God and the Problem Of Evil.

[Voyager]

@monavis

Venice is a thing of earth, not something one cannot observe. I have been there and rode the Gondola’s etc. have pictures of myself in one, and at St Mark’s square. Any one can do the same, but no one can in truth say or prove anything of God except from the word of another human, and they cannot prove it, take anyone there, show it to anyone it is strickly belief, if it helps them to be a better person to believe, then it is a good thing, if they use it( like too many do ) to force others to do as they do then it is wrong. Like a tool, belief can be used for good or harm.

No person can, but God, if he existed, surely could. It is like saying Springfield is hidden from us by an invisibility field. No person can broach it, but Mr. Burns can turn off whenever he wants. Until then, we just have to have faith that it exists.
Even if I didn’t believe you about Venice, I could book a flight there whenever I wished. Not so with God.

[Voyager]

@cosmosdan

I like the George Burns as God line from the old movie when he was asked why he allowed so much suffering.

“Why do YOU allow it?”

“Because we’re not omnipotent, putz!” (The putz applied to God or George or the writer of course, not you!)

[Voyager]

@cosmosdan

Maybe we all volunteered to come here,

I never volunteer.

[vivalostwages]

@monavis

An all knowing Supreme Being would know ahead of time that his created one’s would do as they did, so a poor ignorant human with out any experience being punished, would make it like punishing a baby for soiling it’s diaper, then punishing all it’s decendents!

A recent issue of the JWs’ Watchtower addressed this, claiming that God chose not to use foreknowledge at that time because he wanted to see what Adam and Eve would do.

Or something.

[NetTrekker]

The evangelical answer is that suffering is the result of sin/disobedience; by sinning we have all invited suffering into the world; God chose to create us with free will; God is sovereign so you can’t question his choices.

[Quartz]

@Der_Trihs

That violates omnibenevolence.

So what? The OP isn’t postulating an omnibenevolent deity. And just because a deity is benevolent doesn’t mean it has to intervene in every scenario. Do you give to every charity that asks for time, effort, or money? And even if you do posit an omnibenevolent deity, perhaps that deity has a different definition of onmibenevolence than you?

[vivalostwages]

@Quartz

We’ve learned to cure so much; sure we’ve got much more to learn, but we’re getting there.

Surely, if you put yourself at risk, then you have to accept that risk? If you live on a volcano, then you accept the risk that it might erupt. If you live in an area susceptible to hurricanes, then you build your houses to resist them.

Where in the world can we move where we wouldn’t be at risk for something? Do let the rest of us know so we can all just pick up and move.

[Der_Trihs]

@Quartz

So what? The OP isn’t postulating an omnibenevolent deity.

Yes it is; that’s a basic part of the “Problem of Evil”. If the deity in question isn’t omnibenevolent, then there is no Problem.

@Quartz

And just because a deity is benevolent doesn’t mean it has to intervene in every scenario. Do you give to every charity that asks for time, effort, or money?

If If I had infinite wealth I would come pretty close, and I’m not omnibenevolent. And there is an immense amount of suffering ion the world; not just a few incidents here and there.

@Quartz

And even if you do posit an omnibenevolent deity, perhaps that deity has a different definition of onmibenevolence than you?

And here we are back again at how evil is “good”, as long as it’s God doing the evil. An omnipotent god that stands by and does nothing about all the suffering in the world is monstrous, not merely “not omnibenevolent”. And a definition of “omnibenevolent” that’s indistinguishable from amorality or outright evil is both immoral in itself and ridiculous.

[Randvek]

@Der_Trihs

And there is an immense amount of suffering ion the world; not just a few incidents here and there.

How does one measure suffering, and what must you compare that amount to in order consider it “immense?”

[Latro]

@Randvek

How does one measure suffering, and what must you compare that amount to in order consider it “immense?”

Odd question.
What are you driving at?
“Yes, it’s just a few instances here and there.” or are you saying we don’t have a suffering scale from 1 to 100, so all suffering is just relative?

Surely, compared to an earth ruled by a truly omni-benevolent god, the suffering on earth is “immense”, “humongous”, immeasurable..

[kanicbird]

@Quartz

Why should God fix the world when we’re perfectly capable of fixing it ourselves?

Interesting statement as i believe it is both, God and man will work together but only if man (btw. including women) act with love in their heart, that is the only way God can dwell with man, so in a very ironic way we are perfectly capable of fixing it ourselves because God would be with us, and God would be us.

[monavis]

@NetTrekker

The evangelical answer is that suffering is the result of sin/disobedience; by sinning we have all invited suffering into the world; God chose to create us with free will; God is sovereign so you can’t question his choices.

Free will is not my way or the highway!

[monavis]

@Voyager

No person can, but God, if he existed, surely could. It is like saying Springfield is hidden from us by an invisibility field. No person can broach it, but Mr. Burns can turn off whenever he wants. Until then, we just have to have faith that it exists.
Even if I didn’t believe you about Venice, I could book a flight there whenever I wished. Not so with God.

That IF is a big word, if is not what is!

[Fear_Itself]

@kanicbird

Interesting statement as i believe it is both, God and man will work together but only if man (btw. including women) act with love in their heart, that is the only way God can dwell with man, so in a very ironic way we are perfectly capable of fixing it ourselves because God would be with us, and God would be us.

Will god work with an atheist if they have love in their heart?

[emoticorpse]

God will only work with you if you do all the work. Otherwise he won’t even take your call.

[kanicbird]

@Fear_Itself

Will god work with an atheist if they have love in their heart?

Yes as God is Love, and God is One, where ever there is Love that is God. Not only will God ‘work’ with this atheist He will become one with this atheist. One of God’s greatest assets on earth may be a atheist with Love in their heart and able to reach other atheist and even religious people and give them hope that Love is there for them too.

[YogSothoth]

@Der_Trihs

The usual explanation I hear is what I think of as “The Argument From Cthulhu”; that God is so utterly beyond us, so alien that to him what looks like evil may be good, so we can’t judge him.

I’ve talked personally with Cthulhu and I’ll have you know that he says you guys would just love him if you got to know him…and if your brains didn’t melt when you gazed upon him

[Trinopus]

That’s like Chester Chestburster, the friendly little Alien. When he pops up through your ribs, he just wants to be friends!

[Voyager]

@monavis

That IF is a big word, if is not what is!

Which if are you referring to? If god existed or if I didn’t believe you about Venice? I do, because I have other pieces of evidence that it exists - like a big book of its history I got when we were planning to go there, and lots of people I know who have. (And seeing the German Brunetti shows.)

[drewtwo99]

I posted this poem by Robert Frost a few days ago, kind of addresses this point.

A voice said look me in the stars
and tell me truly men of Earth
if all the soul and body scars
were not too much to pay for birth.

Maybe the only way we can even have life at all is to have suffering. I am an atheist.