The Problem of Evil - Page 3

i was just offering up some interesting points for the "bible's side"

and i think the thing referred to as faith is something they would have needed to use- because like you said, they didn't have adequate knowledge pertaining to God's warning- they would have had to trust Him.

and about not taking responsibility-

if He and the Bible are true, having the Bible written and doing/orchestrating all of the contents therin to produce the result he specifies... by sending His "only begotten son" "through whom, all things were created" in further attempts to save the world from their own sin. he has done nothing to try and counter the "attempts of the enemy"? but he is supposed to do what we think he should, since he created us, and should therefore do our will... that is- if it is true.

but that's not adequate because it is just a collection of stories that, although can possibly lead to a "decent" lifestyle, can also be misinterpreted and forced down the throat of others leading to more damage/harm than what is being spoken against...

...if it's not true/

Even if it is true, your point of its inadequacy still stands, for many reasons.

You refer to trust, you see, I could argue that because they did trust him they weren't afraid of his warnings they could not even comprehend. Because why would your all powerful creator allow something to harm you, even choice.

Still though, you speak of a lesson of trust, a tool of teaching because he created this tree of irrelevant but somehow damning knowledge, (again, another natural thing deemed evil for the purpose of control by the religious, one that can be argued to include everything existing if so desired, how freakin convenient)

But this lesson indicates knowlege regardless ot the tree of knowledge, such the knowledge needed to understand even words, ideas, expressions, especially warnings of god's.

quote:

---

I could argue that because they did trust him they weren't afraid of his warnings they could not even comprehend. Because why would your all powerful creator allow something to harm you, even choice.

---

creatures operating like "robots" so to speak that gave god praise WERE created first... (angels, lots of them too as i remember it saying)
god obviously wanted a creation that would choose him when the decision was theirs.

and i could argue back that Adam, having known firsthandedly, that Eve was created by "that thing that told us not to eat something called fruit that will give us something called knowledge that will bring something called death...but this snake that i have had conversation with seems to know that that other thing didn't know what it was talking about"

they TRUSTED or at least "went with" one of two viewpoints, one of two outside forces... all they had to do was make THEIR CHOICE

If true, one of the choices (as we can now see) held greater truths that -at the time- were unrecognizable... the other "felt right, right now".

quote:

---

again, another natural thing deemed evil for the purpose of control by the religious, one that can be argued to include everything existing if so desired, how freakin convenient

---

Do you know of Science's search for a Theory of Everything?
something that ties together all known forces...
how freaking convenient would that be for science? and if it turns out to be one simple "unacknowledged" or unrecognized thought, what then...

quote:

---

But this lesson indicates knowlege regardless ot the tree of knowledge, such the knowledge needed to understand even words, ideas, expressions, especially warnings of god's.

---

correct, how else would satan "speak" through a snake to tempt in the first place if there was no understanding of speech and the things it speaks of? (at the very least, we are told of some form of communication used to relay ideas)

what about a person who was born deaf and dumb...
are they devoid of thought because they can not hear and speak?
can they not also LEARN that the word DOG means what it does if they study a picture of a dog that's labeled with its "label".

then if consciousness is all that is needed to propogate understanding, what's the problem?

"then if consciousness is all that is needed to propogate understanding, what's the problem?"

Are you asking me? I already said the problem, look again, you didn't negate anything.

"they TRUSTED or at least "went with" one of two viewpoints, one of two outside forces... all they had to do was make THEIR CHOICE"

What is knowledge to you, and more importantly what is the knowledge that is in this tree, if it includes the necessary knowledges for such things as all human actions, learned and developed through trial and error, as all knowledge is, other than blind faith of course. Let alone including such things as language and communication.

"(at the very least, we are told of some form of communication used to relay ideas)"

Hey, if it says they are innocent and without knowledge where do you substantiate such a strong assumption that they can understand right and wrong, consequence?

Innocence without knowledge is the exact description of the mind of a child. The faith itself or at least the majority of the faithful (especially that have kids) will tell you that under these circumstances such a person does NOT understand these concepts.

You make assumptions about learned information, regardless of the claimed notion of the tree holding all knowledge, then continue to assume that an animal that learns from experience through developmental stages and experimentation, that is claimed to be in a stage of complete oblivious innocence and ignorance, somehow has the mental, emotional, and intellectual capacity of a grown adult, probably developed to the degree of those of modern times by your way of thinking, to make such choices of, especially of such an important one time only, altering the destiny of mankind for all known eternity or the second coming, bestowing pain death suffering and sickness with not only one, but the very first human decision of any kind on any subject, and their pop quiz? Yep, they get the fate of mankind one, go figure.


"creatures operating like "robots" so to speak that gave god praise WERE created first... (angels, lots of them too as i remember it saying)
god obviously wanted a creation that would choose him when the decision was theirs."

The picture I get of robots doing gods work aren't starting wars of pride with god....... But we all have our own way of looking at things right? Like a sea of contradictions.

"Do you know of Science's search for a Theory of Everything?
something that ties together all known forces...
how freaking convenient would that be for science? and if it turns out to be one simple "unacknowledged" or unrecognized thought, what then... "

I don't even know you point on this, science's desired knowledge is irrelevant because we aren't talking about science for one, and because science isn't trying to control all human behavior and lay judgement on the world. Its simply INNOCENTLY looking for answers, convenient indeed.

"What is knowledge to you, and more importantly what is the knowledge that is in this tree, if it includes the necessary knowledges for such things as all human actions, learned and developed through trial and error, as all knowledge is, other than blind faith of course."

i think the knowledge referred to here is a separation or opposing view point to "the things of God" thereby causing a need for labels like good and evil

what is the "necessary knowledge for such things as all human actions" to you? especially in light of the fact that, before the decision to eat of the fruit (that period of time in question), the "rules of the game" you are making them play do not apply to the ones existent at the time, and only in part if anything...
you also never fail to emphasize that the weak point of biblical principles is that they are generalized... i see no diference now in your stance on the "survival mechanisms" you speak of as they pertain to adam and eve -before the fall- (animals were turned against them after the "pop quiz".)

as i remarked to you earlier on praise, maybe the only thing they were supposed to do is observe, experience, enjoy, and ?give praise?

...because without the knowledge of having to choose something, what is a creation like that going to do?

quote:

---

I don't even know you point on this, science's desired knowledge is irrelevant because we aren't talking about science for one, and because science isn't trying to control all human behavior and lay judgement on the world. Its simply INNOCENTLY looking for answers, convenient indeed.

---

"to discover this underlying force or principle would be to arrive ath the theory of everything since, at a glance, it would show the single underlying cause for every observation, belief, and theory in science today." -mark mcCutcheon, the final theory

point taken, i was just comparing the basis of a single principle tying together "forces"... i like to be broad and general when i compare things... in the future i will be brief and concise.

besides, you know those bastards aren't supposed to control and judge, they are told to learn and walk in the ways of the lord...
instead, most all misinterpret and make it miserable on those of us who are understanding the world outside of their professed box.

I can't make any sense of this discussion. Answer the question: Why is there evil?

in the simplest of terms- because of choice

for "evidence", try to disassociate yourself with a belief against god and see if what's said in the previous posts make sense from that point of view.

i look at it from the godless point of view as well, it's just that not too many others argue for god here...

...at least not in a way that makes sense with taking from the bible the information that isn't contradicted in the same book.

God's character is at the center of this issue. It is becoming clear that His character is most fully manifested to His creation, when the possibility and reality of evil, pain and suffering is present. His goodness is revealed in giving man moral freedom. His strength is made known when He is able to use the evil man does for a purpose far greater then the cost. His justice is exposed when man is held responsible and judged for every idle word. His patience and long-suffering is shown when He gives man yet another day to repent. His mercy, grace and love is made evident, when through the most evil action of man, He made way for man's salvation.

If there is no God, then suffering and pain is ultimately meaningless. We become a helpless victim of circumstance, a statistic. Life becomes a cruel joke with no comfort to be found. No virtue or dignity to suffering, no real meaning behind this life. Essentially Dr. J. Kevorkian would be our only hope and saviour.

If there is a God, then there can be some greater purpose, some greater good that we can anticipate in the midst of pain. Because God is good and powerful, he is capable and will use evil for an ultimate purpose that is good, good that could not be possible without the presence of evil in the world. It is because God exists, and He is all good and all powerful, can we find purpose, significance, dignity and meaning in evil, pain and suffering.
http://www.antioch.com.sg/~vcfnus/doubts/problem.htm

the only contradicting points, as i see it, are implied outside of its text. that as a result of reading into it or dissproving everything in it because a few points are ?beyond our understanding? at present. so i guess make sure and call me on it when i am- tend to get a little carried away and off topic sometimes... *shrugs*

i think i have a mild? case of A.D.D.
no ritalin though, perscription drugs and their "harmlessness" worry me. never went to the doctor to be "diagnosed" either/

One must associate oneself with logic for a moment and disassociate oneself from mysticism. If humans have choices, how can the universe and humans in the universe operate according to God's divine plan? Further, how can God be all knowing while humans are capable of being unpredictable? If God knows what I will do ahead of time, then I must necessarily do what God knows I will do. Otherwise my actions are unpredictable. If God can predict my actions, then my will is not free. If my will is not free, then how am I responsible for the evil on earth? Let's say for the sake of argument that my will is free: how are babies responsible for the choices they've made? If you say the're paying for their parents sins, I'll have to say that that is about the vilest, wickedest kind of God any person could hope for.

Now, why does a tree of knowledge come up at all? Damn it, if a tree could possibly endow one with knowledge, then wouldn't this entire discussion be about why a tree did or did not cause evil? Forget the tree.

"in the simplest of terms- because of choice "
So the choices of man are the source of all evil in the world?

BULL-SHIT

quote:

---

If humans have choices, how can the universe and humans in the universe operate according to God's divine plan? Further, how can God be all knowing while humans are capable of being unpredictable? If God knows what I will do ahead of time, then I must necessarily do what God knows I will do. Otherwise my actions are unpredictable.

---

if he know's what we are going to choose and yet, if it contradicts his will (obedience in him, not plan of having things work out as he has said as a result of him knowing our choices in advance) he still allows the choice to be yours, what is the problem?

so humans are not unpredictable from that stance on god. you do what he know's you will do and yet, only what you choose.
as in the story of adam and eve, he allowed the choice, yet warned about the consequences/

so what if i decide to do something completely contrary to what i thought i was going to do? that is paradoxical - if he knows all decisions, he will be aware of any "last minute changes".

quote:

---

If God can predict my actions, then my will is not free.

---

if he allows your actions that contradict his desire for your life, how are you not extended freedom of choice.

him knowing what you will do in advance does pose a paradox,
but is it a result of thinking what you would do if you were him?

that is the only way i can see you being able to contradict the allowance of free will.

quote:

---

If you say the're paying for their parents sins, I'll have to say that that is about the vilest, wickedest kind of God any person could hope for.

---

yes, i recall the bible saying that we are "born into sin" and that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of god"...
i have considered the fact that through a lack of understanding a baby will continue to do things that is in direct "disobediende" with their parents telling them NO. why are they held responsible? are they held responsible before they are aware of the "rights and wrongs". how much of an understanding of "right and wrong" must be gained untill you are no longer responsible... if indeed you do start out blameless???

quote:

---

Now, why does a tree of knowledge come up at all? Damn it, if a tree could possibly endow one with knowledge, then wouldn't this entire discussion be about why a tree did or did not cause evil?

---

because of- "acquainting oneself with the understanding of disobedience"- derived from that contradiction now inherent in "satan" who was impregnated in the plant?
that is far on the side of opinion so i guess, for now, we will

quote:

---

Forget the tree

---

and DumbTeen- man chose to associate themselves with the source of all evil in this world, as i said. they lined up in direct defiance of god, with satan, when they chose to CHOOSE to listen to satan instead of god. what is wrong with that concept?

the "knowledge of good and evil" did not exist in them... choosing to defy god, and in turn join satan, you are advocating the "source of all evil in this world"... you are not the source of it, just as when you do what god wants you are not the source of good- per se

but you are the representation of it?

If I have free will, then God cannot possibly know whether or not I will disobey, thus God cannot possibly be an omniscient God, or I do not have free will, God knows everything that I will do because God has divinely planned out a course for me, and I will suffer evil and pleasure according to that plan.

Why do you keep coming up with these complex mystical arguments?

"and DumbTeen- man chose to associate themselves with the source of all evil in this world, as i said. they lined up in direct defiance of god, with satan, when they chose to CHOOSE to listen to satan instead of god. what is wrong with that concept?"
Because I don't think its reasonable to believe that. Honestly, are YOU responsible for plagues, famine, droughts, earthquakes, tornadoes, storms and whatnot?

Its just bullshit, I'm a human being, I'm not perfect but I'm not the source of all evil in the world.

"Why do you keep coming up with these complex mystical arguments?"

A. Because they don't know what they believe.

B. Because they want to confuse you on what they believe.