The problem is evil solved?

[Alien826]

It's relative only to the presence heat. Cold cat be measured because it doesnt exist only heat does.

By your own argument evil is relative if cold is. I am merely claiming cold.is only the condition we call the absence of heat. Same with evil. It's not created it's just what happens when God is absent

Yes, I agree. Temperature is a measure of the amount of heat something contains (ugh, that's a poor way of saying it).

The point I'm making is that what you say about heat and colds has no relevance to your claim about evil. It's not even a good analogy. And I didn't say evil is relative because heat and cold are relative, though I suppose evil is both relative and subjective. Do you have any way to support your claim about evil? Aren't you saying evil doesn't exist?

To put it another way, you could drop the whole thing about cold being the absence of heat and just say that evil is the absence of God. We would then ask you why you believe that and this thread would be not only more productive but a lot shorter too!

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So?

Thus the lack of god isn't what is evil in the sense that cold is the absence of heat.

 

[Ignatius A]

Yes, I agree. Temperature is a measure of the amount of heat something contains (ugh, that's a poor way of saying it).

The point I'm making is that what you say about heat and colds has no relevance to your claim about evil. It's not even a good analogy. And I didn't say evil is relative because heat and cold are relative, though I suppose evil is both relative and subjective. Do you have any way to support your claim about evil? Aren't you saying evil doesn't exist?

To put it another way, you could drop the whole thing about cold being the absence of heat and just say that evil is the absence of God. We would then ask you why you believe that and this thread would be not only more productive but a lot shorter too!

I said evil is the absence of God. You're the one having a problem with cold. Cold is not a thing. It's the absence of heat. Evil is not a thing is the absence of God.

 

[Ignatius A]

Thus the lack of god isn't what is evil in the sense that cold is the absence of heat.

It's exactly the same. Cold is just a term humans apply to that which has no heat. Whether you're evil or not is irrelevant to the discussion.

 

[Alien826]

God can't do all things, a lot of things are by just their nature impossible. He can do all possible things. The framework of possible worlds he creates is in fact constrained in that not everything we assert is possible is possible.

The non-suffering forced world could've been created or he could've made things that it would be very easy to obey God and very difficult to disobey to the extent near impossible.

For example, if he made Adam (a) into a luminous light fire being with more brightness and powers then all Angels, and his form was much higher, then Iblis would not disobey. But Angels (a) would not be tried with respect to their pride and they would be in a way worshiping God vainly.

And if he made a lesson of Satan, then everyone would never disobey purely out of fear of similar destruction right away.

However, the trial was made easy but not too easy. It was unexpected Iblis disobey nor Adam disobey. And so that is the next thing I don't agree with, God knows all possible things, but unset future cannot be known before it happens.

Thanks for an example of what I was trying to say. The problem of evil is only a problem (a contradiction really) when the premises I set out are accepted. You have set out a different set of premises under which God is not evil (I think, I didn't follow it all, but that's OK). It may or may not be true, logical or whatever, but it doesn't address the problem of evil.

Incidentally, if I had to assume the existence of a god of some kind, based on the world as we observe it, I would not conclude a "three omni" God. I would suggest one much less powerful and knowing, with the jury still out on benevolence.

 

[Ignatius A]

Thanks for an example of what I was trying to say. The problem of evil is only a problem (a contradiction really) when the premises I set out are accepted. You have set out a different set of premises under which God is not evil (I think, I didn't follow it all, but that's OK). It may or may not be true, logical or whatever, but it doesn't address the problem of evil.

Incidentally, if I had to assume the existence of a god of some kind, based on the world as we observe it, I would not conclude a "three omni" God. I would suggest one much less powerful and knowing, with the jury still out on benevolence.

God isnt evil though as evil doesnt exist just like cold doesnt exist but people put on warm clothes whenever there is less heat.

 

[Alien826]

I said evil is the absence of God. You're the one having a problem with cold. Cold is not a thing. It's the absence of heat. Evil is not a thing is the absence of God.

Yes we agree about heat and cold. I'm asking you to support your final sentence. The fact that cold is the absence of heat is not evidence that evil is the absence of God.

 

[Ignatius A]

Yes we agree about heat and cold. I'm asking you to support your final sentence. The fact that cold is the absence of heat is not evidence that evil is the absence of God.

I didn't say it was evidence for that unless you can copy and paste where i did say it.

 

[Link]

Thanks for an example of what I was trying to say. The problem of evil is only a problem (a contradiction really) when the premises I set out are accepted. You have set out a different set of premises under which God is not evil (I think, I didn't follow it all, but that's OK). It may or may not be true, logical or whatever, but it doesn't address the problem of evil.

Incidentally, if I had to assume the existence of a god of some kind, based on the world as we observe it, I would not conclude a "three omni" God. I would suggest one much less powerful and knowing, with the jury still out on benevolence.

It addresses the problem of evil because it shows the definition of all-powerful is not accounting that somethings are impossible to do just by the constraints of what they are. But this world is also not the original plan of God, it's state is back up plan on top of back up plans and of course, it could be if he knew this would be outcome, he might've created a vain happy world to avoid the pain of the disobedient. But unlikely scenarios happened, and he is dealing with the constraints we are in.

He is trying to save us from destruction but we pay no heed. And physical pain compared to the light burning darkness pain which is inevitable is nothing. The light burning darkness is the bigger pain of hell, and physical pain warnings are so we avoid what is inevitable even without that.

A soul is not always redeemable. Most souls if set up with reincarnation can become worse over time. The best bet to save as much souls as possible is to have time ticker, one chance to get it right scenario, and warn about consequences and give good news for those who turn to God often and repent.

He wants miracles to be in the open but we probably will react negatively if we don't prepare. And too much manifestation of signs then good will is impossible like it will be impossible to repent and benefit from faith on the day of judgment.

These are all constraints.

 

[Alien826]

God isnt evil though as evil doesnt exist just like cold doesnt exist but people put on warm clothes whenever there is less heat.

So you agree that the heat/cold thing is just an illustration? I don't see how warm clothes come into it.

I didn't say it was evidence for that unless you can copy and paste where i did say it.

No you didn't. I'm trying to point out that the heat thing has actually no connection to the evil thing. And that you need to support your assertion about the absence of God. Any hope that you will?

 

[Alien826]

It addresses the problem of evil because it shows the definition of all-powerful is not accounting that somethings are impossible to do just by the constraints of what they are. But this world is also not the original plan of God, it's state is back up plan on top of back up plans and of course, it could be if he knew this would be outcome, he might've created a vain happy world to avoid the pain of the disobedient. But unlikely scenarios happened, and he is dealing with the constraints we are in.

Thus, you are not addressing the problem of evil, which relies on God knowing everything, including the future. What you've said is that God made the world then things didn't work out as planned, which makes perfect sense, but does not address the problem of evil which requires omniscience in order to be a contradiction.

 

[Link]

Thus, you are not addressing the problem of evil, which relies on God knowing everything, including the future. What you've said is that God made the world then things didn't work out as planned, which makes perfect sense, but does not address the problem of evil which requires omniscience in order to be a contradiction.

Yes, you are correct about that technically, but again, it's the same problem with constraints. Omniscience should be defined, for example, if God knew how to create us all his equals, he would've because he is that generous, but it's impossible to know that. So God doesn't know how to do that because it's impossible. So can future be known, yes, but not with free-will. Free-will makes it unknown just by it's nature. Free-will and known future is impossible.

 

[Ignatius A]

So you agree that the heat/cold thing is just an illustration? I don't see how warm clothes come into it.



No you didn't. I'm trying to point out that the heat thing has actually no connection to the evil thing. And that you need to support your assertion about the absence of God. Any hope that you will?

You don't see how it comes into it? Ok

If I didnt say it then mentioning it derails the discussion

Again I never said there was a.connection between heat and evil. Maybe read before you post.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Yes we agree about heat and cold. I'm asking you to support your final sentence. The fact that cold is the absence of heat is not evidence that evil is the absence of God.

How come heat isn't the absence of cold?

 

[GoodAttention]

The presence of evil is a stumbling block to belief for some people because they believe God created evil. What if evil doesnt actually exist? In science temperature measures the presence of heat and the concept of cold is just what we call the absence of heat. Cold doesnt exist is just a state of no heat. Same with evil. Evil is just a concept that we use the describe the state of being absent from God.

God created free will and also told us to create courts and to consider justice. Man must be responsible for his actions, not God.

Evil isn’t “being absent” from God, more so it is the actions of man that we, together, must decide as right or wrong, and if wrong or evil, must render justice.

We are not all born the same, for which we must also be born unequal, meaning our lives can be unfair in comparison. Power of one over another can be corrupted or compassionate.

This is where and why good and evil exists and why justice is the only way we can make good of any evil in our lives.

 

[Trailblazer]

Really? Because it hurts children and people. It is the humane thing to do.

Yes, it is a humane thing for humans to stop child rape and starvation but God is not a human.

Great, that would be a good thing.

Yes it would be good, but it is something that humans have been entrusted to do.

The better thing would have been to give us the decision when we want to die.

Do you think that anyone would ever want to die if they had a choice (unless they were suicidal)?
Some people might if their life is hard enough, but speaking for myself it is not my own death that is so hard, it is losing loved ones.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

your assessment of evidence and logic are biased.

How is that possible? Did you mean flawed?

He said, "People are wrong about a god belief because every piece of evidence ever presented so far has logical problems and therefore cannot be true"

The unbeliever who cannot grapple with the possibility of there being a God.

Few fit that description. Some unjustifiably assert that gods don't exist, but they are few. Most atheists are also agnostic.

God is not subject to morality because God is not a person so God is not a moral agent. Only humans are moral agents. A moral agent is a person who has the ability to discern right from wrong and to be held accountable for his or her own actions. Moral agents have a moral responsibility not to cause unjustified harm.

The description of gods can be judged according to one's own moral values. Furthermore, you've just argued that your god doesn't know right from wrong.

why should God only stop child rape and starvation?

That's not what he said. He wrote, "I cannot stop child rape and starvation. God can and chooses not to."

Perhaps you can address why this deity sits by and watches such things.

And have you seen this from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-YIJN1aGvgHYPERLINK "http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-YIJN1aGvg&t=13m19s"&HYPERLINK ?: (some profanity just after 13:49)

Tracie (humanist): "You either have a God who sends child rapists to rape children or you have a God who simply watches it and says, 'When you're done, I'm going to punish you' .. If I were in a situation where I could stop a person from raping a child, I would. That's the difference between me and your God."

Shane (Christian caller): "True to life, you portray that little girl as someone who is innocent. She's just as evil as you."

Some of us do know certain things about God, enough to know why God does not do what you want.

So what's your answer to why this deity allows children to be raped?

God knows what is right and what is wrong and that is how God can discern right and wrong human behavior.

It doesn't seem so according to my humanist ethics. As Tracie noted above, she (and most decent people) would protect a vulnerable child in need. I understand why you want this deity exempted from such value judgments, but perhaps you can understand why the humanist won't grant that request.

God chooses not to because God expects humans to do these things.

We can judge that as well, and not favorably. The child can't protect itself, nor can any adult unaware of the child needing protection at that moment. Does the Golden Rule not apply to this deity with you? It does with me, and since it doesn't respect it, why should anyone respect such a god? Because it can harm them?

I understand that you're a believer and excuse this gods behavior whatever it allegedly does, but perhaps you can understand why the unbeliever doesn't. Why would he without your belief?

Evil exists in the same way cold does, that is to say, only in the mind of humans.

Agreed, but then you say this:

lack of God is evil.

And this:

God isnt evil

The god of Abraham meets my definition of "evil." It unleashed Satan on humanity. It punishes humanity for being human. It requires a blood sacrifice. It is intolerant of imperfection. It drowned most of the world. It allowed a demon to gratuitously taunt Job. And it sits by indifferently watching humanity suffer.

Killing and animal to eat is not evil. The body has to have food to live and God knows that.

According to humanist standards, it's "evil" of the god that designed a world where killing is necessary for survival.

God created free will

Really? This god didn't already have free will thanks to whatever laws made it and its will possible?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Yes, it is a humane thing for humans to stop child rape and starvation but God is not a human.

That is not what I said. Why change what I said? Why is it humane for humans to stop child rape and starvation but not for god to stop it?

Yes it would be good, but it is something that humans have been entrusted to do.

Sure, but humans cannot stop it, god could. This is the point you keep avoiding.

Do you think that anyone would ever want to die if they had a choice (unless they were suicidal)?

Yes. Live 1000 years maybe you get bored. Did you watch "The Good Place"?

Some people might if their life is hard enough, but speaking for myself it is not my own death that is so hard, it is losing loved ones.

I would rather not die but I have accepted the fact that I will. Losing loved ones is hard, I agree.

 

[Trailblazer]

Can you please explain it to me then?

God does not do what WE want because God only does what God wants to do. That comes with being omnipotent.

Omnipotence implies ability but it also implies that God only uses that ability as He chooses to, not as you want Him to.
Here is what omnipotence means, in a nutshell:

“Say: He ordaineth as He pleaseth, by virtue of His sovereignty, and doeth whatsoever He willeth at His own behest. He shall not be asked of the things it pleaseth Him to ordain. He, in truth, is the Unrestrained, the All-Powerful, the All-Wise.”

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 279-285

“Say: O people! Let not this life and its deceits deceive you, for the world and all that is therein is held firmly in the grasp of His Will. He bestoweth His favor on whom He willeth, and from whom He willeth He taketh it away. He doth whatsoever He chooseth.” (Gleanings, p. 209)

“God witnesseth that there is no God but Him, the Gracious, the Best-Beloved. All grace and bounty are His. To whomsoever He will He giveth whatsoever is His wish. He, verily, is the All-Powerful, the Almighty, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting.” (Gleanings, p. 73)

And how do you know this?

Because it is in the Writings of Baha'u'llah, as noted above.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then please provide evidence that does not have logical problems.

First you would have to explain what you mean by logical problems.