(Almost) Answering the Problem of Evil

[quatona]

But the problem of evil is specifically about a proposed God.
So the problem itself has a dimension beyond time and space.

Let´s assume for the moment that - from a perspective beyond ours/from the perspective of God/ from a perspecitve beyond time and space - etc.) "evil/good" means something completely different than from a human, earthly perspective.
Let´s also assume for the moment that the results of this perspective could be known to us.
Why would I adopt a perspective that isn´t mine, and that apparently is completely irrelevant for matters in this life?
Or, IOW, why would a suffering lab rat adopt the perspective of the "greater good" that the lab owner pursues with his experiments?

 

[Radrook]

Yep.
There just remains the question which of the assumptions that contradict each other is kept and which one is dismissed. (For completeness´ sake: Even both could be wrong.)

So there is no denomination that makes such a claim-correct?

 

[quatona]

So there is no denomination that makes such a claim-correct?

The claim that everything unfolds according to God´s plan? Why sure - to my knowledge that´s even a mainstream Christian tenet.

Anyway, I was just addressing your basic contemplations on the implications of contradictory terms, and the options of dealing with them. After all, you made those contemplations - so asking me if there are such contradictions when I address your considerations is somewhat odd, don´t you think?

 

[Radrook]

The claim that everything unfolds according to God´s plan? Why sure.

Which denomination claims that Satan and God were in cahoots in that plan? Just curious.

 

[quatona]

Which denomination claims that Satan and God were in cahoots in that plan? Just curious.

I don´t know (there are the weirdest ideas with some Christian denominations, though), and I neither said nor implied there were such denominations. Why do you ask? Nobody else but you introduced that idea - which is, on top, completely irrelevant for the points you were trying to address, nor for anything I responded to you.

 

[Radrook]

I don´t know (there are the weirdest ideas with some Christian denominations, though), and I neither said nor implied there were such denominations. Why do you ask? Nobody else but you introduced that idea - which is, on top, completely irrelevant for the points you were trying to address, nor for anything I responded to you.

Christians learn their concepts from their particular denominations. So if indeed the belief is as all pervasive as you describe-then surely it has to be a denominational theological position that was taught to church members. Since I have never encountered that view I am baffled concerning its source. Since you made the claim I assumed you were familiar with at least one denomination that teaches this idea so I asked.

 

[Chriliman]

It's God's plan that we have true free will, which means He knows that we can disobey Him. The reason there is evil is because created beings with true free will chose to disobey God and some continue to disobey today, this is why it's also a part of God's plan to save His creation from self destruction by giving His son over to the power's of evil in order to destroy them and free His creation from evil sin and death and give life everlasting.

God's word became Jesus and Jesus was perfectly obedient and died for all. God the Father never died(and never will), but His son did and God raised Jesus from the dead(defeating death) after he accomplished the Father's will of atoning for sin by dying on the cross.

It's similar to a good father speaking a word of discipline to his children in a perfect loving way so that their disobedience is reduced over time and eventually they never disobey again because they've become like the good father by understanding his perfect word of discipline. His word is spoken because the good father loves them and wants them to live happy healthy lives. In God's case it's happy healthy everlasting life.

So the premise you have to accept in order for all this to make sense is that evil only exists because creation has disobeyed God and God is working to remedy the situation through His spoken word and perfect love for His creation.

 

[quatona]

Christians learn their concepts from their particular denominations. So if indeed the belief is as all pervasive as you describe-

I didn´t describe it as all-pervasive, I described it as mainstream Christian.

then surely it has to be a denominational theological position that was taught to church members. Since I have never encountered that view I am baffled concerning its source. Since you made the claim I assumed you were familiar with at least one denomination that teaches this idea so I asked.

I mean, honestly: If you haven´t come across a Christian denomination that hold the tenet that everything unfolds according to God´s plan you simply need to get out more.
Actually, it´s even the inevitable conclusion from the tenets that God is the creator of everything and that God is omniscient (now, are you going to ask me to point to a Christian denomination that holds both these tenets - because you aren´t aware there are such?).

 

[quatona]

Here, first thing I get when I google "everything God´s plan":
http://faithbibleonline.net/BasicChristianDoctrine/15.htm

 

[durangodawood]

Let´s assume for the moment that - from a perspective beyond ours/from the perspective of God/ from a perspecitve beyond time and space - etc.) "evil/good" means something completely different than from a human, earthly perspective.
Let´s also assume for the moment that the results of this perspective could be known to us.
Why would I adopt a perspective that isn´t mine, and that apparently is completely irrelevant for matters in this life?
Or, IOW, why would a suffering lab rat adopt the perspective of the "greater good" that the lab owner pursues with his experiments?

All these WHYs are simply shattered by the non-intelligibility of the proposed relationship between us and the eternal.

The "problem of evil" itself is non-sense. The object of the problem is defined in non-sense terms: "omniscient" "omnipotent" and so on. You look one inch below the surface of those ideas and.... they are ungraspable.

We think the "evil" is the conceptual problem. Not at all. The concept itself is the conceptual problem. The faithful should not get attached to conceptualizing the divine so tightly. That will dissolve the problem.

 

[quatona]

All these WHYs are simply shattered by the non-intelligibility of the proposed relationship between us and the eternal.

It all starts with proposing non-intelligible "concepts", for sure.

The "problem of evil" itself is non-sense. The object of the problem is defined in non-sense terms: "omniscient" "omnipotent" and so on. You look one inch below the surface of those ideas and.... they are ungraspable.

I fail to see how "omniscient" or "omnipotent" can not be defined in a graspable way.

We think the "evil" is the conceptual problem. Not at all. The concept itself is the conceptual problem.

I don´t think that the PoE implies that the "evil" is the conceptual problem. Evil can be defined in graspable ways.
The point of the PoE rather seems to be that there are irreconcilable claims at work. "Evil" could just be the tool to demonstrate that - it isn´t necessarily meant to show that it is the conceptual problem.
(Personally, I don´t think the PoE is a particularly good argument - just to be clear)

The faithful should not get attached to conceptualizing the divine so tightly. That will dissolve the problem.

Sure: an argument designed to proof a certain conceptual framework contradictory doesn´t necessarily apply to a different conceptual framework).
Anyway: If the consequence of the discussions would be that Christians let go off the most blatantly incoherent concepts and form an actually coherent god concept, that would be a huge progress.

 

[quatona]

All these WHYs are simply shattered by the non-intelligibility of the proposed relationship between us and the eternal.

I don´t think so. These WHYs are essential. If there´s no answer, God is simply irrelevant for any practical intent or purpose.

 

[durangodawood]

I don´t think so. These WHYs are essential. If there´s no answer, God is simply irrelevant for any practical intent or purpose.

There's a lot more than these WHYs for the faithful to contempate. They can stick to those things and let the conceptualizing stay loose and not rigid.

 

[Locutus]

The faithful should not get attached to conceptualizing the divine so tightly. That will dissolve the problem.

Except that they won't do that. They refuse to let go of the Omni-everything ... thing. While they clearly don't delve beyond an inch into that concept (and therefore don't wrestle with the mutual exclusions it produces - ie free will), they are aware that admitting the god is not all powerful is a no-go zone, and spells doom for most of the dogma. The perpetual bind!

 

[Locutus]

There's a lot more than these WHYs for the faithful to contempate. They can stick to those things and let the conceptualizing stay loose and not rigid.

They can't, actually. How do you support any of it without a deity which is all-powerful and all-knowing?

 

[Radrook]

I didn´t describe it as all-pervasive, I described it as mainstream Christian.

I mean, honestly: If you haven´t come across a Christian denomination that hold the tenet that everything unfolds according to God´s plan you simply need to get out more.
Actually, it´s even the inevitable conclusion from the tenets that God is the creator of everything and that God is omniscient (now, are you going to ask me to point to a Christian denomination that holds both these tenets - because you aren´t aware there are such?).

I am aware of the predestination concept that some denominations hold.
However, I haven't come across any denomination that blatantly declares that God wanted mankind to sin and that God wanted and planned for the devil to maliciously tempt them into sinning. Please note that such a concept if true would, make all the scriptural condemnations directed at Satan seem peevish and insincere. It would also clash with the statement found in the book of James which tells us that God doesn't tempt people with evil.

The concept of God in cooperation with Satan via having meticulously planned everything beforehand renders all the following scriptures nonsensical.

John 8:44

You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

James 1:13
When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone;

2 Corinthians 2:11
in order that Satan might not outwit us. For we are not unaware of his scheme

1 Peter 5:8
Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour.

2 Corinthians 6:14
Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?

 

[Locutus]

However, I haven't come across any denomination that blatantly declares that God wanted mankind to sin and that God wanted and planned for the devil to maliciously tempt them into sinning. Please note that such a concept if true would, make all the scriptural condemnations directed at Satan seem peevish and insincere. It would also clash with the statement found in the book of James which tells us that God doesn't tempt people with evil. The concept of God in cooperation with Satan via having meticulously planned everything beforehand renders all the following scriptures nonsensical.

EXACTLY. Well spotted.

And that you haven't come across it is precisely due to the highlighted. Believers won't invite or encourage the fleshing out of 'Omni-everything', because this is where it will lead.