instrument for God making sure that you were tortured/disfigured and so on.  Then the idea of Heaven doesn't even sound that appealing because it's spending eternity with a God who specifically, personally wants these things to happen to me.  It doesn't sound all that different from Hell.  At that point, what's there to look forward to after a lifetime of suffering and anguish...eternal 1-on-1 time with the same deity who ardently desired torture and trauma?  that's the "reward?"

I think it is extremely important to realize there is a difference between God's positive will (He positively desires good) and His permissive will (He sometimes permits evil, when He knows a greater good will result).  God did not positively WANT His only Son to be tortured worse than any other man could be; but He permissively willed it because it would result in the salvation of many souls.  Christ did not positively WANT to be tortured, but He wanted to obey His Father in His Father's permissive will. 

When we say "accept God's will" we refer to both kinds of will, but there is a difference.

When you are all wrapped up here and now in tortuous pain and suffering, or mentally considering the suffering of others, it is hard to think of any "greater good".  But when we understand our lives (both on earth and in the next life) in eternity, we will see it.  If we are damned, I speculate that our suffering in hell will be justly reduced  (whether we see it or not) because of our suffering on earth.  Our suffering on earth may alternately take away our Purgatory altogether, or at least reduce it.  Sin is the cause of suffering in Hell and Purgatory; suffering is not the cause of more suffering, Chestertonian!

We can't refuse to accept the possibility that God has a true greater good in mind when we (or others) are suffering simply because our reason cannot stretch far enough to understand it now.  We can pray to accept our suffering more, and then come to see a part of the greater good that the Saints saw.  But if we can't be a upper-case Saint, we can at least pray for the humility to accept God's having some greater good that it is impossible for us to see now.

That sacrifice can be offered out of LOVE is probably the greatest good that suffering can provide for one who willingly suffers what God permits. Pray to LOVE God and neighbor.

I speculate that suffering here and now may spiritually help many people in this life or in the next (I speculate that this may be true for millions who may suffer innocently in natural disasters).  INDEED, this is of little consolation now.  But in the next life we WILL have the love of God and neighbor and that we have helped them will give us immense joy.

God knows what is in our hearts and souls better than we do.  Don't condemn yourself for feelings that are beyond your control.

I think tht picture of God that you paint is a different picture fun what Max and Vetus paint.  It could just be my complete inability to fathom the idea of justice and mercy coinciding, but the idea of God only having a positive will and no permissive will is just frightening to me and does not seem benevolent at all.. I am starting to have a panic attack just thinking about it

but the idea of the posytive/prmissive will does seem benevolent but I just can't imagine so much goodness that it eclipses the bad

[Matto]

There's talk on another thread of having the five most annoying posters be banned on the forum's fifth anniversary.  I suppose it will be either put to a vote or left to the discretion of Der Kopf.  I think I would probably make the cut myself, and am actually looking forward to it as I have exceeded three thousand posts and that's an obscene amount; I can offer nothing other than irritation anymore besides.  But I don't think Chestertonian would be included.  He is (deservedly) quite popular.

I don't think you would be voted off the island. I think you are one of the more interesting posters on the traditional Catholic forums I read (though I don't follow all of them). I really liked when you posted the video of them burying all those squealing pigs alive in Korea as a way of showing the seeming meaninglessness of life. I prefer the idea of pardoning five banned members and allowing them to come back.

[Mono no aware]

I don't think you would be voted off the island. I think you are one of the more interesting posters on the traditional Catholic forums I read (though I don't follow all of them). I really liked when you posted the video of them burying all those squealing pigs alive in Korea as a way of showing the seeming meaninglessness of life. I prefer the idea of pardoning five banned members and allowing them to come back.

Seeing as how I consider you one of the best and most saintly posters on the forum, Matto, I take this as a great compliment.  I'm not sure if your view would be widely shared, but there's only one way to find out.  As the milliennials say, "let's do this thing!"

[Non Nobis]

your slapping analogy doesn't sound so bad.  i'm sure we've all been slapped at some point or another.  for most of us it was our own mothers that did it.  but suppose you cross out "slapped" and replace it with "murdered" "tortured" "raped" "molested" "abused" "physically mutilated and disfigured" and so on.  it's difficult enough trying to love a  God who allows these things to happen.  But saying that God actively wanted these traumatic events to happen to us and/or our loved ones.  Again, what kind of "maximum good" could possibly come from things like rape, child molestation, and so on.  the picture you paint of God sounds more like Allah to be honest.

  When I ponder the idea of loving a God who wants me to experience horrifyingly traumatic events, it becomes impossible to love God.  Because then God becomes the ultimate perpetrator of the horrific act, the sinner who committed it was just the instrument for God making sure that you were tortured/disfigured and so on.  Then the idea of Heaven doesn't even sound that appealing because it's spending eternity with a God who specifically, personally wants these things to happen to me.  It doesn't sound all that different from Hell.  At that point, what's there to look forward to after a lifetime of suffering and anguish...eternal 1-on-1 time with the same deity who ardently desired torture and trauma?  that's the "reward?"

I think it is extremely important to realize there is a difference between God's positive will (He positively desires good) and His permissive will (He sometimes permits evil, when He knows a greater good will result).  God did not positively WANT His only Son to be tortured worse than any other man could be; but He permissively willed it because it would result in the salvation of many souls.  Christ did not positively WANT to be tortured, but He wanted to obey His Father in His Father's permissive will. 

When we say "accept God's will" we refer to both kinds of will, but there is a difference.

When you are all wrapped up here and now in tortuous pain and suffering, or mentally considering the suffering of others, it is hard to think of any "greater good".  But when we understand our lives (both on earth and in the next life) in eternity, we will see it.  If we are damned, I speculate that our suffering in hell will be justly reduced  (whether we see it or not) because of our suffering on earth.  Our suffering on earth may alternately take away our Purgatory altogether, or at least reduce it.  Sin is the cause of suffering in Hell and Purgatory; suffering is not the cause of more suffering, Chestertonian!

We can't refuse to accept the possibility that God has a true greater good in mind when we (or others) are suffering simply because our reason cannot stretch far enough to understand it now.  We can pray to accept our suffering more, and then come to see a part of the greater good that the Saints saw.  But if we can't be a upper-case Saint, we can at least pray for the humility to accept God's having some greater good that it is impossible for us to see now.

That sacrifice can be offered out of LOVE is probably the greatest good that suffering can provide for one who willingly suffers what God permits. Pray to LOVE God and neighbor.

I speculate that suffering here and now may spiritually help many people in this life or in the next (I speculate that this may be true for millions who may suffer innocently in natural disasters).  INDEED, this is of little consolation now.  But in the next life we WILL have the love of God and neighbor and that we have helped them will give us immense joy.

God knows what is in our hearts and souls better than we do.  Don't condemn yourself for feelings that are beyond your control.

I think tht picture of God that you paint is a different picture fun what Max and Vetus paint.  It could just be my complete inability to fathom the idea of justice and mercy coinciding, but the idea of God only having a positive will and no permissive will is just frightening to me and does not seem benevolent at all.. I am starting to have a panic attack just thinking about it

but the idea of the posytive/prmissive will does seem benevolent but I just can't imagine so much goodness that it eclipses the bad

I think it is beyond the imagination and needs faith (or very clear thinking about what good and evil are, and what God is: thinking such as that of St. Thomas).  The things you are saying are wrong (I must say objectively evil), but that your faith may be weak is for God to judge; and He will forgive ANYTHING, Ches, if you go to Him in confession.  He knows your suffering and how it overwhelms you (and may excuse much)...

Here is one quote from the Bible:

16] For the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit, that we are the sons of God. [17] And if sons, heirs also; heirs indeed of God, and joint heirs with Christ: yet so, if we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him. [18] For I reckon that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come, that shall be revealed in us

And this:

[28] And we know that to them that love God, all things work together unto good, to such as, according to his purpose, are called to be saints. [29]

Does "good" mean God's sadistic pleasure? No, it is talking about our happiness, not necessarily (or mostly, for anyone) in this life, but beyond our imagination in the next.

I know you are unable to love God for your suffering, but love Him for His answer that will completely eclipse it in the next life and for your chance to obtain it and His desire that you do, and for His dying for this (and for all of us) ... and for your  wife and children (even for us at SD?) and probably many  other things (if you think more on them).

I think your suffering puts you in first class among those God wants for heaven.

[Vetus Ordo]

I don't think you would be voted off the island. I think you are one of the more interesting posters on the traditional Catholic forums I read (though I don't follow all of them). I really liked when you posted the video of them burying all those squealing pigs alive in Korea as a way of showing the seeming meaninglessness of life. I prefer the idea of pardoning five banned members and allowing them to come back.

Seeing as how I consider you one of the best and most saintly posters on the forum, Matto, I take this as a great compliment.  I'm not sure if your view would be widely shared, but there's only one way to find out.  As the milliennials say, "let's do this thing!"

You've been predestined to stay in this forum, Pon.

There's nothing anyone can do about it.

[Lydia Purpuraria]

Sorry, but I think I might have to hold off on replying to Maximilian for the time being.  I'm sitting here waiting in angst for der Kopf's decision on the Great Banning (which, for many, could very well bring about "a certain exultation in the phrase, "good riddance!" LOL). 

[Chestertonian]

your slapping analogy doesn't sound so bad.  i'm sure we've all been slapped at some point or another.  for most of us it was our own mothers that did it.  but suppose you cross out "slapped" and replace it with "murdered" "tortured" "raped" "molested" "abused" "physically mutilated and disfigured" and so on.  it's difficult enough trying to love a  God who allows these things to happen.  But saying that God actively wanted these traumatic events to happen to us and/or our loved ones.  Again, what kind of "maximum good" could possibly come from things like rape, child molestation, and so on.  the picture you paint of God sounds more like Allah to be honest.

  When I ponder the idea of loving a God who wants me to experience horrifyingly traumatic events, it becomes impossible to love God.  Because then God becomes the ultimate perpetrator of the horrific act, the sinner who committed it was just the instrument for God making sure that you were tortured/disfigured and so on.  Then the idea of Heaven doesn't even sound that appealing because it's spending eternity with a God who specifically, personally wants these things to happen to me.  It doesn't sound all that different from Hell.  At that point, what's there to look forward to after a lifetime of suffering and anguish...eternal 1-on-1 time with the same deity who ardently desired torture and trauma?  that's the "reward?"

I think it is extremely important to realize there is a difference between God's positive will (He positively desires good) and His permissive will (He sometimes permits evil, when He knows a greater good will result).  God did not positively WANT His only Son to be tortured worse than any other man could be; but He permissively willed it because it would result in the salvation of many souls.  Christ did not positively WANT to be tortured, but He wanted to obey His Father in His Father's permissive will. 

When we say "accept God's will" we refer to both kinds of will, but there is a difference.

When you are all wrapped up here and now in tortuous pain and suffering, or mentally considering the suffering of others, it is hard to think of any "greater good".  But when we understand our lives (both on earth and in the next life) in eternity, we will see it.  If we are damned, I speculate that our suffering in hell will be justly reduced  (whether we see it or not) because of our suffering on earth.  Our suffering on earth may alternately take away our Purgatory altogether, or at least reduce it.  Sin is the cause of suffering in Hell and Purgatory; suffering is not the cause of more suffering, Chestertonian!

We can't refuse to accept the possibility that God has a true greater good in mind when we (or others) are suffering simply because our reason cannot stretch far enough to understand it now.  We can pray to accept our suffering more, and then come to see a part of the greater good that the Saints saw.  But if we can't be a upper-case Saint, we can at least pray for the humility to accept God's having some greater good that it is impossible for us to see now.

That sacrifice can be offered out of LOVE is probably the greatest good that suffering can provide for one who willingly suffers what God permits. Pray to LOVE God and neighbor.

I speculate that suffering here and now may spiritually help many people in this life or in the next (I speculate that this may be true for millions who may suffer innocently in natural disasters).  INDEED, this is of little consolation now.  But in the next life we WILL have the love of God and neighbor and that we have helped them will give us immense joy.

God knows what is in our hearts and souls better than we do.  Don't condemn yourself for feelings that are beyond your control.

I think tht picture of God that you paint is a different picture fun what Max and Vetus paint.  It could just be my complete inability to fathom the idea of justice and mercy coinciding, but the idea of God only having a positive will and no permissive will is just frightening to me and does not seem benevolent at all.. I am starting to have a panic attack just thinking about it

but the idea of the posytive/prmissive will does seem benevolent but I just can't imagine so much goodness that it eclipses the bad

I think it is beyond the imagination and needs faith (or very clear thinking about what good and evil are, and what God is: thinking such as that of St. Thomas).  The things you are saying are wrong (I must say objectively evil), but that your faith may be weak is for God to judge; and He will forgive ANYTHING, Ches, if you go to Him in confession.  He knows your suffering and how it overwhelms you (and may excuse much)...

Here is one quote from the Bible:

16] For the Spirit himself giveth testimony to our spirit, that we are the sons of God. [17] And if sons, heirs also; heirs indeed of God, and joint heirs with Christ: yet so, if we suffer with him, that we may be also glorified with him. [18] For I reckon that the sufferings of this time are not worthy to be compared with the glory to come, that shall be revealed in us

And this:

[28] And we know that to them that love God, all things work together unto good, to such as, according to his purpose, are called to be saints. [29]

Does "good" mean God's sadistic pleasure? No, it is talking about our happiness, not necessarily (or mostly, for anyone) in this life, but beyond our imagination in the next.

I know you are unable to love God for your suffering, but love Him for His answer that will completely eclipse it in the next life and for your chance to obtain it and His desire that you do, and for His dying for this (and for all of us) ... and for your  wife and children (even for us at SD?) and probably many  other things (if you think more on them).

I think your suffering puts you in first class among those God wants for heaven.

well....blashphemh is unforgivable so it doesnt go away in confession...  i cant remember blaspheming?  I guess maybe saying that I don't know how I can love God if He personally desires for me to suffer?  I hope that isnt true but the fact that it might be true is enough to make it difficult to love God

my issue s that I have lots of differet thoughts goingthrough my head at the same time, not all connected to each other, but sometimes a particular worry will gnaw at me and I end up ruminating about it and worrying that it is true...


my two boys have a nice little bookshelf filled with catholic children's books...mostly ones we got from used book stores, homeschooling websites, TAN books etc.  one of them is a little booklet called "My Jesus and I" which my older son always liked to read when he was very little it's full of little illustrations of angels helping little children throughout their day and little children walking alongside Jesus as a child, as if they are all friends... and paints a happy little picture of a close, intimate, happy life with Jesus and Mary. 








i dont know what it is like to be a Christian child... i never read such books growing up or understand what it means to have a catholic upbringing... i dont know what it is like growing up with this idea that God is always watching out for you and has angels surrounding you always helping you grow closer to Him.  all i know is that this image of God we give little children is the opposite image from the one that's in my head.  if I think about God positively willing suffering it gets even harder because I have neuropathy in my chest and arms and legs and I get this sense that God is beating me up which is frightening...  instead of just saying "I dont agree with this thought" my brain can't just discard things it doesnt want so it stays there and so i keep worrying "what if this is true?" "what if that is true?" What if God hates everyone?  What if I'm not predestined?  so the construct of God in my own mind is like the sum of every "what if" about Gods justice.  He doesnt owe us mercy so I can't expect to ever receive that.  I get this sense that my guardian angel left my side? once the thought of that enters my mind i don't know how to get it out

[An aspiring Thomist]

well....blashphemh is unforgivable so it doesnt go away in confession.

No, it is forgivable. Besides your severe ailment, most of your problems with God being good most likely stem from misunderstandings like this. If you thinking of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit mentioned by Jesus, that is hard passage to interpret. But regardless, any sin is forgivable in confession as long as the Church grants the faculties since Jesus said whatever sins you forgive are forgiven to the Apostles.

[Quaremerepulisti]

And this is Exhibit A of why traditionalism has no future.

Because a whole lot of it is crap, and there is no effort made whatsoever to separate the wheat from the chaff.  What isn't crap is what is important and in fact the only thing that is important: repentance from sin and turning toward God, in order to serve the true and living God, and to achieve union with Him.

But, aside from all that, because some big name said something in the 5th Century, that settles it, according to the traditionalist mindset, because how dare we think we might know better than he (so goes the response every single time).  But all posters like Pon de Replay and Chestertonian do is simply point out that the sh*t really does stink.

Reason can know certain things about God, and if someone makes a claim of "faith" or "revelation" that contradicts any of this, it is wrong.  The consistent human temptation is to make out of God an anthromorphism: just a vastly superior creature.  Because that how we instinctively think of things.  That is how the Greeks and Romans constructed the Greek and Roman gods.  But certain categories are simply not applicable to an infinite and completely simple being.

If it is really true that God predetermines the vast majority of mankind for hell in order to manifest His justice and to bring about His glory, He is no more worthy of worship than Josef Stalin or Kim Jong-Un, who do similar things, and He is "manifesting" nothing else than that He is no better than they; in fact much, much worse.  But all of this is nonsense.  Yes, I know St. Augustine said something similar with his idea of the massa damnata, and you know what?  I don't care.  Am I saying I know something better than a Doctor of the Church?  Abso-freaking-lutely.  Shoot me.  I don't care.  Tell me how "proud" I am.  I don't care.  All this presumes, among other things, that God makes decisions in the same manner as creatures do.  But He does not.  In fact, the very concept of a "decision" is incompatible with God.  I will not worship this so-called "God" who is in reality a glorified dictator no matter what.

Then of course you will tell me that "God's ways are not mine" and "who am I to question God".  But the very hero of traditionalism, the Angelic Doctor, whom traditionalists love to bash everyone else over the head with, says that God's attributes are analogous to the human attributes and not equivocal.  That is to say, we can absolutely question some one's idea of God if the attributes of this God are equivocal to the equivalent attributes among humans.  So, love means that one wills another's good for its own sake; and thus God must will whatever good is found among humans for their own sake, and not for whatever glory it gives Him.