From: sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe)
Subject: Re: The Book of Job
Organization: New Mexico State University
Distribution: world,public
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 10:31:35 GMT

In article <parsons.725779973@cygnus.cis.ksu.edu.cis.ksu.edu> parsons@cis.ksu.edu (Scott S Parish ) writes:
>sumner@math.scarolina.edu (David Sumner) writes:
>
>>Scott Parish's commentary on Job: 
>>> Satan was the one coming before God accusing Job of only
>>> serving God for the cash, land, camels, sheep, etc.  So, 
>>>to prove Satan wrong He allowed Satan to rake Job over the 
>>> coals.  It wasn't so much to punish or torture (as you put 
>>> it) Job, as to put Satan in his place.  
>> 
>>Isn't it strange that God needs to 'prove' something to 
>>Satan? Don't the Christians realize how insecure this makes 
>>their god appear to be?  He hurts an innocent man just to 
>>make a point with the Devil.
>
>1.  Satan is not Omniscient; therefore, to answer the accusation
>God would either have to a) tell him plainly that Job wouldn't
>curse Him, b) as someone so humourously proposed, used the old 
>Jedi mind trick on Satan or c) allowed Satan to do what he did.
>
>The problem with 'a', as I see it, is Satan still wouldn't have
>believed, even though God does not lie, and probably would have 
>continued to accuse Job.  The problem with 'b' is that it would
>violate the freedom God has granted to all His creation.  We are
>not puppets on a string.  'C' is the best response I think God
>could make.  What better way to show a fool his folly than by
>letting him do it himself?

a)  Why does God care if Satan believes Him or not?  Satan can accuse
Job all he wants, but the decision is God's, right?

b)  Why then does the Bible speak of the predestination of the elect?

c)  So God let Satan kill Job's children and torture Job, all to prove
a point.  Nice guy.

>God didn't need to 'prove' anything to Satan, but I suppose you
>can view the exchange any way you like.  However let me pose this
>parallel and see if you still view it as God 'proving' himself:
>A world record holding weight lifter is approached one day by
>the 98 pound weakling.  The 98 pounder challenges the strongman,
>"I can lift more than you can."  In reply the strongman says,
>"Ok, here's the weight."  The 98 pounder attempts to lift the
>weight but fails.

The 98 pound weakling hurt nothing but his pride.  Satan kills Job's
children and tortures him, and does all this with God's *permission*.

>2.  In response to question two:  you view it as weakness and
>insecurity.  I view it as confidence and sureity.  Giving Satan
>or humans or angels freedom to do what they will in no way diminishes
>the fact that God is still God.  As someone pointed out in a
>reply to one of the original posts, God made and blessed Job,
>Satan destroyed what Job had, yet God rebuilt all that Job had.

Gee, I guess that because Job had more children, he no longer missed
the ones he lost.  

>3.  God did not hurt Job, Satan did.  God was not proving anything;
>Satan was allowed to display his own ignorance and folly.

Hitler didn't build the concentration camps, he just allowed Goebbels
to do it.

I love it, the way an omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient and
benevolent God is allowed to abdicate responsibility for the suffering
he causes, or allows to happen.

SD
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:24385 talk.religion.misc:24665