The question of evil
-
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 27, 2024 10:54 AM)
many have questioned why God allows evil…
First answer is Mercy. He is giving mankind, all of mankind, time to unfuck themselves.
First off, God does not only 'allow' evil, He admits
creating
it (Isiah 45:7),
natural
evil at least. The rest of your first answer is unbiblical. For one thing if God is giving us time, then why are dead evildoers supposedly always being punished by eternal fire at once as soon as judged? (Indeed, why does the Bible mention such an infinite punishment at all (Mat 18:8, 25:41, and Jude 7 etc) if it is not to be?
Second answer… your question doesn't matter. Imagine the devil. He spends 6000 years..
Soul_Venom believes the world is only 6,000 years old LOL
…causing as much havoc as he possibly can goes to all that effort killing, destroying, despising. God snaps His fingers and all that evil is undone even better than brand new.
One wonders why, if this is the case, why God just doesn't get on with it. Curing childhood cancer for all, for instance; absolving the sinful etc. 6,000 years means quite a few generations have passed and still we haven't 'unfucked' ourselves. What makes you think things will be different over the next? Or is the idea of 'an-all loving god' which creates an imperfect world and tolerates the inevitable evil ultimately that which just ****s us all up? Or, if the Question of Evil truly is irrelevant since all turn out fine despite it, then why worry about it (as Christian apologists have done incessantly down the years) and argue for the necessity of doing right over wrong in the first place?
Ultimately your claim just seems special pleading for a type of God to side-step the famous Epicurean Paradox.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/readersblog/sauravbanerjeeblogs/the-epicurean-paradox-53130/
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(August 27, 2024 04:40 PM)
It is unfortunate that not all english translations are precise. God sometimes allows evil to happen but does not directly create it.
For a more in depth explanation:
https://www.str.org/w/does-isaiah-45-7-teach-that-god-created-evil-
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 27, 2024 05:50 PM)
God sometimes allows evil to happen but does not directly create it.
And so "I am the LORD, and there is no other. 7 I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create evil ; I, the LORD, do all these things"
really means… let's see:
Your link admits that if read straightforwardly it would it would render the Bible incoherent. Yep, so onto it: your link quite rightly points out that here 'evil' is sometimes interpreted as “calamity” (NASB, ESV) or “disaster” (NIV) in other major translations. (Or more precisely seen as any 'natural evil' although as it is still 'evil' nonetheless so, rather conspicuously, this is not mentioned). But they still agree that "He’s [still] responsible for bringing prosperity to those who are faithful and calamity to those who rebel. "
Disasters and calamities such as earthquakes, tsunamis, and hurricanes are considered natural evils. Natural evils are events that cause suffering without a perpetrator to blame. They are different from moral evils, which are the acts of humans that are considered morally wrong, such as murder and theft.
Then they say, that "God didn’t bring evil into existence. It’s the result of sin and our fallen world." But they have just admitted He did! Then they end with "Isaiah 45:7 was a reminder that God blessed those who honored him and brought calamity upon those who disobeyed." It seems this is a poor attempt at Cakeism. Or if one admits that calamities and disasters and all natural evils exist but does
not
consider them bad events, then this reeks of special pleading. For one thing if they are not so unpleasant, then what sort of punishment do they bring to 'those who rebel'?
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
Soul_Venom — 1 year ago(August 27, 2024 10:41 PM)
It is one of those stupidity is its own punishment types of deal. God wished to protect His children but He is unable to do so if they reject His protection. Those not under his protection fall victim to natural evils.
Or in other words if you refuse to stand under the umbrella you will get wet.
Trump is still your President. Charlie Kirk still Wins! -
filmflaneur — 1 year ago(August 27, 2024 10:44 PM)
Those not under his protection fall victim to natural evils.
Unfortunately it is simply not the case that clearly good people, let alone Christians
per se
, suffer less from natural evils than those less deserving. The devastating tsunami of a few years ago did not part and wash around the faithful. Nor did the blessed get advance warning. (As an atheist I suspect one obvious reason for that, but that is for another time)
One notes though that now the pretence that your god does not admit to creating natural evil in the first place is abandoned.
I think you'll find things are a little more complicated than that. -
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!