Unintended Messages

Often when one looks beyond what appears as the obvious, there is another message--truth to be discovered.  It can be both unintended and at variance with the initial statement.  In fact, it allows for another story quite different from the first.  So it is with the following.

If a god knew what the creatures that it makes would "freely choose" and it makes them anyway and punishes them for such choices...that's not only evil...it's insane. 

Name withheld

What can one make of such a statement?  A place to begin is with the tone and tenor of the statement.  One can certainly wonder at some things--two of several are as follows.  First, why is it that "a god" is valued in the negative?  Couldn't the question  be asked if not the positive, at least in the neutral?  Second, what "choices" are available and what are the implications based in there being "choices?"

First, the values present.  Keep in mind that when there is a negative, of necessity there must be a previous positive.  In other words, if one observes that God is "not good," there must be an antecedent "good" by which to make the "not good" observation.   

Therefore, for the writer's "evil" and "insane" to exist, there is an assumption that the opposite positive exists.  Such brings about another question.  What is the origin of that "good?"  Did this notion of "good" evolve?  Is it just a rational social construct?  Did it just happen by some random chance?  This is perhaps the major unintended messages of the statement.  There are more!

Consider the "freely choose" thought.  The notion of free choice means that the possibility of there not being free choice exists.  In this case the created is vested with a certain capacity to make choices.  If that capacity did not exist then there would be no choice and thus a whole host of other elements would not be present.   There is for example, the matter of opportunity which is present when there is choice.  Said another way, remove choice and opportunity is removed.

One of the opportunities present is that of relationship.  Choice is necessary for there to be relationship.  Thus the created was vested not just with the opportunity of choice but also the opportunity to be blessed with relationships from those choices.

Then there is the matter of responsibility.  The initial statement is based in the notion that the created is held accountable for poor decisions that grow out of the previously reference free will.  If one accepts that there is responsibility, then one must assume that there is a standard by which to divide responsible from irresponsible.  That being so, the writer must assume that the creator did not make clear the dividing line.  Quite an assumption! 

As with any number of choices, there is an outcome.  Notice the assumption is that the outcome of choice is punishment.  Again the unintended message is that if there is the possibility of "punishment" there then must be the possibility of "blessing."  Thus, the choices one makes may be dire in outcome or could result in opportunity, responsibility, relationship, and blessing.   

Interesting that the whole notion of the created making right choices and being blessed is ignored.  The focus is upon the consequences of wrong choices.   This of course is a reflection of the writer's view of the "creator" and as well the "created."

The final observation is this.  Quite right, the writer observes that the created has a propensity for failing and that points to another element of the discussion.  If such is so, then would it not seem logical that the creator would create a solution to the need of the created?  Well such would not be apparent to one who takes a dim view of the Creator!

"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever, believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.  For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him."  John 3:16-17