Freethought & Rationalism Archive

FFT · 12-12-2005, 05:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamp Of Light

So God , for example, could reign down a storm or somthing, and kill an entire city of wicked people in a rather violent fashion, and certainly everyone in the city would think it was a tremendous evil that has fallen upon them, yet they were wicked people, and so those who were being oppressed by the wicked people of the city would probably be cheering at the prospect.

However, God has the ability to simply pop up in the city, and say "look, quit it, people."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamp Of Light

If there was no satan, or evil, then I suggest that there could be no point of reference for a true experiential understanding and appreciation of God Himself, and that is frankly one pf the primary reasons we are here.

Most of us manage to get through life without truly experiencing what pains the world has to offer. Most of us will never get trapped in a basement, the victim of a serial killer, or anything like it. Does that mean that most of us have not truly experienced free will? Of course not. Experiencing evil is not a necessary attribute of free will.

John A. Broussard · 12-12-2005, 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lamp Of Light

If there was no satan, or evil, then I suggest that there could be no point of reference for a true experiential understanding and appreciation of God Himself, and that is frankly one pf the primary reasons we are here.

What's the point to heaven, then, since there will be no evil there?

FatherMithras · 12-12-2005, 06:50 AM

Quote:

I would suggest to you all however, that proper understanding and perspective is needed. For example, look at WWII, the japanese suffered and atomic attack that killed an extraordianrily large number of people. Certainly they thought it was a horrific evil that befell them. On the other hand, the americans dropped the bomb, and they all celebrated this evil as greater good. So God , for example, could reign down a storm or somthing, and kill an entire city of wicked people in a rather violent fashion, and certainly everyone in the city would think it was a tremendous evil that has fallen upon them, yet they were wicked people, and so those who were being oppressed by the wicked people of the city would probably be cheering at the prospect.

So according to you, a man raping his daughter and shooting her in the head serves the greater good in God's plan. I am forced by reason to disagree.

Quote:

Yet my own opinion is all things serve Gods purpose. Both good and evil. Evil wouldn't exist if God didn't have desire for it to exist. I suggest that evil exists because it is necessary to bringing a whole or complete knowledge and understanding via experience. It is one of the means whereby which God becomes magnified and glorified. Much like a light bulb does not give off alot of light in a burning daylight, yet the same light bulb in a pitch black night will stand out like a shining beacon.

Your opinions should be based on fact, with evidence and with more then anecdotal support. Some people believe the earth is flat. They don't have support either. And "Good is better because of evil!" doesn't stand. A guy saving a baby from a fire doesn't mean the aformentioned rape and murder validated.

Quote:

Satan surely serves God purpose. It isn't as if God made a mistake, or couldn't destroy him whenever He wanted. He is even called the angel of light, and I say that is preciesly because of what I said above... if there were no evil to provide a point of reference, there could ultimately not be a complete understanding provided. So just liek the dark makes the light bulb shine like a beacon, so does satan make God shine like a beacon, hence why i say he is called the angel of light... but that is just my own speculation and opinion really, in regards to why he is called that. the more traditional view is that is his name because he was the greatest of Gods angels and fairest before the fall. I of course would agree with that he is the greatest, and that is why I say he was made first.... because he was essential to Gods plan... to build the kingdom God desires to build. If there was no satan, or evil, then I suggest that there could be no point of reference for a true experiential understanding and appreciation of God Himself, and that is frankly one pf the primary reasons we are here.

And the price of that understanding is the majority of people ever born are suffering torment worse then the holocaust, vietnam torture, bodily mutilation, burning, and drowning, times a 1000. Hmmmm..... God seems like a pretty evil person in that light doesn't he?

John A. Broussard · 12-12-2005, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FatherMithras

And the price of that understanding is the majority of people ever born are suffering torment worse then the holocaust, vietnam torture, bodily mutilation, burning, and drowning, times a 1000. Hmmmm..... God seems like a pretty evil person in that light doesn't he?

But LoL has already said, "if there were no evil to provide a point of reference, there could ultimately not be a complete understanding provided."

So suffering isn't an expression of evil, it's an opportunity for the people who are being tortured to "completely understand." The more suffering the better.

I vaguely remember a Kafka short story where someone takes Jesus' place on the cross in order to achieve that complete understanding.

God loves us all to pieces.

Straight A · 12-12-2005, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbarmstrong

no evil is not a created thing it is the absence or total privation of good

So this would mean god is not omnipotent as he has no control over 'evil'.

Straight A · 12-12-2005, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISVfan

God created evil so we wouldn't have to be mindless slaves to Him. God is actually fairer than you guys would have Him be. He isn't going to force you to serve Him. This is known in theology as free will of man.

This is like saying, I am not going to force you to marry me, but if you don't I will set you on fire*

Sound like a fair choice to me.

SA

*did I mention you will burn for eternity?

Transplanar · 12-12-2005, 12:51 PM

Eh... now that I think of it, I do see the merits of suffering, but there are flaws to that arguement.

Lets say you went through a horrifically traumitizing event. The death of a loved one, your house burning down, near-death experiance (or maybe all of the above on a single day). In reaction to this you could:

A) Come to terms with it, move on, and think no further on it
B) Have nightmares about it for years, leading you to go crazy and start killing people
C) Realize the significance of what happened to you and learn from it, and/or see the world in a new light

Now, we'd like to think that C happens all the time when people suffer, but sadly very few people really have the sense to do that. True wise people, I believe, are those that have suffered the most and not snapped. Unfortunately, we don't see very many wise people around here, and there are fewer every day. If suffering's intention was to make people wise, then God made us ill-equipped to get the picture.

I mean, I could easily imagine a world that still had suffering yet there was no evil, but unfortunately, in the real world, suffering tends to lead to evil deeds.

mikem · 12-12-2005, 01:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Transplanar

Well, to say that the Christian God is purely evil is to ignore the good things his religion has helped to promote. I'm not so much arguing that God is evil, but more that God is not good. He's more neutral. Human beings aren't his cherished love-children, they are his toys. He can be nice to his toys, or he can smash them to pieces, and he's in the unique position to have no one to answer to regardless.

Translanar, I think that you would enjoy reading a book called "StarMaker" by Olaf Stapledon. The StarMaker is the intelligence that created everything, but is indifferent to it. I'm not sure that by our standards, such a being could be called morally neutral. If such a god were able to intervene and did not, although he may not be evil, we would certainly regard him as culpable. He would be a monster. How else would we regard someone who stood by and watched while a defenceless child was slowly murdered, and did nothing at all? I think that you have a law in America do you not, that allows you to imprison someone who does not do anything to prevent a crime if they are in a position to do so?

AZSuperman · 12-12-2005, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbarmstrong

Read Augustine. Evil is not a created thing it is the privation of good. If God created all things and created them good, and evil is bad, then God cannot have created evil, thus evil must only exist as it is the absence of good not as an actual tangible universal substance.

Interesting... So let me get this straight...

God created everything, and it was good. The Earth was good, the sun was good, Jupiter was good, Saturn was good, electrons were good, protrons were good, well you get the picture.

That's great... all this good stuff floating around. Sounds nice. :angel:

But wait... what is the good stuff floating around in? Nothing... This is an absence of creation!

The sun may be good, the earth may be good, but the 91 million miles of empty space between the earth and the sun is EVIL!
:devil2:
At the subatomic level we have the same thing! Atoms are made of protons, electrons, and neutrons; however, atoms are not solid clumps of particles, they are extremely small clumps of particles and large amounts of empty space!

The nucleus of the atom is good, the electron is good, but the empty space inbetween is LACKING!! It must be EVIL!! :devil1:

This would mean there is infinitely more evil in the world than good! :devil3:

(This example was to demonstrate how poor the "lack" argument really is.)

John A. Broussard · 12-13-2005, 07:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AZSuperman

(This example was to demonstrate how poor the "lack" argument really is.)

And, then, there are those virtual particles. When they come into existence, that's good. When they go out of existence and leave empty space behind, that's evil.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-12-2005, 12:51 PM	#27
Transplanar Regular Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Vermont, USA Posts: 146	Eh... now that I think of it, I do see the merits of suffering, but there are flaws to that arguement. Lets say you went through a horrifically traumitizing event. The death of a loved one, your house burning down, near-death experiance (or maybe all of the above on a single day). In reaction to this you could: A) Come to terms with it, move on, and think no further on it B) Have nightmares about it for years, leading you to go crazy and start killing people C) Realize the significance of what happened to you and learn from it, and/or see the world in a new light Now, we'd like to think that C happens all the time when people suffer, but sadly very few people really have the sense to do that. True wise people, I believe, are those that have suffered the most and not snapped. Unfortunately, we don't see very many wise people around here, and there are fewer every day. If suffering's intention was to make people wise, then God made us ill-equipped to get the picture. I mean, I could easily imagine a world that still had suffering yet there was no evil, but unfortunately, in the real world, suffering tends to lead to evil deeds.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.