The question of evil
-
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 28, 2024 09:12 AM)
So when in Isiah God says that He creates natural evil at least, He does not mean what He says?
Matt 5:45 simply shows that God appears to make no distinction between good and evil when it suits him. No wonder if He created them both.
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(August 28, 2024 07:37 PM)
First you misunderstand Matthew. God is Just. He gives all an equal opportunity to repent and be forgiven.
I also challenge your notion of natural evil. I think you are confusing the consequences of evil with evil itself. When God created the world it was good. Sin corrupted it. The consequences of an evil act is not necessarily evil in and of itself even if it causes death and destruction.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 28, 2024 08:00 PM)
First you misunderstand Matthew. God is Just. He gives all an equal opportunity to repent and be forgiven.
The point still stands that, in that Matthew passage, ["That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust"] good and evil are merely shown as treated equally; there is no mention of 'opportunities to repent', more than God loves sinners and the good alike (even though He pledges to send the former into eternal torment). EG
What does Matthew 5:45 mean?
God loves everyone in the world, both the good people and those who are evil. How do we know that? Jesus offers one bit of evidence: God causes the sun to shine and the rain to fall on everyone, no matter who they are or what they are guilty of.
What it all has to do with your god creating at least one sort of evil only you can say and seems an irrelevant distraction.
I also challenge your notion of natural evil. I think you are confusing the consequences of evil with evil itself. When God created the world it was good. Sin corrupted it.
Actually the words are 'very good'; but whatever, that is not the same as 'perfect', so neither God nor we ought to be surprised when a deliberately imperfect creation inevitably brings imperfect results.
The point still remains that in Isiah your god specifically admits making what is commonly glossed as natural evil, which has been the point made all along. He does not say that He 'just made the consequences', if that is what you are saying - and which sounds like the special pleading of an apologist.
The consequences of an evil act is not necessarily evil in and of itself even if it causes death and destruction.
In the case of your god which instigates or authorises genocide, mass killing, rape, mutilation etc does this mean you are falling back on Command Theory to excuse it? You where that inevitably leads don't you, and its bad rep among many philosophers? And, er, God creates evil acts? Have you thought this through?
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(August 29, 2024 12:28 AM)
God does not create evil. I am done trying to explain it to someone who doesn't want to know and will make no effort to comprehend.
Your mockery is noted.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 30, 2024 09:56 AM)
As already mentioned 'evil' is sometimes glossed as 'disaster' or 'calamity'. But the calamities of childhood cancers and tsunamis are still bad no matter how one translates things and your god made them all. As the link you kindly provided had to admit: " "He’s [still] responsible for bringing prosperity to those who are faithful and calamity to those who rebel. " Thank you for playing.
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 30, 2024 01:55 PM)
In case you haven't realised both are natural evils. You may wish to mug up on this stuff before proceeding.
"Natural evil is evil for which no non-divine agent can be held morally responsible and is chiefly derived from the operation of the laws of nature."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_evil
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(August 30, 2024 04:19 PM)
filmflaneur said...
In case you haven't realised both are natural evils. You may wish to mug up on this stuff before proceeding.
"Natural evil is evil for which no non-divine agent can be held morally responsible and is chiefly derived from the operation of the laws of nature."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_evil
A human definition. Not a Biblical one.
While you are busy defining things I suggest you study the definition of
Spiritual blindness
An affliction from which you appear to suffer.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 30, 2024 05:31 PM)
Soul_Venom said...
A human definition. Not a Biblical one.
While you are busy defining things I suggest you study the definition of
Spiritual blindness
An affliction from which you appear to suffer.
A human definition. Not a Biblical one.
This sounds a bit desperate. One notes that there are plenty definitions of evil in scripture too.
The only other definition, if this is the case, is that Isiah's words mean
all
evil, moral and natural. So your deity is still on the hook.
Spiritual blindness An affliction from which you appear to suffer.
ad hominem
noted.
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(August 31, 2024 12:12 AM)
filmflaneur said...
A human definition. Not a Biblical one.
This sounds a bit desperate. One notes that there are plenty definitions of evil in scripture too.
The only other definition, if this is the case, is that Isiah's words mean
all
evil, moral and natural. So your deity is still on the hook.
Spiritual blindness An affliction from which you appear to suffer.
ad hominem
noted.
expand
That is not and ad hominem. It is a diagnosis.
Your failure is noted.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 31, 2024 10:03 AM)
Soul_Venom said...
That is not and ad hominem. It is a diagnosis.
Your failure is noted.
An
ad hominem
is when the person is addressed, usually insultingly, rather than their arguments. But thank you anyway.
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(August 31, 2024 03:37 PM)
filmflaneur said...
An
ad hominem
is when the person is addressed, usually insultingly, rather than their arguments. But thank you anyway.
Not my problem if you find it insulting. I merely pointed out a fact.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 31, 2024 11:12 PM)
Soul_Venom said...
Not my problem if you find it insulting. I merely pointed out a fact.
Its your problem if you insult rather than take part in an debate. But I guess that is all you have. See you next time.
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(August 31, 2024 11:29 PM)
filmflaneur said...
Its your problem if you insult rather than take part in an debate. But I guess that is all you have. See you next time.
Pointing out that you suffer from spiritual blindness is no different that pointing out someone has a cold. If you chosen to take offense where none was intended that is your problem.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 31, 2024 11:53 PM)
Soul_Venom said...
Pointing out that you suffer from spiritual blindness is no different that pointing out someone has a cold. If you chosen to take offense where none was intended that is your problem.
And now you just protest too much…
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(September 01, 2024 06:03 AM)
filmflaneur said...
And now you just protest too much…
^^The reply you can expect when you are forced to slow walk smug people through a concept they find hard to understand.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(September 01, 2024 05:53 PM)
Soul_Venom said...
^^The reply you can expect when you are forced to slow walk smug people through a concept they find hard to understand.
you are forced to slow walk smug people through a cocept [sic] they find hard to understand
Too true. But even so, if you want slow walking through what constitutes natural evil again - you know the sort God admits to making in Isiah - just let me know.
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that.