The Problem of Evil

[quatona]

Did you also explain how paradise was and heaven will be possible if your maxime "there must be (factual) evil" is accurate?

 

[Inkfingers]

*Double post*

 

[Inkfingers]

The topic of the current discussion weren´t car accidents.

Children dying in car accidents is an example of "evil" occuring.

If God rescued one, you would whine that he did not rescue all...and then move on the the smallpox sufferers, those born disabled, the ones' abused, and so onwards.

So as I said, if he saves one, he would have to save all because to do otherwise is to still leave evil in the world.....and that is what this thread is about.

Could you point me to the post where you did?

Click the links and start going backwards down the thread. You'll find them. I'm not spoon-feeding someone who turns up 15 pages in and refuses to read the previous conversation.

 

[quatona]

Children dying in car accidents is an example of "evil" occuring.

It´s not an example of what the poster was talking about to whom you responded, and he explicitly had said so.
The topic is not "the problem of suffering", it´s the "problem of evil".

If God rescued one, you would whine that he did not rescue all...and then move on the the smallpox sufferers, those born disabled, the ones' abused, and so onwards.

"You would whine about it..." is not showing how it is impossible, illogical or anything else you are trying to show.
Let alone that you don´t know what I would whine about or not.
But let´s assume, someone would indeed demand God to intervene with all those things, and God would. What problem(s) would this cause?

Personally, I don´t think the PoE is not a particularly good argument. But I think your responses are even worse.
Personally, I am just wondering why an omni-God wouldn´t feel the desire to intervene with every single case of "evil" - being omninbenevolent and all. And, if he has the desire to do so, what greater good he is sacrificing this desire to.

So as I said, if he saves one, he would have to save all

According to your personal morality? According to God´s morality?

So as I said, if he saves one, he would have to save all because to do otherwise is to still leave evil in the world....

And this would be a problem exactly how and for whom?

And again, you didn´t address the fact that the bible tells us about God in fact intervening occasionally. So he actually did what you here say he can´t/shouldn´t/mustn´t do.

Click the links and start going backwards down the thread. You'll find them. I'm not spoon-feeding someone who turns up 15 pages in and refuses to read the previous conversation.

I don´t ask you to spoonfeed me. I am asking you to post a link to where you answered a particular question.
I have been attending the first pages of this thread, and I have seen the arguments you have brought up there (and they didn´t answer these questions). On the last pages all I see you doing is claiming that you had answered the questions already, that people just do not understand your arguments, that people don´t understand their own arguments etc.
So apparently in between all the noise there must be at least one post in which you got to the core of your argument. I can´t tell the noise from the argument, and I ask you to point me to the actual argument.
Of course, you are under no obligation to make yourself understood.

 

[Inkfingers]

It´s not an example of what the poster was talking about to whom you responded, and he explicitly had said so.
The topic is not "the problem of suffering", it´s the "problem of evil".

Evil is the source of suffering; they address the same issue.

"You would whine about it..." is not showing how it is impossible, illogical or anything else you are trying to show.

I've already shown how it would be necessary to save all if you save one on the basis of "a good God stops evil".

I don´t ask you to spoonfeed me. I am asking you to post a link to where you answered a particular question.
I have been attending the first pages of this thread, and I have seen the arguments you have brought up there (and they didn´t answer these questions).

So you say.

I say differently.

Anyone who is interested can read them, but I'm not wasting a morning chasing your "arguments" in circles because you either refuse to read through the answers or you discount them automatically because you don't agree with them.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Why do you keep quoting the Quran when your icon is "Oneness" (implying Oneness Pentecostalism, yes?)?

Never heard of Oneness prntecostalism", thanks though. I thought it meant oneness of God, or "human family" etc

 

[Ken-1122]

Then they don't understand there own arguments. If he intervenes in one, he must intervene in all or stand charged of the same thing he would be accused of if not intervening with that first one.

Evil has to exist and be a real possibility and not just imagined.

I disagree! Intervening in one does not require you intervene in all. I'm not talking about a robot or computer, I talking about an intelligent being capable of using discretion as to when intervention is necessary, and when it is not.

Ken

 

[Ken-1122]

If he saves one child from a car accident, the argument will be "well, why only that one? Why not the all the rest?"

We're not talking about saving a child from a car accident; we're talking about evil. A better analogy would be; if he saved the Jews from Treblinka; he should save those in the other concentration camps as well! To which I would respond; YES! He should have stopped the Nazis.

Ken

 

[bhsmte]

So as I said, if he saves one, he would have to save all because to do otherwise is to still leave evil in the world.....and that is what this thread is about.

Does this mean God saves no one?

 

[Ken-1122]

Evil is the source of suffering; they address the same issue.

No. Evil is human behavior that is extremely bad. Suffering is misfortune humans have to deal with. Evil results in suffering, but not all suffering is the result of evil.

Ken

 

[Inkfingers]

I disagree! Intervening in one does not require you intervene in all. I'm not talking about a robot or computer, I talking about an intelligent being capable of using discretion as to when intervention is necessary, and when it is not.

Ken

If he saves one child from a car accident, why not the rest?

You'd complain about evil so long as there were one occurance of it.

 

[bhsmte]

If he saves one child from a car accident, why not the rest?

You'd complain about evil so long as there were one occurance of it.

How would one tell if a god intervened for a child in a car accident?

 

[Inkfingers]

How would one tell if a god intervened for a child in a car accident?

I do not know.

However the point here is that people are complaining that God does not intervene (as evidenced by numerous dead children) and that if he intervened with one but not another those who are complaining about the existence of evil would continue to complain....until he intervened in all cases and no evil occured.

Except, as I said, we need a real possibility of experiencing evil in order to experience good; as without comparing X with not-X you cannot know X.

 

[bhsmte]

I do not know.

However the point here is that people are complaining that God does not intervene (as evidenced by numerous dead children) and that if he intervened with one but not another those who are complaining about the existence of evil would continue to complain....until he intervened in all cases and no evil occured.

Except, as I said, we need a real possibility of experiencing evil in order to experience good; as without comparing X with not-X you cannot know X.

Dead children?

Yes, 9 million die each year, before the age of five.

Now, some Christians do claim, that God has saved their child.

 

[Inkfingers]

Dead children?

Yes, 9 million die each year, before the age of five.

Now, some Christians do claim, that God has saved their child.

And?

I am simply discussing the nature of evil. What is your point?

 

[bhsmte]

And?

I am simply discussing the nature of evil. What is your point?

Is it evil that 9 million children die each year before the age of five?

If some Christians are right and God has saved their child, that would mean that God intervenes only in certain circumstances.

 

[Inkfingers]

Is it evil that 9 million children die each year before the age of five?

If some Christians are right and God has saved their child, that would mean that God intervenes only in certain circumstances.

We don't know if He has or has not.

Regardless, the point I am making is that evil has to be part of the universe. Do you understand that?

 

[bhsmte]

We don't know if He has or has not.

Regardless, the point I am making is that evil has to be part of the universe. Do you understand that?

Harmful things are part of the universe.

 

[Inkfingers]

Harmful things are part of the universe.

They are a necessary part of the universe. One without which the real and genuine possibility of we could not know good.

 

[Chany]

They are a necessary part of the universe. One without which the real and genuine possibility of we could not know good.

Do you understand the meaning of the term "logically possible"?