你相信一位「給予人類自由意志卻又會對人類進行報復」的神嗎？如果把那些地球脈動所產生的地震天災、洪水乾旱等現象視為神的報復行為，或稱那些是神不需負責的自然法則(Natural Laws)，但又是誰定下這些自然法則的呢？
如果我們同意那必然是神定下的法則，那神會那麼無聊或無能地定出〝能被人破壞〞的法則嗎？讓我們來正視一些「神學所教導關於神」的觀念與邏輯，也繼續檢視【完整了解「希特勒為何上天堂？」系列摘文】- 4/10：
正視【神學所教導「關於神」的觀念與邏輯】
【完整了解「希特勒為何上天堂？」系列摘文】-4/10
如果我的意願是全能的，那麼你認為希特勒又怎麼能(如你說的違背了神的意願)那樣做呢？
尼：你允許他去做。
如果是我允許他去做，那麼那是「我的意願」而他應該那樣做。
尼：好像是那樣吧……但你究竟是出於什麼樣的理由呢？對了。你的意願是「他要有自由選擇」。他是出於他的意願，做了他所做的。
你說的這點很接近，非常接近了。
你說的沒錯，當然，我的意願是希特勒——以及你們每一個人——都有自由選擇。但我的意願並非如果你們沒有做我要你們做的選擇，你們會無止境地受懲罰。如果是那樣的話，我要你們做的選擇怎麼會是「自由」的呢？如果你們知道不做我想要你們做的事，就將遭受無法形容的痛苦，你們是真的自由嗎？那是哪門子的選擇呢？
尼：那不是懲罰的問題。那只是自然的法則。只是一個因果的問題。
我明白你受過良好的神學教育的鍛鍊，讓你認為我是一個復仇的神——同時讓我可以不需為我的報復行為負責。
但又是誰定下這些自然法則(Natural Laws)呢？如果說我們可以同意必然是我(神)定下的，那我幹嘛要定一種能被你們破壞的法則呢？
如果我不想要你們受這些法則侵害——如果我的意願是我的奇妙造物永不該受苦——那我幹嘛要創造你們可能受苦的可能性呢？
而且，我又幹嘛要日夜地誘惑你們來破壞我定下的法則呢？
尼：不是你誘惑我們。是魔鬼。
又來啦，又是在為我脫卸責任。
你沒有看出來嗎？唯一能使你們的神學合理的方式，就是使得我無能(the only way you can rationalize your theology is to render Me powerless)。你是否裡看出，唯一讓你們神學的想法模式顯得合理的方法，就是讓我的顯得不合理？
對「神創造了一個生命，而其行為卻是神所不能控制的」這樣的觀念，你們真的覺得對勁嗎？
尼爾：你說我們的神學是瘋狂的——但如果神學沒有一套獎賞與懲罰的體制，它如何能運作？
人生的一切都依「你們視為人生的目的為何」而定(everything depends on what you perceive to be the purpose of life)——因而，神學的基礎亦然。
如果你們認為人生是一場測試，是一場考驗，是一段使你們加緊腳步以看你「值不值得」的時期，那你們的神學看來就很合理。
如果你們認為生命是一個機會，一個讓你們發現的歷程——憶起——你們是有價值的（而一向都是如此），那麼，你們的神學就似乎瘋狂。
如果你們認為神是一個「充滿自我，會要求人們的關注、讚美、愛慕，而且為了得到這些東西不惜殺人」的神，則你們的神學就開始有凝聚力。
如果你們認為神沒有自我或需求，而反倒是一切的源頭，是一切智慧與愛之所在，那你們的神學就會崩潰。
如果你們認為神是復仇之神，對愛會嫉妒，生氣時會暴怒，那你們的神學就很完善。
如果你們認為神是和平的，在她的愛中是快樂的，在她的狂喜中是熱情的，則你們的神學就無用。
我告訴你們：人生的目的不是為了取悅神。人生的目的是去了解、去重新創造「你是誰」。 (the purpose of life is not to please God. The purpose of life is to know, and to recreate, Who You Are.)
在這樣做的過程中，你們確實就已取悅了神，並榮耀了神。
摘自《與神對話 II》第3章
Now how do you think he could do that if My Will is all powerful?
Neale: You allowed him to.
If I allowed him to, then it was My Will that he should.
Neale: It would seem that way… but what possible reason could You have? No. It was Your Will that he have Free Choice. It was his will that he do what he did.
You're so close on this. So close.
You're right, of course. It was My Will that Hitler—that all of you—have Free Choice. But it is not My Will that you be punished unceasingly, unendingly, if you do not make the choice I want you to make. If that were the case, how "free" have I made your choice? Are you really free to do what you want if you know you'll be made to suffer unspeakably if you do not do what I want? What kind of choice is that?
Neale: It isn't a question of punishment. It's just Natural Law. It's simply a question of consequences.
I see you've been schooled well in all the theological constructions that allow you to hold Me as a vengeful God— without making Me responsible for it.
But who made these Natural Laws? And if we can agree that I must have put them into place, why would I put into place such laws—then give you the power to overcome them?
If I didn't want you affected by them—if it was My Will that My wonderful beings never should suffer—why would I create the possibility that you could?
And then, why would I continue to tempt you, day and night, to break the laws I've set down?
You don't tempt us. The devil does.
There you go again, making Me not responsible.
Don't you see that the only way you can rationalize your theology is to render Me powerless? Do you understand that the only way your constructions make sense is if Mine don't?
Are you really comfortable with the idea of a God who creates a being whose actions it cannot control?
Neale: You call our theologies insane—but how can any theology work without a system of Reward and Punishment?
Everything depends on what you perceive to be the purpose of life—and therefore the basis of the theology. If you believe life exists as a test, a trial, a period of putting you through your paces to see if you are "worthy," your theologies begin to make sense.
If you believe that life exists as an opportunity, a process through which you discover—remember—that you are worthy (and have always been), then your theologies seem insane.
If you believe God is an ego-filled God who requires attention, adoration, appreciation, and affection—and will kill to get it—your theologies start to hold together.
If you believe that God is without ego or need, but the source of all things, and the seat of all wisdom and love, then your theologies fall apart.
If you believe that God is a vengeful God, jealous in His love and wrathful in His anger, then your theologies are perfect.
If you believe God is a peaceful God, joyous in Her love and passionate in Her ecstasy, then your theologies are useless.
I tell you this: the purpose of life is not to please God. The purpose of life is to know, and to recreate, Who You Are. In so doing you do please God, and glorify Her as well.
