Emmet, before responding I'll just tell you why I chose to ask you those particular questions in case your intuition is off. Doing so will hopefully elicit a less hedged response so we can correspond with one another in a more direct manner and this discussion can bear some fruit, something which I fully expect to happen.
I asked you: "Is the Creator a being characterized by love and compassion?"
Elsewhere on this forum I've heard you refer to a someone, whom you call G-d, in such an uncolored and abstract manner that it makes me wonder if you've simply ascribed this moniker to a lofty theoretical concept, rather than a relatable being. It seems your dispassionate position is rooted in the notion that absolute truth is a relic of the credulous and only a survey of possible views should be expressed. It's also possible that you feel it's disrespectful and rather tactless to presume to know something about the one you call G-d and therefore a survey of views, insofar as they align with modern scholarship, is the way to go. I don't mean to be pithy but theory only excites me when an anchor is dropped at some point.
(1b) Before further discussion, we should establish our terms. I'll take a sally, and wait for your response. Love is a state of appreciation for an object (grammatically speaking) that motivates one toward further engagement of the object and motivates one against the object being harmed. Compassion is a state of responsive emotion, corresponding to greater or lesser extent to the plight experienced by an object (grammatically speaking).
My examples of love and compassion have been correctly defined by you so we can proceed. Does the one whom you call G-d possess these attributes in such a way that characterizes him?
(2) I decilne to compare quantities of responsibility. But every being that is capable of responsibility and has either (a) done evil and/or caused suffering or (b) had the capacity to stop evil or suffering, without doing so - all such bear some responsibility. Yes, that probably includes G-d.
I'm puzzled that you would be so pious as to not even spell the word G-d in its entirety and yet entertain the thought that he might bear some responsibility for evil. I could perhaps see your point if the suffering of the innocent were endless instead of momentary, as Paul taught, but is he also arbitary? I don't consider evil and suffering to be the same thing although one is usually the result of the other. In Christian theology, the Father permits evil because he chooses to give angels and humans a free will to, in some measure, determine their own course. As C.S. Lewis argues, He did this because He seeks loving fellowship and that's only possible when one is free to choose. I married my wife because I sought to be in a loving relationship with her, and not of the forced variety. But along with that determination comes the possibility that she could be unfaithful and cause great suffering, not only to me, but to other parties as well. Am I evil for marrying her? Am I responsible for not forcing her to be faithful to me?
These two issues (what are God's emotional characteristics and who is responsible for evil) both make sense within my worldview. Perhaps this explanation strikes you as too tidy but I'm inclined to think God wants us to understand that He is, in fact, loving and that while he permits evil, he is not the guilty party. It's you and I that are commanded to repent, not Him.
