Total Posts:57|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Problem with the Problem of Evil

Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2012 2:42:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.
I'd not limit PoE to Christianity, it only requires an Epicurean god.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

I'd say that this would be ad populum. We just need an epicurean version of God, because we only need natural evil to exist.
3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

Helps the argument, not sure if needed.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2012 3:04:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/20/2012 2:42:46 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.
I'd not limit PoE to Christianity, it only requires an Epicurean god.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

I'd say that this would be ad populum. We just need an epicurean version of God, because we only need natural evil to exist.
3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

Helps the argument, not sure if needed.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?

Well, I'm mainly concerned with people subscribing to the Judeo-Christian God,so for the sake of argument lets stick to him.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2012 3:11:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Atheists would see those acts as part of the PoE argument. Would a tri-omni God commit those acts? They don't believe it's compatible with the Christian view of God. From my observations Biblical occurrences are usually included in the POE.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2012 3:11:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?:

You won't ever get a straight answer, because we have a situation where the cart is always placed before the horse.

God, for these people, is the measurement of what good is. Therefore, whatever he does is automatically deemed good A PRIORI. It's a case of "do as I say, not as I do."
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2012 3:15:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/20/2012 3:11:41 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?:

You won't ever get a straight answer, because we have a situation where the cart is always placed before the horse.

God, for these people, is the measurement of what good is. Therefore, whatever he does is automatically deemed good A PRIORI. It's a case of "do as I say, not as I do."

Then how does the PoE have any significance of whether God exists?
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2012 3:20:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/20/2012 3:15:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
At 3/20/2012 3:11:41 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?:

You won't ever get a straight answer, because we have a situation where the cart is always placed before the horse.

God, for these people, is the measurement of what good is. Therefore, whatever he does is automatically deemed good A PRIORI. It's a case of "do as I say, not as I do."

Then how does the PoE have any significance of whether God exists?

It has to do with an all loving, just, and moral God. The PoE doesn't poke holes in any cosmological arguments, it just pokes holes in the arguments that God is an all loving, all just, and all moral being.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/20/2012 3:25:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Then how does the PoE have any significance of whether God exists?:

It doesn't to theists... which is why they handwave it away and shift the goalposts to avoid it like the plague. You want to see some mental gymnastics, ask a theist to reconcile the PoE with specific verses. It's a sad and pathetic spectacle.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Jon1
Posts: 314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 2:41:09 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I love it how everyone's cool with questioning an omniscient, omnipotent mind. Also, what PCP said. The bible does not have to be inerrant.
Jon1
Posts: 314
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 2:43:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/21/2012 2:41:09 AM, Jon1 wrote:
I love it how everyone's cool with questioning an omniscient, omnipotent mind. Also, what PCP said. The bible does not have to be inerrant.

Like, what's up with that?
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 1:40:04 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/20/2012 4:59:12 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
I don't believe God did that stuff, so...

The Fool: how are justifing one part of the bible and then not the next. It follows that you are just picking and choosing parts of Gods word that you like. But that problematic. At least in any rational sense.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 4:34:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/21/2012 1:40:04 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 3/20/2012 4:59:12 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
I don't believe God did that stuff, so...

The Fool: how are justifing one part of the bible and then not the next. It follows that you are just picking and choosing parts of Gods word that you like. But that problematic. At least in any rational sense.

Err, no that doesn't follow. For one, how do you know my views on divine inspiration, hermeneutics and interpretive method? For two, in a very real sense I accept a lot of things in the bible I don't like at least some of the time. It's sometimes really hard (and something I'd rather not do a lot of the times) to repay evil with good for instance.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 5:00:26 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?

It would be important to define the term used (as they are often used differently by different people). When a Christian says God in omni-benevolent what they are saying is that everything that God does in good. It is good because God by nature is good. To say God does evil (as in sin, not destruction) would be claiming God does something outside of His nature. This is the same with any omni-statement. The reason we say 'omni' as opposed to terms that would be limited to deity's is because we consider God to but the highest of anything. To be honest I have never heard it said that God is omni-benevolent- just that He is good.

To address your question: ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood) are all forms of judgement to the Christian. Every man women and child is guilty of sin and thus must be punished. The punishment is death. Therefor, when God kills He has the right to do so. An example of God committing actual evil would be if He lied.
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 5:04:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/21/2012 5:00:26 PM, joneszj wrote:
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?

It would be important to define the term used (as they are often used differently by different people). When a Christian says God in omni-benevolent what they are saying is that everything that God does in good. It is good because God by nature is good. To say God does evil (as in sin, not destruction) would be claiming God does something outside of His nature. This is the same with any omni-statement. The reason we say 'omni' as opposed to terms that would be limited to deity's is because we consider God to but the highest of anything. To be honest I have never heard it said that God is omni-benevolent- just that He is good.

To address your question: ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood) are all forms of judgement to the Christian. Every man women and child is guilty of sin and thus must be punished. The punishment is death. Therefor, when God kills He has the right to do so. An example of God committing actual evil would be if He lied.

"An example of God committing actual evil would be if He lied."

lying is worse than murder in your eyes? Coo coo, coo coo
Rational_Thinker9119
Posts: 9,054
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 5:07:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/21/2012 5:00:26 PM, joneszj wrote:
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?

It would be important to define the term used (as they are often used differently by different people). When a Christian says God in omni-benevolent what they are saying is that everything that God does in good. It is good because God by nature is good. To say God does evil (as in sin, not destruction) would be claiming God does something outside of His nature. This is the same with any omni-statement. The reason we say 'omni' as opposed to terms that would be limited to deity's is because we consider God to but the highest of anything. To be honest I have never heard it said that God is omni-benevolent- just that He is good.

To address your question: ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood) are all forms of judgement to the Christian. Every man women and child is guilty of sin and thus must be punished. The punishment is death. Therefor, when God kills He has the right to do so. An example of God committing actual evil would be if He lied.

Ezekial 14:9 says that God deceived a prophet. Even The Bible admits God is a liar.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 6:37:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/21/2012 5:00:26 PM, joneszj wrote:
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?

It would be important to define the term used (as they are often used differently by different people). When a Christian says God in omni-benevolent what they are saying is that everything that God does in good. It is good because God by nature is good. To say God does evil (as in sin, not destruction) would be claiming God does something outside of His nature. This is the same with any omni-statement. The reason we say 'omni' as opposed to terms that would be limited to deity's is because we consider God to but the highest of anything. To be honest I have never heard it said that God is omni-benevolent- just that He is good.

To address your question: ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood) are all forms of judgement to the Christian. Every man women and child is guilty of sin and thus must be punished. The punishment is death. Therefor, when God kills He has the right to do so. An example of God committing actual evil would be if He lied.

I'm sorry but it just flabbergasts me when you say stuff like this. You on one try to say that God is essentially good (in other words he couldn't ever be NOT good) and so would never do anything evil but then on the other hand want to say that God ordered/committed genocide (which is about as clear an evil as one can think of). You're essentially stripping the term "good" of having any meaning whatsoever. You saying "God is good" is just like saying "God is God". Sure, but that's a trivial and vaucous truism. And if that's the case that why COULDN'T God lie? If anything God does is good and he can do no evil then WHY couldn't he lie and therefore making lying a good thing to do? You seem to say that God couldn't lie because that would contradict his nature - this means that you think saying "God is good" entails that the term "goodness" excludes certain things (like lying). But yet it doesn't exclude things monstrous evils like committing/ordering mass genocide? o_O It seems like you want to have it both ways.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/21/2012 6:44:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
joneszj, what do you do with verses like these?

2 Thes 2:11-12

"11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

1 Kings 22:19-23

"19 And Micaiah said, Therefore hear thou the word of Jehovah: I saw Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.
20 And Jehovah said, Who shall entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner; and another said on that manner.
21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before Jehovah, and said, I will entice him.
22 And Jehovah said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt entice him, and shalt prevail also: go forth, and do so.
23 Now therefore, behold, Jehovah hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets; and Jehovah hath spoken evil concerning thee."
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Suqua
Posts: 433
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 9:45:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark. (how about the 120yr warning part)

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim. (how about the warning part )
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition). This hardening was a result of Pharoah's resistance to what would come his way by way of the disasters to let GOD's son go out of slavery. In his constant resistance his heart was hardened. GOD foreknowing, but hoping, for he had choice, this would not be the case. GOD did not take his freedom to take a right course of action, pride was his downfall. GOD knows where pride would take him. Satan first of the fallen by pride.
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with. This transaction which could not be avoided even by GOD himself, because HE abides by the same rules HE cannot change . Out of HIS love for fallen humanity HE HIMSELF would pay the penalty for a broken law, the law of love. And man would be given a second chance to choose life.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture? ( what about the warning unheeded for 120yrs?)
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 10:04:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

Christians believe all sorts of different things about their god. The PoE, therefore, can only be be about what some Christians believe.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?

The PoE doesn't have to square with those beliefs. The PoE is merely pointing out that those beliefs do not square with other Christian beliefs. The Christian belief that god behaves very badly does not square with the Christian belief that god is perfectly good.

That's our point.

Christians who believe that god did the things you describe, and who also believe that god is perfectly good, are just wrong. Even in the make-believe realm of religion, where the rules are made up, those can't both be true.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:04:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/21/2012 6:37:34 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/21/2012 5:00:26 PM, joneszj wrote:
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?

It would be important to define the term used (as they are often used differently by different people). When a Christian says God in omni-benevolent what they are saying is that everything that God does in good. It is good because God by nature is good. To say God does evil (as in sin, not destruction) would be claiming God does something outside of His nature. This is the same with any omni-statement. The reason we say 'omni' as opposed to terms that would be limited to deity's is because we consider God to but the highest of anything. To be honest I have never heard it said that God is omni-benevolent- just that He is good.

To address your question: ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood) are all forms of judgement to the Christian. Every man women and child is guilty of sin and thus must be punished. The punishment is death. Therefor, when God kills He has the right to do so. An example of God committing actual evil would be if He lied.

I'm sorry but it just flabbergasts me when you say stuff like this. You on one try to say that God is essentially good (in other words he couldn't ever be NOT good) and so would never do anything evil but then on the other hand want to say that God ordered/committed genocide (which is about as clear an evil as one can think of). You're essentially stripping the term "good" of having any meaning whatsoever. You saying "God is good" is just like saying "God is God". Sure, but that's a trivial and vaucous truism. And if that's the case that why COULDN'T God lie? If anything God does is good and he can do no evil then WHY couldn't he lie and therefore making lying a good thing to do? You seem to say that God couldn't lie because that would contradict his nature - this means that you think saying "God is good" entails that the term "goodness" excludes certain things (like lying). But yet it doesn't exclude things monstrous evils like committing/ordering mass genocide? o_O It seems like you want to have it both ways.

In order for the killing to be evil it would have to be unjust. God killing anyone who sins is justice (and therefor good). As for: " And if that's the case that why COULDN'T God lie? If anything God does is good and he can do no evil then WHY couldn't he lie and therefore making lying a good thing to do?" This is because Gods nature is what defines goodness. He cannot make a sin a 'good' thing anymore then He could cause Himself to stop existing. Its impossible.

I can see why you would say I want things both ways. The difference I view is that I see humanity as evil, wicked, and sinful beings deserving of utter wrath and destruction. So, when God brought the flood from the pespective of a holy and just God it was a good thing. The bible does say that God creates evil (in the form of calamity- not sin). The point is that when God does these things He had every right to do so and it was just. The reason Christians say He is good is because He is merciful to Christians and to all people to an extent. I suppose it would be more accurate to say that God is good and just.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:12:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/21/2012 6:44:36 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
joneszj, what do you do with verses like these?

2 Thes 2:11-12

"11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

1 Kings 22:19-23

"19 And Micaiah said, Therefore hear thou the word of Jehovah: I saw Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.
20 And Jehovah said, Who shall entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner; and another said on that manner.
21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before Jehovah, and said, I will entice him.
22 And Jehovah said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt entice him, and shalt prevail also: go forth, and do so.
23 Now therefore, behold, Jehovah hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets; and Jehovah hath spoken evil concerning thee."

God used this evil for His own ends as a judgment

I am actually very familiar with those verses (Im a calvinist). These verses would not make sense if one held the view that God is an omnibenevolent being that would lay aside justice to treat all creation equally. Instead it seems to me that God has the right to do anything to us that pleases Him (His nature). I interpret both sets to be an example of Romans 1 where Paul says God 'gave them over' to their own passions and wickedness.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:13:24 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/22/2012 11:12:34 AM, joneszj wrote:
At 3/21/2012 6:44:36 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
joneszj, what do you do with verses like these?

2 Thes 2:11-12

"11And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

1 Kings 22:19-23

"19 And Micaiah said, Therefore hear thou the word of Jehovah: I saw Jehovah sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.
20 And Jehovah said, Who shall entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead? And one said on this manner; and another said on that manner.
21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before Jehovah, and said, I will entice him.
22 And Jehovah said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt entice him, and shalt prevail also: go forth, and do so.
23 Now therefore, behold, Jehovah hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets; and Jehovah hath spoken evil concerning thee."

God used this evil for His own ends as a judgment\

In the same way He used Judas to betray Jesus.

I am actually very familiar with those verses (Im a calvinist). These verses would not make sense if one held the view that God is an omnibenevolent being that would lay aside justice to treat all creation equally. Instead it seems to me that God has the right to do anything to us that pleases Him (His nature). I interpret both sets to be an example of Romans 1 where Paul says God 'gave them over' to their own passions and wickedness.
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:17:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/22/2012 11:04:56 AM, joneszj wrote:
At 3/21/2012 6:37:34 PM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 3/21/2012 5:00:26 PM, joneszj wrote:
At 3/20/2012 2:30:09 PM, Wnope wrote:
I've tried getting answers to this on two different threads dedicated to the PoE. Since there is no internet equivalent of waving a semi-automatic in the air and firing warning shots, I'm hoping I can get an intelligible response by starting a thread on it.

Now, for those who think the PoE has any value:

1. If we are to define the Problem of Evil in such a way as to not be a strawman of Christianity, the definition must accord with what Christians believe about God.

2.The vast majority of religious Christians believe Jesus rose from the dead, Moses/Aaron accurately represented God's actions, and Noah and his family were the only survivals of an ark.

3. Therefore, whatever God is being targeted in the problem of evil, he must also have done the following:

a. drowned millions, if not billions, of men, women, and children on a whim.
b. massacred every first-born Egyptian child because their tyrannical monarch did what God wanted him to do (God hardened the Pharoah's heart so he would purposefully reject Moses/Aaron's proposition).
c. inflicted massive torture on either himself or his son (depending on your sect) so that a transaction could occur which, due to omnipotence, was always within God's power to begin with.

MY QUESTION:

What acts could you put forward as "excessively evil" when an "omnibenevolent" God committed the equivalents of ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood), and unnecessary, extreme torture?

It would be important to define the term used (as they are often used differently by different people). When a Christian says God in omni-benevolent what they are saying is that everything that God does in good. It is good because God by nature is good. To say God does evil (as in sin, not destruction) would be claiming God does something outside of His nature. This is the same with any omni-statement. The reason we say 'omni' as opposed to terms that would be limited to deity's is because we consider God to but the highest of anything. To be honest I have never heard it said that God is omni-benevolent- just that He is good.

To address your question: ethnic genocide, annihilation of millions of children simultaneously (Noah's flood) are all forms of judgement to the Christian. Every man women and child is guilty of sin and thus must be punished. The punishment is death. Therefor, when God kills He has the right to do so. An example of God committing actual evil would be if He lied.

I'm sorry but it just flabbergasts me when you say stuff like this. You on one try to say that God is essentially good (in other words he couldn't ever be NOT good) and so would never do anything evil but then on the other hand want to say that God ordered/committed genocide (which is about as clear an evil as one can think of). You're essentially stripping the term "good" of having any meaning whatsoever. You saying "God is good" is just like saying "God is God". Sure, but that's a trivial and vaucous truism. And if that's the case that why COULDN'T God lie? If anything God does is good and he can do no evil then WHY couldn't he lie and therefore making lying a good thing to do? You seem to say that God couldn't lie because that would contradict his nature - this means that you think saying "God is good" entails that the term "goodness" excludes certain things (like lying). But yet it doesn't exclude things monstrous evils like committing/ordering mass genocide? o_O It seems like you want to have it both ways.

In order for the killing to be evil it would have to be unjust. God killing anyone who sins is justice (and therefor good). As for: " And if that's the case that why COULDN'T God lie? If anything God does is good and he can do no evil then WHY couldn't he lie and therefore making lying a good thing to do?" This is because Gods nature is what defines goodness. He cannot make a sin a 'good' thing anymore then He could cause Himself to stop existing. Its impossible.

I can see why you would say I want things both ways. The difference I view is that I see humanity as evil, wicked, and sinful beings deserving of utter wrath and destruction. So, when God brought the flood from the pespective of a holy and just God it was a good thing. The bible does say that God creates evil (in the form of calamity- not sin). The point is that when God does these things He had every right to do so and it was just. The reason Christians say He is good is because He is merciful to Christians and to all people to an extent. I suppose it would be more accurate to say that God is good and just.

If one considers God killing sinners on earth evil then I think it would be logical to conclude that God condemning sinners to an eternity in hell to be evil as well. I see both as completely just (and therefor good). As a Christian I think mercy is better and wish more people would at least see the perspective I have instead attempt to bash and smash it while belittling me. Its not really effective and gets boring after awhile.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:18:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I am actually very familiar with those verses (Im a calvinist). These verses would not make sense if one held the view that God is an omnibenevolent being that would lay aside justice to treat all creation equally. Instead it seems to me that God has the right to do anything to us that pleases Him (His nature). I interpret both sets to be an example of Romans 1 where Paul says God 'gave them over' to their own passions and wickedness.:

So, essentially, "do as I say, not as I do."
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
joneszj
Posts: 1,202
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:21:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/22/2012 11:18:17 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
I am actually very familiar with those verses (Im a calvinist). These verses would not make sense if one held the view that God is an omnibenevolent being that would lay aside justice to treat all creation equally. Instead it seems to me that God has the right to do anything to us that pleases Him (His nature). I interpret both sets to be an example of Romans 1 where Paul says God 'gave them over' to their own passions and wickedness.:

So, essentially, "do as I say, not as I do."

We cannot do what God does because our nature is dead and broken. If it werent like say for example an arch angle and God commanded us to kill wicked people it would still be just.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:22:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
If one considers God killing sinners on earth evil then I think it would be logical to conclude that God condemning sinners to an eternity in hell to be evil as well. I see both as completely just (and therefor good). As a Christian I think mercy is better and wish more people would at least see the perspective I have instead attempt to bash and smash it while belittling me. Its not really effective and gets boring after awhile.:

Concluding that God is good on the basis that good is God is a tautologically circular in logic.

Even supposing we could grant God the righteousness to slay sinners, what of the indiscriminate killing of infants who could not have sinned?
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:38:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 3/22/2012 11:21:45 AM, joneszj wrote:
At 3/22/2012 11:18:17 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
I am actually very familiar with those verses (Im a calvinist). These verses would not make sense if one held the view that God is an omnibenevolent being that would lay aside justice to treat all creation equally. Instead it seems to me that God has the right to do anything to us that pleases Him (His nature). I interpret both sets to be an example of Romans 1 where Paul says God 'gave them over' to their own passions and wickedness.:

So, essentially, "do as I say, not as I do."

We cannot do what God does because our nature is dead and broken. If it werent like say for example an arch angle and God commanded us to kill wicked people it would still be just.

Wait. I thought we had Free Will? Can't I decided to be like God out of Free Will?
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/22/2012 11:39:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
So, essentially, "do as I say, not as I do."

We cannot do what God does because our nature is dead and broken.:

Which was how we were allegedly created.

If it werent like say for example an arch angle and God commanded us to kill wicked people it would still be just.:

If God wanted us to kill wicked people, we'd have to first start by killing ourselves.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)