How do you reconcile the problem of evil?

[Willamena]

I like to distinguish being able to vs actually doing. So that God might be able to do everything in potential but I don't see such a being actually doing every single thing that's possible even if he can. Though if God does literally do everything possible then we are in just one of many perfect realities.

But that engenders the question, why bother regarding him as omnipotent if he doesn't do everything?

 

[idav]

In what way are you defining those terms?

Aware as in interactions are occurring but no brain to process it at a conscious level. Which is why I used unconscious but that isn't exact either but it gets closer to what I'm getting at. Anything without a brain will not be as conscious as humans or at least it will be a different sort of awareness.

It's a "he"?

That's a bad habit I have from reading the bible too much.

Do you believe it'll succeed?

As long as conscious beings continue to advance in technology then we may be able to help ourselves out.

How can god want anything if it is unconscious?

God doesn't want things we do. We can look at it the way life would have developed via evolution. Life developed without being conscious while at the same time striving to keep the life going which can be a sort of want but not to the point of actually thinking about it, analyzing and determining repercussions.

But that engenders the question, why bother regarding him as omnipotent if he doesn't do everything?

I get that question a lot. If God is so omnipotent that he can do contradictory things then that God does not exist. It would still deserve the label because of all the power and energy that is part of the universe that God is responsible for. Not only that but omni-potential is still valid aside from the path that is actually taken.

 

[quizas]

Our life like test

It like saying I won't go to school because
I have to suffer so much ( suffer from studying and
Waking in the morning )

If You go to school you will success
Otherwise you will fail

devil can't go near to people who is
Reading Surat albaqara from quran

People who recite Surat al Baqara every
Three days devil can't go near to him

If you are working with wizards and they
Don't let you so do what I am saying

And experience it

I know wizards will not you leave them easily
They will torture you

If you don't read Arabic just
Go to book store and ask for Surat albaqara
And play it every three days

 

[Koldo]

I'm talking more pantheistic because the pan(en)theism has it that God is separate from it's creation so that god has more control like the deist type god while maintaining presence as in the pantheist concept.

When someone states that anything is possible, some of those anything's are bound to contradict. I look at omnipotence as what is logically possible.

I am not sure how a pantheistic God would fit in.

Can God be evil and omnibenevolent at the same time?
Because unless you deny the existence of evil that is what happens.

 

[idav]

I am not sure how a pantheistic God would fit in.

Can God be evil and omnibenevolent at the same time?
Because unless you deny the existence of evil that is what happens.

Evil does exist, some gods especially humans can be evil. Humans would be where evil is coming from, not nature or the universe itself. There is suffering cause other humans have the power to do so and if the power really belongs to the humans then it is not the will of God but the will of the human, which puts a kink in the omnipotence area.

The bible says to "love others as you love yourself". God has no problem with that we do.

 

[Koldo]

Evil does exist, some gods especially humans can be evil. Humans would be where evil is coming from, not nature or the universe itself. There is suffering cause other humans have the power to do so and if the power really belongs to the humans then it is not the will of God but the will of the human, which puts a kink in the omnipotence area.

The bible says to "love others as you love yourself". God has no problem with that we do.

I can't comprehend what you are talking about on this post.

It seems that your understanding of what 'deistic God' means is completely different from mine.

Could you then define it as thoroughly as possible?

 

[idav]

I can't comprehend what you are talking about on this post.

It seems that your understanding of what 'deistic God' means is completely different from mine.

Could you then define it as thoroughly as possible?

You had asked about pantheism I thought. A deist god is separate from it's creation but also typically deism frowns upon talk of supernatural. Any god I'm advocating would be of natural causes. Almost as if people are like, "if it isn't supernatural why call it god".

 

[Willamena]

I get that question a lot. If God is so omnipotent that he can do contradictory things then that God does not exist. It would still deserve the label because of all the power and energy that is part of the universe that God is responsible for. Not only that but omni-potential is still valid aside from the path that is actually taken.

It just makes sense to me to distinguish between potency and potential, i.e. if omnipotence points at what God may or might do, vs. if omnipotence points at what God does do.

 

[idav]

It just makes sense to me to distinguish between potency and potential, i.e. if omnipotence points at what God may or might do, vs. if omnipotence points at what God does do.

I agree, the potency aspect means that the potential is there however having the potential doesn't mean it will be actualized.

 

[Willamena]

I agree, the potency aspect means that the potential is there however having the potential doesn't mean it will be actualized.

But in distinguishing between potency and potential, I would favour potency at the expense of potential.

What I mean is, what God may or might do need not be implied because God does everything.

 

[Koldo]

You had asked about pantheism I thought. A deist god is separate from it's creation but also typically deism frowns upon talk of supernatural. Any god I'm advocating would be of natural causes. Almost as if people are like, "if it isn't supernatural why call it god".

I apologize for that.
I meant to say 'pantheistic God' on that post, not 'deistic'. No idea why i said 'deistic'.

 

[idav]

But in distinguishing between potency and potential, I would favour potency at the expense of potential.

What I mean is, what God may or might do need not be implied because God does everything.

Does god doing "everything" mean god can do things that are contradictory? Like go left and right at the same time. The power means god can go left or right but is there potential that both will be actualized. Potency implies potential but potential doesn't imply actualization.

I apologize for that.
I meant to say 'pantheistic God' on that post, not 'deistic'. No idea why i said 'deistic'.

I go with Naturalistic Pantheism. We may not understand how it all came about but I go with natural processes. If it is impossible then it is supernatural. To me omnipotence is supernatural/impossible unless omnipotence is defined in a way to only include things that are naturally possible given enough power.

 

[Willamena]

Does god doing "everything" mean god can do things that are contradictory? Like go left and right at the same time. The power means god can go left or right but is there potential that both will be actualized. Potency implies potential but potential doesn't imply actualization.

"Can do" is potentiality language.

 

[Koldo]

I go with Naturalistic Pantheism. We may not understand how it all came about but I go with natural processes. If it is impossible then it is supernatural. To me omnipotence is supernatural/impossible unless omnipotence is defined in a way to only include things that are naturally possible given enough power.

You said humans are gods if i understood you correctly.
What do you mean by that if you are talking about pantheism?

 

[idav]

You said humans are gods if i understood you correctly.
What do you mean by that if you are talking about pantheism?

With pantheism all is god and god is within all. So technically one could say that everything is god but that really doesn't amount to much without sentience. I've been using the term god-like because to some extent humans do have some power, and this power is often times abused when some of these god-like beings spread evil. Obviously we aren't God with a capital "G" but that is where we came from and have some attributes of the source. With our sentience we are able to wield what limited power we have for better or worse.

 

[idav]

"Can do" is potentiality language.

Sure but "can do" is not the same as "will do".

 

[Willamena]

Sure but "can do" is not the same as "will do".

Or "doing."

 

[Ingledsva]

The Simple answer is that God is both good and evil. Whatever we imagined he imagined first, yet he became flesh and gave his life to overcome his own evil he created so that he could also overcome death itself when he could have let us all die or chose to not create us in the first place.

Such a twisted convoluted concept.

*