The Problem of Natural Evil... Again

[5wize]

I do not universalize my experiences. I am an essentially rebellious and hedonistic person who dislikes and mistrusts all authority. God allowed much suffering to get my attention.



Heredity, environment and our free will choices. I was raised right so I am to blame for all my screwups which caused myself and others suffering.

Why doesn't this avenue of free will living result in the same outcome of finding God if all rivers do in fact lead to that source? Why is this not clearly seen by 2 people, you and me, I, who will match your rebellious hedonism step for step. Why doesn't free will expose the same underlying truth of reality to us?

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Why doesn't this avenue of free will living result in the same outcome of finding God if all rivers do in fact lead to that source? Why is this not clearly seen by 2 people, you and me, I, who will match your rebellious hedonism step for step. Why doesn't free will expose the same underlying truth of reality to us?

The scabs of poor free will choices are not easily dissolved. Those scabs damn up those rivers you mention.

 

[Eightcrackers]

That sounds like the old glass have empty vs glass half full. Wouldnt a life based o the philosophy the glass is half full be better overall than one based on the glass is have empty?

So, any time anybody does anything ostensibly bad, but you don't know that they had no good reason, you give them the benefit of the doubt?

If I punched you in the face for no cause you could discern, would your reaction really be

"well... he might have had a dang good reason, so I'll let it slide"

?

 

[5wize]

Did he learn the alphabet?

I had to take him out of school, against his mother's wishes, in 4rth grade after 3 years of warning to the school establishment that there was an issue. After one year, he and I, math and reading only - no tutors, he returned to the 5th grade and recently graduated high school with honors. Sometimes only a father can love enough and know what to do. And sometimes I anthropomorphize my experience onto God. Love is what love does. With all His power to intervene like this father did for his son, I feel none should perish. I could not wait for my son to come to me.

It does dwell in us. St Augustine said, "You have made us for yourself, O Lord, and our heart is restless until it rests in you." If you know anything about St. Augustine's life you'd know it's an interesting quote from him. Biden might have referred to Augustine as one of those, "bad hombres".

I have "City of God". Got half way through it. Tough read. Long conceptual turn around and idea development.

But you are at the crux of my point.... With this same inner dwelling connection in us all, why is there such disparity of experience in tapping it? Why isn't it internally clear to a Muslim that Christianity is true? Why would God allow so much external suffering to fire that connection as opposed to a more loving and pronounced ringing of that connection internally when needed - like I did with my son above? Love is what love does. I could have waited for my son to discover his own problem later in life. Why would a loving and knowing father do that?

Non of that denies free will.

 

[5wize]

The scabs of poor free will choices are not easily dissolved. Those scabs damn up those rivers you mention.

Thus the problem of random disparity. There is no reason that your bad choices ended up in a different place than my bad choices if there is a single truth of reality flowing beneath our feet that bad choices are supposed to help us discover.

Maybe that common reality really isn't there?

 

[Nedsk]

So, any time anybody does anything ostensibly bad, but you don't know that they had no good reason, you give them the benefit of the doubt?

If I punched you in the face for no cause you could discern, would your reaction really be

"well... he might have had a dang good reason, so I'll let it slide"

?

If I don't have all the information how could I do otherwise?

My reaction to you punching me in the face is not necessarily tied to what I could discern. In the moment, why you're doing it is irrelevant and I will punch you back. It really is a silly t assume I wont react because I can't discern your reasons for acting.

 

[Nedsk]

I had to take him out of school, against his mother's wishes, in 4rth grade after 3 years of warning to the school establishment that there was an issue. After one year, he and I, math and reading only - no tutors, he returned to the 5th grade and recently graduated high school with honors. Sometimes only a father can love enough and know what to do. And sometimes I anthropomorphize my experience onto God. Love is what love does. With all His power to intervene like this father did for his son, I feel none should perish. I could not wait for my son to come to me.

I have "City of God". Got half way through it. Tough read. Long conceptual turn around and idea development.

But you are at the crux of my point.... With this same inner dwelling connection in us all, why is there such disparity of experience in tapping it? Why isn't it internally clear to a Muslim that Christianity is true? Why would God allow so much external suffering to fire that connection as opposed to a more loving and pronounced ringing of that connection internally when needed - like I did with my son above? Love is what love does. I could have waited for my son to discover his own problem later in life. Why would a loving and knowing father do that?

Non of that denies free will.

So the answer is "Yes"?

I never denied free will. Assumptions are limiting.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Thus the problem of random disparity. There is no reason that your bad choices ended up in a different place than my bad choices if there is a single truth of reality flowing beneath our feet that bad choices are supposed to help us discover.

Maybe that common reality really isn't there?

The main "disparity" occurs in our reaction to the consequences of our bad choices. My consequences were so brutal that I could not take refuge (as no offense, you seem to have done) in reactionary tirades against a God in whom I did not believe. I sought and sought and sought.

 

[Dizerner]

Just make sure we don't look down on atheists and judge their hearts, as we simply do not know.

I will promise any atheist on here that if they will not give up on seeking God, they will eventually find him.

 

[Eightcrackers]

If I don't have all the information how could I do otherwise?

Your honest reaction to being punched in the face for no apparent reason is not outrage, but a calm, considered "maybe he had a good reason"?

Sorry - I just don't believe this.

My reaction to you punching me in the face is not necessarily tied to what I could discern. In the moment, why you're doing it is irrelevant and I will punch you back.

Then why don't theists "punch their god back". That is, react with default outrage, instead of default consideration?

 

[Nedsk]

Your honest reaction to being punched in the face for no apparent reason is not outrage, but a calm, considered "maybe he had a good reason"?

Sorry - I just don't believe this.

Then why don't theists "punch their god back". That is, react with default outrage, instead of default consideration?

Where did I say that? What does how I feel about it have to do with how I judge it? You are confusing two entirely different things

Again you assume I haven't and based on what? You're feelings are merely reactions nothing more. If you're motivated by anger, that's different than being angry, then you're in for a tough time.

 

[Gus Bovona]

One argument I have seen is that God does these things because of the joy they bring. To be clear, this was specifically with reference to childhood cancer ("Cancer brought my wife and me joy we would never have had otherwise"). I am doubtful natural disasters or childhood cancer bring joy; I strongly suspect those involved would be far more happy if these disasters did NOT happen.

One reason - sufficient by itself - to show that we'd always prefer not going through childhood cancer is that no one ever wishes for it, nor engages in other activities (jumping off a roof to break your leg so that your parents would find the joy of caring for you in your convalescence, bring all you together in a way not possible otherwise), to bring it about. If childhood cancer was a net positive, people would be trying to get it. If childhood cancer is a net negative, people would hope they don't get it.

To be clear, the point here is not to blame God for bad things, but to look at whether Christianity is consistent with what we see of the world - to consider whether or not God exists. I was raised in a Christian family, and this was very much the issue that initially persuaded me Christianity is wrong. In many years of discussion at CARM I have yet to see a satisfactory answer to this issue.

I appreciate there is nothing new in this topic; people have debated the "Problem of Evil" for a long time. This should mean the answer is out there and well-known - if there is a good answer. And I will say up front that I have no clear dividing line between what counts as a disaster that a morally good God should prevent, and what is just a mild inconvenience, but I do not think that that is required to be sure that natural disasters that cause widespread destruction and loss of life, and fatal childhood diseases such as cancer are awful events that cause great suffering and that one might expect a perfectly good and loving God to prevent.

Someone else on CARM made the excellent point that I never heard before that evil doesn't have to be necessary in order so that we appreciate the good; merely a baseline level of neither good nor evil - a neutral feeling or situation - would still be below the good, the really good, and the incredibly good so that we appreciate all that good (in the same sense that evil is "below" the good such that we then appreciate the good because we compare it to evil).

 

[Nedsk]

One reason - sufficient by itself - to show that we'd always prefer not going through childhood cancer is that no one ever wishes for it, nor engages in other activities (jumping off a roof to break your leg so that your parents would find the joy of caring for you in your convalescence, bring all you together in a way not possible otherwise), to bring it about. If childhood cancer was a net positive, people would be trying to get it. If childhood cancer is a net negative, people would hope they don't get it.


Someone else on CARM made the excellent point that I never heard before that evil doesn't have to be necessary in order so that we appreciate the good; merely a baseline level of neither good nor evil - a neutral feeling or situation - would still be below the good, the really good, and the incredibly good so that we appreciate all that good (in the same sense that evil is "below" the good such that we then appreciate the good because we compare it to evil).

It's a net positive to eat more salad than McDonalds but America is obese.

The presence of evil is a bad argument against the existence of God.

 

[Dizerner]

Your honest reaction to being punched in the face for no apparent reason is not outrage, but a calm, considered "maybe he had a good reason"?

Sorry - I just don't believe this.

Then why don't theists "punch their god back". That is, react with default outrage, instead of default consideration?

We teach we are sinful by nature.

I for one will readily admit my gut reaction was anger and offense at God.

 

[Dizerner]

The presence of evil is a bad argument against the existence of God.

I think the idea is against a good God, not just any one in particular.

An evil God would not be too hard to defend, you'd just have to explain the presence of good.

 

[Nedsk]

I think the idea is against a good God, not just any one in particular.

An evil God would not be too hard to defend, you'd just have to explain the presence of good.

Good point

 

[Gus Bovona]

I think the idea is against a good God, not just any one in particular.

An evil God would not be too hard to defend, you'd just have to explain the presence of good.

I think it's Stephen law who says that an evil god would want us to experience some good so that the evil that god inflicts on us is even more painful.

 

[5wize]

The main "disparity" occurs in our reaction to the consequences of our bad choices. My consequences were so brutal that I could not take refuge (as no offense, you seem to have done) in reactionary tirades against a God in whom I did not believe. I sought and sought and sought.

Where did you seek? From the same potentially poisoned pool of ideas that need to be bent and wrenched very hard to seat them? To a hammer everything looks like a nail.

My tirades are not against God or the seeking of Him. I actually miss believing in God. It isn't an easier row I hoe since I let go of that supernatural relief and hope. I know what it is. I felt it once and I'm still seeking it. I just did not find that where your conclusion rested held any water over time and exposure for me.

Don't deflect my confrontation of the serious theological issues that everyone knows exist in the Christian worldview as a tirade against God. Finding a comfort in God by either ignoring those issues, or marginalizing them, and then saying that because I cannot commit myself anyway as a result of them is somehow "damning" to me with whatever theory of damnation or separation you hold to.

You just don't know any of this is true other than it brings you relief to believe it and think about it. Which is o.k. by me... But given all the obvious theological conundrums of Christianity it's the baggage that the Christian worldview pins on you about me that is at issue.

It's like I keep repeating. Christianity is not a closed belief system where the one who takes it on is the one who sinks or swims with regards to their relationship to it. When you took it on, you swim, we all sink... by its own definition.

 

[Dizerner]

Is it possible, though, that one rejects God not for intellectual reasons at all, but actually for emotional ones?

I think this happens way more than people realize it and they are confusing emotions with intellect.

 

[5wize]

So the answer is "Yes"?

Yes, but the story is meaningful as to an expectation of what a father that loves is expected to do within his power to save a son. Again, Love is what love does. Can we actually know that God loves us from a biblical claim alone when we actively show love for each other - or is God's love reduced to a Christian bromide?

I never denied free will. Assumptions are limiting.

I know you didn't. Just heading off that argument from others that would claim interventions by God would thwart free will.... yet there they are praying for them all the time.