The Problem of Evil

[Archaeopteryx]

The problem of evil lies in the unspoken premise that God should make sense to us.

There's no reason to believe thats so.

Better break the news to the theologians gently.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Can god exitst without morailty then?

 

[quatona]

Can god exitst without morailty then?

Depends on the god concept in question.

 

[juvenissun]

It doesn't prove I'm a free man. It only proves if an all-knowing and all-powerful god does exist, it doesn't want me to believe it exists.

Illogical conclusion. I am sure you know how to analyze that and find out the error.

 

[juvenissun]

If God exists, it is a problem for him. What would his take be on countless people not believing he exists because his nature is such that he possesses conflicting attributes? Not to mention that these conflicting attributes make it very easy to prove he doesn't exist?

He provides a way out of that. You do not like it, it is your problem. I accepted it, I solved the problem.

 

[juvenissun]

The problem of evil lies in the unspoken premise that God should make sense to us.

There's no reason to believe thats so.

Not "should". It "does".
Everything starts from an assumption. There is no should not should not.
You do not like the assumption, then you can go away.

 

[talquin]

The problem of evil lies in the unspoken premise that God should make sense to us.

There's no reason to believe thats so.

Is "can do anything" supposed to make sense to us?

Is "loves everyone" supposed to make sense to us?

 

[talquin]

Can god exitst without morailty then?

Please define morality. Feel free to use examples in your definition.

 

[talquin]

Illogical conclusion. I am sure you know how to analyze that and find out the error.

Not an illegal conclusion. Since God has not done what it takes to get me to believe he exists and is fully capable of doing so, it means his desire for me to believe he exists isn't greater than the cost to him to get me to believe he exists. This translates to him not wanting me to believe he exists.

 

[talquin]

He provides a way out of that. You do not like it, it is your problem. I accepted it, I solved the problem.

How do you resolve something like the problem of evil in which God possesses conflicting attributes?

 

[durangodawood]

Not "should". It "does".
Everything starts from an assumption. There is no should not should not.
You do not like the assumption, then you can go away.

Obviously God does not make sense to us. Theologians have been trying to wrestle him into a box for thousands of years, and they still cant do it.

 

[juvenissun]

Obviously God does not make sense to us. Theologians have been trying to wrestle him into a box for thousands of years, and they still cant do it.

I don't see how would be obvious.

 

[juvenissun]

Not an illegal conclusion. Since God has not done what it takes to get me to believe he exists and is fully capable of doing so, it means his desire for me to believe he exists isn't greater than the cost to him to get me to believe he exists. This translates to him not wanting me to believe he exists.

He HAS done A LOT. The problem is you do not accept any of them without a careful consideration.

Of course, it is your free choice.

 

[talquin]

Not an illegal conclusion. Since God has not done what it takes to get me to believe he exists and is fully capable of doing so, it means his desire for me to believe he exists isn't greater than the cost to him to get me to believe he exists. This translates to him not wanting me to believe he exists.

He HAS done A LOT.

What has God done to get me to believe he exists?

The problem is you do not accept any of them without a careful consideration.

I'll accept any sufficient evidence which is presented to me.

Of course, it is your free choice.

What is my free choice?

 

[juvenissun]

What has God done to get me to believe he exists?


I'll accept any sufficient evidence which is presented to me.


What is my free choice?

Sufficient or not depends on the capacity of your understanding. You do not understand much. So, many sufficient evidences are not known to you. At least, some evidences I can see are not conceivable to you.

For example, Planet Mars. How much do you know about it? How much can you appreciate if I said it is one of the evidence?

Want another one? How about the ocean of the earth? Is that a sufficient evidence to you? Of course not. Because you do not know much about it. How could it be sufficient?

What is your expert knowledge? I may try to give you an evidence on something you could know better.

 

[talquin]

Sufficient or not depends on the capacity of your understanding. You do not understand much. So, many sufficient evidences are not known to you. At least, some evidences I can see are not conceivable to you.

For example, Planet Mars. How much do you know about it? How much can you appreciate if I said it is one of the evidence?

Want another one? How about the ocean of the earth? Is that a sufficient evidence to you? Of course not. Because you do not know much about it. How could it be sufficient?

What is your expert knowledge? I may try to give you an evidence on something you could know better.

None of those are sufficient evidence of an all-powerful, all-knowing & all-loving god. You'll have to do better than that.

 

[J0hnSm1th]

But since these things do occur, it means a god which is all-loving and all-powerful can't exist. It doesn't mean that no god exists, but it does mean we have to rethink our idea of what God is.

It depends on your definition of "all-powerful". God is benevolent, for the world to exist in the state we see it means it must be that way as a step towards God's ultimate plan. If God could have made it better then he would have. The fact it isnt better means God is constrained in what he can do.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

It depends on your definition of "all-powerful". God is benevolent, for the world to exist in the state we see it means it must be that way as a step towards God's ultimate plan. If God could have made it better then he would have. The fact it isnt better means God is constrained in what he can do.

What does this ultimate plan consist in?

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Please define morality. Feel free to use examples in your definition.

Rational attraction to being. For example safeguarding ones welfare, is as a genral rule ethical, and uses reason and results in the furtherance of a life which we can find attractive.

So god is a priori "rational attraction to being" (infallibly good, the better opition which ought to exist beyond all measure, grovel grovel) and we are finite, mortal creatures (oops, did I say that).

 

[GrowingSmaller]

What does this ultimate plan consist in?

Collapsing the wave function of the "multiverse" in the best possible way, for those who love him?