Evil - metaphysics? or bad grammar?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jonesboy
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jonesboy

Guest
The problem of evil is why God allows world catastrophes.

But there is no problem. There is only bad grammar.

Spatio-temporal objects and movements have weight and movement, by definition. Catastrophe is not a physical, weighable, property. Exploding Suns and crumbling dams are not evils because of any material considerations. There is no evil in material Nature.
 
Very interesting thoughts! I really like the alignment between a weight that cannot be lifted!

Nice work again!
 
It depends on how a catastrophe is defined. If it’s an “event causing great and often sudden damage or suffering” one is entitled to ask why God allows it to occur - even though it’s inevitable that sooner or later people and animals are bound to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
 
tonyrey said:
It depends on how a catastrophe is defined. If it’s an “event causing great and often sudden damage or suffering” one is entitled to ask why God allows it to occur - even though it’s inevitable that sooner or later people and animals are bound to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Click to expand...
Is suffering evil?
I would not care to think that my suffering is evil, nor to blame anyone for this capability.
 
Jonesboy said:
Is suffering evil?
I would not care to think that my suffering is evil, nor to blame anyone for this capability.
Click to expand...
Suffering is only evil if it is unnecessary or frustrates the purposes of life. Suffering, death or any other harmful interference is morally evil when it is caused deliberately and physically evil when it is caused by natural events.
 
tonyrey said:
Suffering is only evil if it is unnecessary or frustrates the purposes of life. Suffering, death or any other harmful interference is morally evil when it is caused deliberately and physically evil when it is caused by natural events.
Click to expand...
Again, is our suffering evil? Suffering without hope is in the nature of suffering.

I would not reason to damn nature by drawing my own curses on its face.

Evil is an intention that is against life.
 
Jonesboy said:
Again, is our suffering evil? Suffering without hope is in the nature of suffering.

I would not reason to damn nature by drawing my own curses on its face.

Evil is an intention that is against life.
Click to expand...
Jones:

I think that evil is properly conceived of as to be against God, His angels, His Kingdom, His people, His Earth, and His Churches. Only these can be the receptacles of “good.”

God bless,
jd
 
JDaniel said:
Jones:

I think that evil is properly conceived of as to be against God, His angels, His Kingdom, His people, His Earth, and His Churches. Only these can be the receptacles of “good.”

God bless,
jd
Click to expand...
see new post on Life for itself
 
tonyrey said:
Jonesboy;8106184:
Why without hope?

Nature is not innocent… but neither is it guilty!

The evil-doer thinks it enhances his life! But of course it is against the life of others.
Click to expand...
The evil-doer thinks it enhances his life, but his life is more than he wants to think it is.
Click to expand...
 
The way the explanation is framed seems as apt as saying a weapon is not evil because it is material. But both nature to God and a hammer to man are materials respectively under each actor’s control, so when we see catastrophes we are seeing God using His influence as He pleases. This is why it does not seem satisfying to me to refute only the morality of a material, and ignore the morality of the action. The question is how can we relate to natural disasters that happen on God’s watch, when it is negligent or immoral for us to cause the deaths and suffering of others by similar actions? Suffering is good when God causes it but bad when we do?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top