So God Makes This Deal With Satan

If God exists, and God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect, then
why did God make a deal with Satan to afflict Job?
God: Where you off to today, Satan?
Satan: Oh...here and there...causing the usual mischief.
God: Have you considered my servant, Job?
Satan: Who can mess with Job? You're protecting him. I bet if you stopped, though, he'd curse you to your face.
God: Look...I'll make a deal with you...you can destroy everthing belonging to Job; you can even hurt him pretty badly; but, don't destroy Job.
Satan: You've gotta deal.

i have been told-

to test. (and take pleasure in the defeat? of satan and the triumph? of Job?)

i think he passed it and was given aboundingly more than he had to begin with.

but had he made the choice to "curse god in his face" the outcome would have been diferent?


and along with all that/ apart from all that...

if god exists like it says, everything we have or have done, even the ability to think/consider what these things are, is given to us by god.

so we can't ask the question why... even though we can ask the question why.

lol, rip it to shreds guys...

not my opinions- just memories, for now.

If God allows evil for the sake of good because of the more good that is later received, then evil is itself good. Let us say for the sake of argument, then, that to kill a Jew is good, because the ends justify the means, and what the jewish community receives as a result of the Jew's death will be multiplied. The Holocaust is even better because the Jewish community will receive even more than they did than when the one Jew died. Well, that would make God a utilitarian, now wouldn't it? If that argument sounds evil, then one must consider the consequences before asserting something like "evil rendered generates greater rewards."

evil actions can be turned into good results?
(i assume we are speaking through divine intervention)
one lead to the other so they are one in the same?

If you are using the argument that the justification for God's action was because Job received increasingly more than he lost, then your argument justifies evil as long as good results from that evil, thereby effectively making evil good.

IMO whatever "justification" god had in acting the way he did, concerns proving satan wrong.

and by having "good come from evil", that re-asserts the "ability" of god to change "evil intentions" into "positive outcomes". i don't think it justifies the existence of it... only recognises that existence, and counteracts it.

SO, must evil exist in order for "good" to be experienced?... if it didn't exist, could good still come of things? if only good was the true wanting of a "God" like we speak of, he would not have made us into autonomous beings. it seems to me he likes when a decision for good is made in the light of "temptation of evil things".

So God forced immense amounts of evil on Job for Job to appreciate good? Is that to say that God forced immense amounts of death on Jews for Jews to appreciate life? Must one experience extreme amounts of discomfort to appreciate comfort? I don't think that follows. With the introduction of physical evil for one to appreciate moral good, one introduces moral evil. So, not only do you have Job wrything in pain, but you also have friends taunting him by saying that he should confess his sins, by talking behind Job's back about Job finally getting what he desserves, and by not giving out of their own storerooms because they think God's afflicting Job because Job has sinned.

Likewise, you get people saying that the Jews got what they desserved because of what? They killed Jesus?

again-

ALLOW, not force. if he forced, it would contradict his stance on free will?

satan is the "force" that "plants the seed of desire", we are the ones who make the decision to act- through time bringing that "seed" to full maturity, and since god allows this process...

you could say he is the initial cause.

Concerning U.S. laws... am i right in recalling that if you do not lend aid to an accident, you are at fault?

Let's not get ahead of ourselves with U.S. law before we've resolved universal law. So, if Satan is the force, and God causes the force, and I suppose Jesus is the equal but opposite force caused by God, then God is simply the unmoved mover that is neither good nor evil. That assertion says nothing about God's deal with Satan if the Bible is to be literally translated. If it is not to be literally translated, then one is left in a quandary, because how, then, does one qualify one's notions of God, Satan, and Jesus?

comparing the fact that even if you don't cause something "bad"... you are "required by law" to render aid.

again, generalization... i recall how well that word fit into a light analogy...

quote:

---

if Satan is the force, and God causes the force, and I suppose Jesus is the equal but opposite force caused by God

---

if satan is working against god, the only thing on "satan's side" "caused" by god is satan himself.

i think satan is opposing god's choice to extend his gift of love and free will. the greater, yet less prevalent, attracting and allowing forces.

the bible says "god" is a triune. so if jesus- the word of god-
was the only "opposing force" as you assumed, it would either mean that the part of the triune i believe you refer to as god was the unmoved mover as you have said...or that "that aspect" of god was constantly moving/working/whatever.

da_deef pointed this out in another post-as far as good and evil- if things just were before a "defiance" of that way, then it would not be called good or bad... it just WOULD BE. so apart from sin, things just are...

..."I AM that, I AM"

creation of "evil" came through a part of what He created?
God is inadvertently at fault...

For this reason, skepticism as to the idea of a morally perfet god is relevant.

at least by the "accident wasn't my fault" comparison in my previous post... you were right in saying i should have saved that one/

If one is going to use physics as an analogy for religion, then one cannot have a cause that is the effect of that which it has caused and force that is an equal but opposite reaction to itself.