The Problem of Evil has been solved.(?)

[M. J. Fernandes]

Are you going to have free will in heaven?

Ciao

- viole

I believe free-will exists in Heaven too, but that it exists in being able only to choose from several good options. It's like G-d's free-will. G-d has free-will, but can only do good, because that is G-d's nature.

Coming back to your previous post, what you said has triggered a rethink of my proposed moral solution. I'm wondering whether perhaps G-d instead gives people free-will to choose between different good options, and that the ability to choose evil was initially an unintended side effect that G-d didn't even realise was possible when He first created angels. This might be the case, because free-will on earth, as previously described, whilst it being the free-will to choose good over evil, seems also to be one and the same as free-will to choose evil: free-will to choose good = free-will to choose evil (when free-will is conceived as freedom between good and evil). Because it seems unlikely that G-d would give His creatures free-will to choose evil (such seems possibly to be an evil thing), maybe G-d gave free-will only to choose between different goods. The ability to choose evil, whilst still being a free choice, perhaps is only made possible when temptations come to be. But G-d can draw greater good out of the suffering that is in the ability to choose evil, through making the choice of good in such cases, a triumph of good over evil, which is more powerful than simply choosing good from several good options.

Anyway, these new ideas are a bit sketchy at the moment, and need to be 'fleshed out' for greater coherency.

 

[Koldo]

When we triumph over evil with good, we earn extra merits for Heaven; that is one explanation for why G-d gives us such free-will on earth. I believe free-will exists in Heaven too, but that it exists in being able only to choose from several good options. It's like G-d's free-will. G-d has free-will, but can only do good, because that is G-d's nature.

You disagree with your own argument when you say it is possible to have both free will and only good options.

 

[Heyo]

Suffering is a brute fact of what we call "nature"

Well, then, theodicy solved.

G-d can sometimes work miracles to alleviate suffering.
[...]
The Church teaches magic is wrong (see Catechism of the Catholic Church, #2115 onwards). We believe that science never truly clashes with those teachings of Catholicism deemed to be infallible. [ ... ] For example, how can science disprove the virgin birth of Jesus, the immaculate conception of Mary, the resurrection of Jesus, that Jesus worked miracles, etc. ?

Science has axioms, things that are believed to be true, just as religions have. One scientific law that results directly from the axioms is that magic (a.k.a. miracles) is impossible.

It seems to me that you are a follower of 'Scientism', rather than someone who understands the scientific method and its limitations properly.

Do you know and understand the axioms of science, which are even more basic thaan the scientific method?

Regarding omnipotence, see above: not being able to make 2+2=5, doesn't mean you're not omnipotent. St. Thomas Aquinas's idea of "maximally great", is probably a reference to omnipotence, properly understood. Infinity doesn't exist (as indicated in my first post), which means that G-d can only do finite things, which means that intrinsically G-d has maximums, but this doesn't interfere with omnipotence, because infinity in reality, is an intrinsic impossibility.

The first instance of the PoE is probably by Epicurus, who, by they way, predated Christianity by 3 centuries:

You have redefined omnipotence, hence your persisting PoE. Your god isn't omnipotent, but you insist that it is - while clearly stating that it doesn't fit the definition of "able to do all things" (or at least it is unable to prevent suffering).

 

[loverofhumanity]

yea yea I said bye-bye to this site shut up about that I'm not going to stay terminally logged in I'm enjoying my time away but I just had to share-

My reverend at my local Center for Spiritual Living (CSL) answered the Problem of Evil by asking "why not now? Why don't we stop evil now?" I am looking into the source material of the denomination of the church to understand what my reverend said. The CSL founder Ernest Holmes and source text says "Evil will remain a problem as long as any one believes in it."

The author doesn't go on to making a sound and convincing case for this line of reasoning, but I think I can pick up where he left off. Evil exists because there is free will and people choose to be evil. We don't have to be evil. We don't have to suffer. It is physically possible to not kill each other through war. It is physically possible to feed and clothe everyone on Earth. It is physically possible to alleviate so much of the suffering that we are afflicted with, but because there is free will, there is evil because people choose to be evil.

The PoE is used to discount the idea of a benevolent yet omnipotent/omniscient God. But does the idea that evil is not truly necessary but rather a "voluntary" predicament endured by man discount the idea that the PoE is logical reasoning against an omnipotent yet loving God?

Religion is a radiant light and an impregnable stronghold for the protection and welfare of the peoples of the world, for the fear of God impelleth man to hold fast to that which is good, and shun all evil. Should the lamp of religion be obscured, chaos and confusion will ensue, and the lights of fairness, of justice, of tranquillity and peace cease to shine. (Baha’u’llah)

Being religious in name only means nothing. If people were truly religious the world would be a wonderful place but people no longer practise their religion and obey corrupt religious leaders instead.

 

[viole]

I believe free-will exists in Heaven too, but that it exists in being able only to choose from several good options. It's like G-d's free-will. G-d has free-will, but can only do good, because that is G-d's nature.

That means that it is possible, at least in principle, to have free will without any possibility to choose evil. For we would have a nature that would not allow us to choose evil, even if we could. A bit like the free will to choose from pizza or spaghetti for lunch, but not things like a rotting rat. In fact, we have already some instincts that allows us to choose what is good for us, and causes disgust for the things that might be bad for us. Ergo, we have already some free will limiting mechanism in place

But why didn’t God devise that state of affairs from the start, and for all things that hurt us, including sin, then?

ciao

- viole

 

[URAVIP2ME]

...............................................................................................................................................................
But why didn’t God devise that state of affairs from the start, and for all things that hurt us, including sin, then?

In chapter one of Genesis God from the very start made everything Very Good !
Free will is a good thing because God is forcing No one to love or obey Him
Sinners Satan and Adam brought all things that hurt us
With the original perfection there was Nothing to block good intentions
With the now adamic imperfection there are leanings/ towards wrongdoing
God offers everlasting life ( nothing that hurts us ) for those who want to be righteous ones
Thus, the sin problem is a temporary problem until Jesus will bring 'healing' to earth's nations - Revelation 22:2

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Did God get to know evil only through experiencing it himself? If not, what are you talking about?
What are you even talking about? Eating the fruit was sufficient to get to know evil.
Humans go through much worse than that. Go figure.

The 'evil ' is in connection to Genesis 2:17
The ' evil ' was 'death' for humanity
So, by eating the forbidden fruit ( breaking God's Law ) was sufficient to get to know evil/ death
The total full price tag that sin pays is: death
Not death with some post-mortem penalty, No double jeopardy for death
Death is the evil that sinners pay
Since we can't resurrect oneself or another is why we needed someone who could resurrect us - Jesus can and will - Rev. 1:18

 

[URAVIP2ME]

"With great power comes great responsibility." - Uncle Ben
That god of yours creates or maintains everything, which makes it responsible for everything. Creating or maintaining suffering is not compatible with benevolence. Your god has a Problem of Evil. Necessarily.

Each person is drawn out by his own desire - James 1:13-15 - Satan turned himself into the Devil and Satan
Humanity has the choice to do good or not do good
Sinner Satan threw a monkey wrench into Eden
If you were out working in your garden and someone came along and interrupted you, would you say because you were interrupted you would never go back to your garden, or would you go back after the interruption was over ____________
Sinners Satan and Adam caused an interruption but right away God promised a solution at Genesis 3:15
Jesus would prove to be that promised 'seed' Messiah to come to the rescue
First, all of us would have to be born and think who we would like as Sovereign over us
Earth would have to be populated (Not over full - Gen. 1:28) before the interruption would come to a final end
This is why we are all invited to pray the invitation to God for Jesus to come ! - Rev. 22:20
Jesus to come and bring ' healing' to earth's nations - Rev. 22:2
Healing to the point that sickness and death will end for us
- see 1st Corinthians 15:24-26

 

[URAVIP2ME]

As far as the problem of evil is concerned, it is inconsequential if humans can completely overcome suffering.

Suffering from crime, suffering from disease, etc. _________
Because we can't overcome suffering is a reason why we can ask God for Jesus to come ! - Revelation 22:20
Jesus to come and bring 'healing ' to earth's nations - Rev. 22:2
Healing to the point that No one will say, " I am sick......" - Isaiah 33:24
Even enemy death will be No more on earth - 1st Corinthians 15:24-26; Isaiah 25:8
Thus, through Jesus coming will suffering be completely overcome

 

[ppp]

Suffering is a brute fact of what we call "nature" (note it is not 'natural' to suffer according to G-d's original plan/design). G-d can sometimes work miracles to alleviate suffering. But I posit, and common experience manifestly testifies to this, that G-d doesn't always alleviate suffering. I put forward that G-d doesn't always alleviate suffering, because in such cases He cannot, and further that He cannot, because it is intrinsically impossible for Him to do so. As described in my first post, this doesn't interfere with the concept of G-d being omnipotent (and I linked to the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia article on omnipotence to show this is compatible with Catholic doctrine). G-d can't make 2+2=5, and according to how G-d has constructed the cosmos, G-d sometimes, in very many cases, can't prevent suffering.

If I were omnipotent I could alleviate most of the extant forms of suffering. Disease. Hunger. Assault. Torture (including rape). Hurricanes. Volcanoes. Sunburn. Etcetera. Heck. I doubt I would even need to be omnipotent. Or even maximally powerful.

The inability of their god to address these thing is usually a product of the lack of imagination of the believers.

 

[Estro Felino]

If I were omnipotent I could alleviate most of the extant forms of suffering. Disease. Hunger. Assault. Torture (including rape). Hurricanes. Volcanoes. Sunburn. Etcetera. Heck. I doubt I would even need to be omnipotent. Or even maximally powerful.

So would I.
I mean...who wouldn't?
But don't forget that many injustices are the direct consequences of certain people's greed and wickedness.
So in order to eliminate suffering, I will have to kill the banksters, the murderers and the rapists.

Would you do that?
It's basically depriving people (even wicked people) of their own free will.

The inability of their god to address these thing is usually a product of the lack of imagination of the believers.

No...God just gave free will and chose to respect it.

 

[ppp]

So would I.
I mean...who wouldn't?

I said could.

But don't forget that many injustices are the direct consequences of certain people's greed and wickedness.
So in order to eliminate suffering, I will have to kill the banksters, the murderers and the rapists.

As I said, believers suffer from a lack of imagination. I would simply reconfigure the world were those actions are not possible. No killing would be necessary.

And before you go on an (unimaginative) screen about free will -- you are already unable to perform all sorts of actions without any impact on your alleged free will. Being unable to rape someone is no more of an impact on your free will than being unable to levitate.

Can you levitate? Can you walk through walls? Can you kill me with your thoughts? Then obviously, you lack free will!

No...God just gave free will and chose to respect it.

No. Unbelievers just look for an excuse for their god's incompetence with omnipotence.

 

[Heyo]

So would I.
I mean...who wouldn't?
But don't forget that many injustices are the direct consequences of certain people's greed and wickedness.
So in order to eliminate suffering, I will have to kill the banksters, the murderers and the rapists.

Would you do that?
It's basically depriving people (even wicked people) of their own free will.

That's not the PoE. The PoE is about the gratuitous suffering resulting from "acts of god", like volcanos, or failures in our bodies we can't be responsible for, like bone cancer in newborns.

 

[Estro Felino]

That's not the PoE. The PoE is about the gratuitous suffering resulting from "acts of god", like volcanos, or failures in our bodies we can't be responsible for, like bone cancer in newborns.

Yes, but the truth is that not even God can control volcanoes or earthquakes.
As for diseases, well... that's nature and God has nothing to do with that.

There's also a solution: not to procreate, so you are sure your children don't suffer at all.

 

[Estro Felino]

As I said, believers suffer from a lack of imagination. I would simply reconfigure the world were those actions are not possible. No killing would be necessary.

Sure.
I mean...evil can also be prevented by making evil actions not doable.
That also would be an alternative.
God will have to stop wicked people from doing harm onto others.

And before you go on an (unimaginative) screen about free will -- you are already unable to perform all sorts of actions without any impact on your alleged free will. Being unable to rape someone is no more of an impact on your free will than being unable to levitate.
Can you levitate? Can you walk through walls? Can you kill me with your thoughts? Then obviously, you lack free will!

I understand.
But in such a world sex would not even exist, and we all would be vegetarians because even killing animals would be impossible.
I like the idea.

 

[Heyo]

Yes, but the truth is that not even God can control volcanoes or earthquakes.
As for diseases, well... that's nature and God has nothing to do with that.

Then god isn't omnipotent, PoE solved.

 

[ppp]

I understand.
But in such a world sex would not even exist, and we all would be vegetarians because even killing animals would be impossible.
I like the idea.

Again, your imaginations is flaccid. There would still be sex, and eating would be unnecessary. Sheesh.

 

[Estro Felino]

Then god isn't omnipotent, PoE solved.

Yeah... indeed.
Technically, He is not.

 

[Estro Felino]

Again, your imaginations is flaccid. There would still be sex, and eating would be unnecessary. Sheesh.

The problem here is that reality can't be changed.

 

[ppp]

The problem here is that reality can't be changed.

The problem is that the god you claim does not exist.