The Problem of Natural Evil... Again

[5wize]

Can you cite where he is unclear?

Jesus emphasized salvation through righteousness model, as a practicing Jew would. Paul invented a salvation through grace model.

Jesus thought himself to be the messiah of the Jewish nation from the prophesies. Paul invented a gentile savior of Jesus that could be used as a salvation for all.

... to name a couple.

 

[Nedsk]

Jesus emphasized salvation through righteousness model, as a practicing Jew would. Paul invented a salvation through grace model.

Jesus came to be the messiah of the Jewish nation from the prophesies. Paul invented a gentile reach where Jesus could be used as a salvation for all.

... to name a couple.

Paul didnt invent it he preached it. Not the same.

Yes he did and they rejected him. Hmmm m they rejected the messiah who rose up from their midsts and we're supposed people today reject him?

 

[5wize]

Paul didnt invent it he preached it. Not the same.

From what scriptural authority prior to his epistles?

Yes he did and they rejected him. Hmmm m they rejected the messiah who rose up from their midsts and we're supposed people today reject him?

But Jesus never claimed to change his mission as a result.

Either way... those are 2 very solid issues lacking biblical clarity.

 

[Nedsk]

From what scriptural authority prior to his epistles?

But Jesus never claimed to change his mission as a result.

Either way... those are 2 very solid issues lacking biblical clarity.

Jesus told them to spread the word. When the Jews rejected Jesus the apostles were supposed to do what? Go back to fishing?

 

[5wize]

Jesus told them to spread the word. When the Jews rejected Jesus the apostles were supposed to do what? Go back to fishing?

God's intent for the life of Jesus, as was inherited by Hebrew theology, is not something that is changed with rhetorical questions posed by us humans.

 

[docphin5]

There have been a couple of threads recently that dance around this subject - this one by stiggy explicitly addresses why God allows things that are just mildly bad, while this one merely states God did not create the universe flawed, and the OP insists we not discuss the real problem. So I thought I would start a thread to hit is head on.

By natural evil I mean bad things happening outside man's control. These are events where the free will defence fails because mankind had no choice. In the atheist world-view, these things are not evil, as they is no agency behind them, but in the theist view they are, or so it seems to me.

A volcane, hurricate or tidal wave that causes great destruction and kills thousands an example of natural evil, in contrast to the Holocaust, which was clearly engineered by man. While there are ways the damage from a volcane, hurricate or tidal wave can be mitigated, if God exists then these are events God chose to allow to happen (or perhaps even caused himself; Isaiah 45:7) that he could have prevented without restricting anyone's free will.

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.

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.

Simple answer is the second will broke away from the Light resulting in the material world (aka darkness). First will allows second will’s chaos to generate humans with a moral consciousness. Moral consciousness raises soul(s) to the first Will. At the appointed time first will recalls material world to himself and returns everything to Light.

Thus, natural evil = satan‘s power over the material world

Nasseni Hymn from gnostic library

The world's producing law was Primal Mind,

And next was First-born's outpoured Chaos; And third, the soul received its law of toil:

Encircl'd, therefore, with an acqueous form, With care o'erpowered it succumbs to death.

Now holding sway, it eyes the light, And now it weeps on misery flung; Now it mourns, now it thrills with joy; Now it wails, now it hears its doom; Now it hears its doom, now it dies, And now it leaves us, never to return.

It, hapless straying, treads the maze of ills.

But Jesus said, Father, behold, A strife of ills across the earth Wanders from thy breath (of wrath); But bitter Chaos (man) seeks to shun, And knows not how to pass it through.

On this account, O Father, send me; Bearing seals, I shall descend; Through ages whole I'll sweep, All mysteries I'll unravel, And forms of Gods I'll show; And secrets of the saintly path, Styled "Gnosis," I'll impart.

 

[The Pixie]

Simply put, God does not want us to stay happy. I know that you have this creepy practice of archiving my posts, and I know how you like to take things out of context, often leaving out further explanations which clarify, so let me make it easy for you. I’ll put it in bold caps:

GOD DOES NOT WANT US TO STAY HAPPY.

Hence, he inflicts great suffering on billions to punish them (Mat 25:41-46). So far so good,

Now here's the part you will most likely leave out every time you trot out the above quote of mine:

Why? Either God wants us to be happy or he does not. You have confirmed he does not.

That you immediately contradict that only serves to show how incoherent you position is.

GOD WANTS US TO BE JOYFUL!

Which is why he lets kids die of cancer, right?

Are you going to whine that that is taken out of context? It was not. You made the statement in the context of a discussion about why God lets kids die of cancer.

Man was initially given dominion over the world. When mankind fell, the entire world fell with him. Satan, along with "principalities and powers" is now the "ruler of this (fallen) world." But God bought the world back with a ransom payable in blood, the blood of His only begotten Son, so now Satan is no more than a useful tool of God's until the moment of Christ's return, i.e. when our redemption bought by His blood "draweth nigh" but is still now a fait accompli.

What exactly is your point?

Are you saying God is impotent; he has been usurped and now cannot stop kids dying of cancer? If that is not what you are saying, then how is this in any way relevant.

But Pixie, rather than you getting bogged down in the theology of the above paragraph, which you will NEVER understand unless it be divinely revealed to you, let's focus on the two statements in bold above, the logic of which needs no divine revelation to be understood:

That you admit it cannot be understood unless God tells you himself is at least a step in the right direction.

Mere happiness is often an impediment to receiving godly joy.

You seem to think joy and happiness are mutually exclusive. If you have joy, would not be happy? I would.

We were not ultimately made for this world. Rather than elaborate on why this is so, let me go back to my personal "testimony" (yuk, I hate that word):

When my wife was diagnosed with cancer, I was a fairly new, but very lukewarm Christian, nowhere near the miserable wretch I was BC, but fairly miserable nevertheless. Ditto my wife. God did not give my wife cancer, but He ALLOWED it, and it became a catalyst for bringing us to the Lord in prayer and intense supplication. Both of our lives were enriched in a way that would never have happened otherwise. She has now gone on to glory and knows true joy. My two sons and I are closer than we ever could have been without undergoing the mutual suffering that the four of us underwent during her illness. But of course she is now better off than the three of us.

Again, you argument would appear to be that God lets children die of cancer because of the joy it brings. I think this is fundamentally flawed because cancer actually brings far more misery than joy.

 

[The Pixie]

Simple answer is the second will broke away from the Light resulting in the material world (aka darkness). First will allows second will’s chaos to generate humans with a moral consciousness. Moral consciousness raises soul(s) to the first Will. At the appointed time first will recalls material world to himself and returns everything to Light.

Thus, natural evil = satan‘s power over the material world
...

Blaming Satan is one approach. It is Biblical and it is coherent, and it is likely some ancient Hebrews did believe that, given the influence of Zoroastrianism after the Exile. It does assume Satan has god-like powers, however, so not compatible with monotheism, which is why most Christians reject it.

 

[The Pixie]

The thing for christians is that this body and this life are temporary. Its not that either has no value, it's a matter of what has greater value, this life or the life that Christians believe is to come, eternal life. The only thing that gives me any kind of solace about the pain and suffering and injustice we experience in this life is the hope that it is all made right by the judge of the universe. So the little children that suffer here receive some kind of relief in the next life so it wasn't all for nothing. Or that those who escaped the punishment they deserved in this life will receive the just sentences in the next to balance the ledger.

Do you think torturing children is morally acceptable? Ignore for the moment whether anyone does that, and just consider the question. My view is that it is not, but the argument you present here suggests you might think otherwise: "The thing for christians is that this body and this life are temporary. Its not that either has no value, it's a matter of what has greater value, this life or the life that Christians believe is to come, eternal life." If you say torturing children is necessarily wrong - and I hope you do - then I think that that invalidates your argument here, as you are acknowledging that what happens in this life is important, has a moral aspect to it. You cannot just write it off as trivial; if you do then you are saying torture, murder, rape, slavery in this world are acceptable.

I get what you say about balancing the ledger, and I think there is Biblical support for that, but why do so many Christians live is comfort when they could be toiling hard in this life, giving their money to charity, and living austerely. To be sure, some Christians do just that, and are well regarded in the Christian community. But the vast majority do not; they look like they are heading to a lot of woe in the next life.

My excuse is that I do not believe it is true. What is yours?

I have to resist judging God and others because my temporary and limited knowledge makes me woefully unprepared for the job. If I were a brain surgeon with that little knowledge you wouldn't want me anywhere near you.

Sorry, but from my perspective this is a cop out. I am not choosing between brain surgeons, I am trying to decide if the brain surgeon even exists.

I reject Christianity because it has no answer to the Problem of Natural Evil, and to me this is a tacit admission of that.

 

[Nedsk]

Do you think torturing children is morally acceptable? Ignore for the moment whether anyone does that, and just consider the question. My view is that it is not, but the argument you present here suggests you might think otherwise: "The thing for christians is that this body and this life are temporary. Its not that either has no value, it's a matter of what has greater value, this life or the life that Christians believe is to come, eternal life." If you say torturing children is necessarily wrong - and I hope you do - then I think that that invalidates your argument here, as you are acknowledging that what happens in this life is important, has a moral aspect to it. You cannot just write it off as trivial; if you do then you are saying torture, murder, rape, slavery in this world are acceptable.

I get what you say about balancing the ledger, and I think there is Biblical support for that, but why do so many Christians live is comfort when they could be toiling hard in this life, giving their money to charity, and living austerely. To be sure, some Christians do just that, and are well regarded in the Christian community. But the vast majority do not; they look like they are heading to a lot of woe in the next life.

My excuse is that I do not believe it is true. What is yours?


Sorry, but from my perspective this is a cop out. I am not choosing between brain surgeons, I am trying to decide if the brain surgeon even exists.

I reject Christianity because it has no answer to the Problem of Natural Evil, and to me this is a tacit admission of that.

Never. Copy and paste where I ever suggested otherwise. With all due respect you havnt got first clue what you're talking about. Show m we my words. Bad premise bad conclusion.

 

[stiggy wiggy]

Why? Either God wants us to be happy or he does not. You have confirmed he does not.

To STAY happy? Correct, He does not. Continual mere contentment is an impediment to joy. I discussed that in the OP. Did you not read the OP before hitting that "reply" button?

That you immediately contradict that only serves to show how incoherent you position is.

And yet I didn't, which explains why you failed so miserably to show where. Look Pixie, if you are so intent on starting a thread with a new OP attacking my beliefs, you ought to know from our past history that rhetorically I'm gonna eat you alive if you come so unprepared. Are you some kind of masochist or something?

Which is why he lets kids die of cancer, right?

He lets us all die. What kind of cruel god would require us to live forever in these increasingly decrepit bodies in such a corrupt world?

Are you going to whine that that is taken out of context?

Nah, I don't offer whining. Not my style. Besides, I'm used to your taking things out of context. Your arguments are so weak you usually have no other choice.

What exactly is your point?

That suffering indirectly brings joy if we take it to the Lord. That should have been obvious from the OP. Those who disagreed with that point in this thread at least had enough smarts to GET the point. Sorry you don't.

Are you saying God is impotent; he has been usurped and now cannot stop kids dying of cancer?

Where did I say that? Sure He can. Often He does. Sometimes He does not.

That you admit it cannot be understood unless God tells you himself is at least a step in the right direction.

Amen! What little humility I do have is indeed a step in the right direction.

You seem to think joy and happiness are mutually exclusive. If you have joy, would not be happy? I would.

Me too. The latter is a subset of the former, but not vice-versa.

Again, you argument would appear to be that God lets children die of cancer because of the joy it brings. I think this is fundamentally flawed because cancer actually brings far more misery than joy.

Depends. That wasn't the case with me and my family. My wife, for example, is now experiencing joy unspeakable. My two boys have never been closer, and that brings me great joy.

 

[Nedsk]

To STAY happy? Correct, He does not. Continual mere contentment is an impediment to joy. I discussed that in the OP. Did you not read the OP before hitting that "reply" button?



And yet I didn't, which explains why you failed so miserably to show where. Look Pixie, if you are so intent on starting a thread with a new OP attacking my beliefs, you ought to know from our past history that rhetorically I'm gonna eat you alive if you come so unprepared. Are you some kind of masochist or something?



He lets us all die. What kind of cruel god would require us to live forever in these increasingly decrepit bodies in such a corrupt world?




Nah, I don't offer whining. Not my style. Besides, I'm used to your taking things out of context. Your arguments are so weak you usually have no other choice.



That suffering indirectly brings joy if we take it to the Lord. That should have been obvious from the OP. Those who disagreed with that point in this thread at least had enough smarts to GET the point. Sorry you don't.



Where did I say that? Sure He can. Often He does. Sometimes He does not.



Amen! What little humility I do have is indeed a step in the right direction.



Me too. The latter is a subset of the former, but not vice-versa.



Depends. That wasn't the case with me and my family. My wife, for example, is now experiencing joy unspeakable. My two boys have never been closer, and that brings me great joy.

The problem of constant happiness

 

[Howie]

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"

?

He's speaking if God, not just ANYBODY.

 

[Howie]

There have been a couple of threads recently that dance around this subject - this one by stiggy explicitly addresses why God allows things that are just mildly bad, while this one merely states God did not create the universe flawed, and the OP insists we not discuss the real problem. So I thought I would start a thread to hit is head on.

By natural evil I mean bad things happening outside man's control. These are events where the free will defence fails because mankind had no choice. In the atheist world-view, these things are not evil, as they is no agency behind them, but in the theist view they are, or so it seems to me.

A volcane, hurricate or tidal wave that causes great destruction and kills thousands an example of natural evil, in contrast to the Holocaust, which was clearly engineered by man. While there are ways the damage from a volcane, hurricate or tidal wave can be mitigated, if God exists then these are events God chose to allow to happen (or perhaps even caused himself; Isaiah 45:7) that he could have prevented without restricting anyone's free will.

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.

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.

I don't understand. What's the problem with life?

 

[Howie]

If I reject Christianity because it has no answer to the Problem of Natural Evil, and to me this is a tacit admission of that.

If I were to give the answer that satisfied you, and brought you closer to the belief God existed, what would it include?

Thanks.

 

[Electric Skeptic]

The thing for christians is that this body and this life are temporary. Its not that either has no value, it's a matter of what has greater value, this life or the life that Christians believe is to come, eternal life. The only thing that gives me any kind of solace about the pain and suffering and injustice we experience in this life is the hope that it is all made right by the judge of the universe. So the little children that suffer here receive some kind of relief in the next life so it wasn't all for nothing. Or that those who escaped the punishment they deserved in this life will receive the just sentences in the next to balance the ledger.

I have to resist judging God and others because my temporary and limited knowledge makes me woefully unprepared for the job. If I were a brain surgeon with that little knowledge you wouldn't want me anywhere near you.

Even if what you say above is correct, it doesn't address the issue. Little children suffer here, but receive some kind of relief in the next life - that doesn't address why they have to suffer at all. Why does an omnipotent god make people suffer needlessly?

 

[Electric Skeptic]

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.

And I've been promised by a Muslim friend of mine that if I do not give up on seeking Allah, I will eventually find him.

why is your promise any more credible than his?

 

[5wize]

No. I have commented before about your tendency to universalize your own experience. You have shown that you had distorted and poisoned ideas of Christianity in your youth, none which I had, not having been raised in a religious household, so the disparity you speak of, i.e. your failure versus my success in ultimately finding Christ, could be due to my having implored the living God while you implored "poisoned ideas."



My imploring God did not lead to a mere mental consent nor to a conclusion in which I now rest.



It's a shame that someone must have damned you pretty severely in your youth to the point that you also universalize not only your own experiences but the attitudes of all with whom you have come into contact. Some might call that paranoia. I have never damned you. I'm not interested in the "Christian worldview."



On the contrary, like Job, "I KNOW that my redeemer liveth."



Baggage must be felt, or it is not baggage. I am not confined to any "Christian worldview," and certainly feel no baggage nor know of any troublesome conundrums.



I never "took on" any "belief system." What I do believe about Christ Whom I have come to know is hardly closed, nor systematic, but wide open and growing gloriously.

I know enough about Christianity to know that you are following your own invention then. This is the result of the same mental malleability that created 10's of thousands of beliefs.

 

[docphin5]

Blaming Satan is one approach. It is Biblical and it is coherent, and it is likely some ancient Hebrews did believe that, given the influence of Zoroastrianism after the Exile. It does assume Satan has god-like powers, however, so not compatible with monotheism, which is why most Christians reject it.

If it is “Biblical and coherent”, as you say, then it should be compatible with monotheism and Christianity. Also, just because some Christians reject something, eg, evolution, only proves that Christians are likely wrong about a lot of things (I am not implying that we throw the baby out with the bath water, but instead critically assess everything).

“If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things?” (John 3:12)

 

[stiggy wiggy]

I know enough about Christianity to know that you are following your own invention then.

Absurd comment. No way in hell, on my own, I could invent the plan of redemption as laid out by Paul via the unique and glorious revelation given to him by God. But I'm flattered you would think I could. Thanks.

This is the result of the same mental malleability that created 10's of thousands of beliefs.

Correct. Our minds must be malleable before they can be renewed. Every once in a while you hit on a truth.