The problem of evil

[Loudmouth]

I understand you're looking for a theoretical model of morality. I seriously doubt you've found it.

Just because you disagree doesn't mean you get to misrepresent my position.

Are these three things your idea, or are you following a particular school of thought? I ask because empathy is rejected by some as a good basis for morality:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...aul-bloom-is-wrong-about-empathy-and-morality

I include reason and logic with empathy, not just empathy alone.

Empathy allows us to understand that other people can feel joy and pain just like we can. We can use reason and logic to understand how our actions can cause joy and pain in others. The combination of these three things allows us to form moral codes. It isn't a track record. It is a process that starts with the basic characteristics of being human, and expands from there.

 

[Resha Caner]

It isn't a track record. It is a process that starts with the basic characteristics of being human, and expands from there.

Uh huh. I'll ask my question again. Is this your idea, or is it from a particular school of thought?

 

[Loudmouth]

Uh huh. I'll ask my question again. Is this your idea, or is it from a particular school of thought?

Doesn't matter.

 

[Resha Caner]

Doesn't matter.

In the context of a discussion on the arbitrary it does. This could be just a whim of yours.

 

[bhsmte]

No, you changed the question before you answered it. I don't see how someone with a track record of making non-arbitrary choices suddenly becomes "debatable" (the word you added). What about a good track record is a cause of concern?



Again with the added qualifiers. I didn't ask about blind obedience. If there's a form of obedience you think is morally acceptable, I'd be interested to know what that is.



You asked what issues it appears you are struggling to separate. My answer is: things like the above statement. Arbitrary and bad are two different things. A decision could be arbitrary and yet good. A decision can be non-arbitrary and yet bad. We're talking about "arbitrary".



That's why I've mentioned things like trust and a track record. I never said God has to be blindly trusted. It's also why I mentioned issues of relevance. Even you, when I was talking about the average citizen in the military vehicle example, stated that we should choose someone who was above average. In other words, you're indicating that the people making decisions must in some form or another be relevant to that decision.

You should actually read what people write and stop twisting their words.

 

[Dan Bert]

The natural man is more savage and more cruel than any animals. Animals and nature and insects even the dust of the earth do the will of God. Only man has the intelligence, wisdom and knowledge to act in rebellion to God. Animals since they fulfill the law and their creative vision have a place prepared by God. Does that answer you question?

dan

No, you didn't. My question was specifically about non-human animals, and your answer was about humans.

I'll ask again: how can non-human animals learn obedience and thus avoid suffering?

 

[Picky Picky]

The natural man is more savage and more cruel than any animals. Animals and nature and insects even the dust of the earth do the will of God. Only man has the intelligence, wisdom and knowledge to act in rebellion to God. Animals since they fulfill the law and their creative vision have a place prepared by God. Does that answer you question?

dan

The post of yours which led to my question said:

Everything that exist, and happens is due to spiritual laws. The Spiritual laws bring both sufferings and blessings - depending whether we obey or not. Spiritual laws are designed to push each of us to greater Spiritual heights. Jesus said once..If obedience has been learned, what need therefore is suffering?

And I asked you how non-human animals can learn obedience and thus avoid suffering. In your latest reply you imply that animals and nature and insects are naturally obedient. Have I got that right, and if so, how can it be that they suffer?

 

[Dan Bert]

Yes you have got it right. Animals act according to their species...ex. Cats, dogs, Cows etc. Trees act like trees etc. Everything act according to their creative purpose except man. Even rocks act like rocks should. None deviate from their creative purpose except man. I used dust as an example because ancient prophets also used to sit in the dust and with their hands put the dust on they head showing that they were lower than the dust of the earth. Dust is useless not even dirt. Nothing grows in dust. Dust go wherever the wind blows. Does not complain and do not seek to be something else. Dust obey perfectly the will of God.

Each one of us was given a creative vision. Satan in heaven changed this for the angels and the angels were deceived by Satan into thinking they could change it. That is how they fell, they tried to change their creative purposes. That explains why the Nephelims came to be on the earth. They took for themselves daughters of men. The Nephilims were their children and God punished the Watchers severely. The word Watcher...is used at least twice in the OT and support Genesis account. At least the little there is in the bible.

Dan

 

[SkyWriting]

It seems to me the problem of evil is a real problem, and it is my main barrier to faith. I just have trouble believing in a benevolent creator that cares about people- I see no evidence for it in this world. There is gross unfairness and suffering in the world and I don't believe Christians can account for it.

Do you think your ability to see unfairness and suffering would be an
indicator that you've been given sight to identify these problems?

I mean, if you watch goldfish, they seem pretty content in pond
bowl, or a plastic baggie. They don't seem worried about the
world they exist in.

 

[SkyWriting]

9 million children die each year before the age of five. I have a hard time believing, they all deserved it.

Perhaps they all do deserve it. How much longer do you think they deserved to suffer?
Did you want to drag it out for 100 years?

 

[FireDragon76]

Do you think your ability to see unfairness and suffering would be an
indicator that you've been given sight to identify these problems?.

Please explain what you mean by this. Do you mean God giving me sight? That only begs the question why he would give that to somebody and not everybody.

Truthfully, I think most people are like your goldfish. For a lack of a better word, most people I find are not "enlightened" in these matters.

 

[SkyWriting]

Please explain what you mean by this. Do you mean God giving me sight? That only begs the question why he would give that to somebody and not everybody.Truthfully, I think most people are like your goldfish. For a lack of a better word, most people I find are not "enlightened" in these matters.

And....where do you feel these insights come from?
You seem to have some standard for justice that
you are using. What is it's source?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Do you think your ability to see unfairness and suffering would be an
indicator that you've been given sight to identify these problems?

I mean, if you watch goldfish, they seem pretty content in pond
bowl, or a plastic baggie. They don't seem worried about the
world they exist in.

There's biological cognitive differences between human beings and goldfish. I would think that was obvious...

 

[Dave Ellis]

It seems to me the problem of evil is a real problem, and it is my main barrier to faith. I just have trouble believing in a benevolent creator that cares about people- I see no evidence for it in this world. There is gross unfairness and suffering in the world and I don't believe Christians can account for it.

I grant that I could be wrong, that somehow there is a God in charge of it all and its just like the Christian God and is beyond my understanding. But it would be pretty cruel for such a being to hold honest doubts against me, given the quality of evidence he's left.

And honestly, if it is the case that God exists and he has such a mysterious plan, what does that say about Christian epistemology? How could we take any religious authority seriously if God's will is so inscrutable? It seems to me much more skepticism of religious claims are warranted, regardless of whether or not the Christian God exists.

It may be possible that a god exists in a world like the one we have (although I haven't seen any evidence to support that idea).

However, by necessity that god would either have to be at best amoral, and at worst sadistic. The idea of a perfectly good and loving god is incompatible with many horrible diseases, natural disasters and other things we see in the world.

 

[FireDragon76]

And....where do you feel these insights come from?
You seem to have some standard for justice that
you are using. What is it's source?

Please answer the question I asked first. Don't dodge my question with another. I specifically asked why God only gives this sight to some people, and not others?

There are many churchgoing Christians that don't seem particularly bothered by suffering... why is this?

Why do I need to appeal to an external standard of justice? Just by peoples subjective experiences, many people seem miserable. People in the Netherlands, for instance, are starting to choose doctor assisted suicide as a remedy for post-traumatic stress from childhood sexual abuse. Pretty extreme in my book, but clearly there are a lot of anguished people out there choosing to die rather than to suffer.

 

[SkyWriting]

I specifically asked why God only gives this sight to some people, and not others?

That is an assumptive question and does not require an answer.

Like: Have you ever been so messed up
that they would let you back into Rehab?

 

[SkyWriting]

There are many churchgoing Christians that don't seem particularly bothered by suffering... why is this?

People are the same, on average, no matter if they attend a church or not.
I think there are "more active" sinners attending church for help, as well
as "less active" sinners that have practiced helping more than they hurt.
But on average, they are the same as the general public.

Now, why are ther people who are numb to suffering in the world?
There may be 100's of reasons. Me, I've had my share of suffering
and helping those suffering. Making a difference is a huge chore
becasue lazy whelps will suck you dry on occasion, then empty
your apartment to top it off. Others would never do that. Being
charitable is a huge chore.

 

[FireDragon76]

People are the same, on average, no matter if they attend a church or not.

Isn't that a damning indictment of the religion? What exactly do we have to show for all this?

 

[SkyWriting]

Isn't that a damning indictment of the religion? What exactly do we have to show for all this?

It's nice to be forgiven. Peaceful even.
I feel there is a great personal advantage.
You can try and re-read my post for any insights.

 

[Dave Ellis]

It's nice to be forgiven. Peaceful even.
I feel there is a great personal advantage.
You can try and re-read my post for any insights.

What does a church have to do with forgiveness?

If I've wronged somebody, the only forgiveness I care about is from the person that I wronged. Presumably that would come after I made some effort to correct my mistake.

If I wrong somebody, then go to a church and receive forgiveness from them, that's not a forgiveness that matters. That's an abdication of responsibility to set things right with the person or people who were actually wronged.