If man is morally culpable for doing bad, is not God, Man's
creator, also morally culpable for the bad that man does?

     The Christians argue that all that comes from God is good, and that
Man comes from God, but Man is not good.

     They argue that man has a free will, so man is morally culpable for
the bad that he does, but that his creator is not.

     If I am a scientist creating deadly anthrax for biological warfare
knowing full well what might happen should they ever escape, and knowing
there is a high probability that they might escape one day, and then
they do escape killing millions of people, do I shrug my shoulders and
say "I am not to blame, the little buggers killed them."

     If I create an army of human clones, knowing full well that they
have free wills, and I set them free on the Earth knowing full well that
many of them, if not all of them, will do bad things at some times in
their lives, do I not carry the burden of culpability along with my
creatures for the bad that they do?

     If I have a child by a woman, and I have this child knowing full
well that this child might one day do bad, am I not also morally
culpable for the bad that this child does?  Is it not incumbent upon me
to think carefully about whether to have this child or not, what the
consequences to others might be and to accept full responsibility for
those consequences should they turn out bad?

     Do I shrug my shoulders and say "I had nothing to do with it, my
child is the one who killed you."

     Is the creator of the monster not morally culpable for the actions
of the monster?

     Now God is also all knowing, he created man KNOWING that man would
do bad.  Or at least he knew there was a possibility to it.

     So rather than allow man's bad-doing to run rough shod over God's
good creation, he probably incorporated man's expected bad behavior INTO
his creation.

     God had a free will about whether to create or not, he wasn't
forced to create, he could just as easily not created.  Is not God then
also morally culpable for the suffering and bad that was generated in
his creation which he knew and expected to happen and which he BUILT

     Without God's creation there would have been no suffering or man to
do bad.

     Who started the cycle of suffering with enough awareness of the
possibility of that suffering to have been able to do something about it
before it happened?

     One might argue that giving man free will and allowing him to do
bad was a necessary part of the good of creation, that a 'good' creation
could not have been created with out the freewill and the bad that
arose.  But then should we not be able to say that man's bad is in fact
good in some higher sense, thus allowing us to continue to claim that
all that comes from God is good?

     If any HUMAN had created a universe and created other humans and
put them into it to have at it with each other, that creator human would
be considered a monster.

      How so is not God then?


- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith     The Paths of Lovers    Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF        Cross            Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com    In the Line of Duty    http://www.lightlink.com

================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Sun Jul 10 12:06:01 EDT 2016
WEB:  http://www.clearing.org
BLOG: http://adoretheproof.blogspot.org
FTP:  ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore244.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help in body
=========== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===============
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning,
but not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)

Sun Jul 10 17:59:34 EDT 2016