Evil vs. Absence of Good

[chefmomster2]

JPII seemed to disagree that evil is simply a deprivation of good, he stated that it was a driving force.

Is he correct?

I’d be interested in seeing his comments on the subject. Where could I find them?

 

[oldcelt]

I’d be interested in seeing his comments on the subject. Where could I find them?

As would I. It seems that what is being discussed here in an exercise in semantics. I can only guess at the purpose, but I suspect that it is to absolve God of any association with evil or is it ungood?

 

[chefmomster2]

As would I. It seems that what is being discussed here in an exercise in semantics. I can only guess at the purpose, but I suspect that it is to absolve God of any association with evil or is it ungood?

I am the OP and that certainly was NOT the intention. In fact the current issue is whether evil is just the absence of good or if there another component involved? Some have argued ignorance for those who do not choose the GOOD. Others argue that it is not always ignorance. There is culpability.

How would one “absolve” God? He is GOOD. The evil comes from US. He is not associated with evil.

Maybe I misunderstood?

 

[Thorns]

I will attempt to look for the quote later tonight or tomorrow.

If evil is just the abscence of good, doesnt that suggest the only sins we can commit are sins of omission? So active evil deeds like stealing, murder, etc would be seen as neutral because theyre sins that require action, not lack of action.

Since Satan is evil, he actively prowls the world like a lion seeking souls to devour. Satan seems like an actual force, not just an indifferent spirit that flunked out of Obedience 101.

 

[oldcelt]

I am the OP and that certainly was NOT the intention. In fact the current issue is whether evil is just the absence of good or if there another component involved? Some have argued ignorance for those who do not choose the GOOD. Others argue that it is not always ignorance. There is culpability.

How would one “absolve” God? He is GOOD. The evil comes from US. He is not associated with evil.

Maybe I misunderstood?

No, you understood quite well. In the Abrahamic/Christian tradition God is the creator of all, including Satan. Add in to that equation omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence and you have something of a quandary.

John

 

[chefmomster2]

No, you understood quite well. In the Abrahamic/Christian tradition God is the creator of all, including Satan. Add in to that equation omniscience, omnipotence and omnipresence and you have something of a quandary.

John

The authoritative teaching of the Church on this topic is set forth in the decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council (cap. i, “Firmiter credimus”), wherein, after saying that** God in the beginning had created together two creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal**, that is to say the angelic and the earthly, and lastly man, who was made of both spirit and body, the council continues:

“Diabolus enim et alii dæmones a Deo quidem naturâ creati sunt boni, sed ipsi per se facti sunt mali.” (**“the Devil and the other demons were created by God good in their nature but **they by themselves have made themselves evil.”)

If we define Satan as an evil being, I take issue with the statement that God created the “devil”. God created a good creature who later became consumed with evil by his own act. In other words, since it was Satan’s ACT that caused him to become the evil creature which we know, but for that act, there would be no Satan. God’s creation would have been this original part of the angelic creation. The evil did not originate with God.

 

[josh987654321]

.

Hi chefmomster2

Would this make Man the “originator” of evil since he was responsible for its beginning?

Regarding this I would say no, as I believe Satan is the “originator” of evil and that it is Satan and his servants that are the driving force behind it, in the sense that Satan first deprived himself of good and takes other creatures with him.

(Genesis Satan tempting Adam and Eve, thus us not the originators or the first ones to reject God’s goodness).

I would like to quote a bit out of the book “Mere Christianity” by C.S. Lewis for you
C.S. Lewis - Mere Christianity:

If God is omnipotent and omniscient, is the existence of Satan in accordance with his will? If it is, he is a strange God, you will say: and if it is not, how can anything happen contrary to the will of a being with absolute power? But anyone who has been in authority knows how a thing can be in accordance with your will in one way and not in another. You make a thing voluntary and than half the people do not do it. That is not what you willed, but your will has made it possible. It’s the same in the universe. God created things which had free will. That means creatures which can go either wrong or right. Some people think they can imagine a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong; I cannot.

If a thing is free to be good it is also free to be bad. And free will is what has made evil possible. Why, then, did God give them free will? Because free will, though it makes evil possible, is also the only thing that makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having. A world of automata-of creatures that worked like machines-would hardly be worth creating. The happiness which God designs for his higher creatures is the happiness of being freely, voluntarily united to him and to each other in an ecstasy of love and delight compared with which the most rapturous love between a man and a woman on this earth is mere milk and water. And for that they must be free.

Of course God knew what would happen if they used their freedom the wrong way: apparently He thought it worth it. Perhaps we feel inclined to disagree with him. But there is a difficulty about disagreeing with God. He is the source from which all your reasoning power comes; you could not be right and He wrong any more than a stream could rise higher than its own source. When you are arguing against him you are arguing against the very power that makes you able to argue at all: it is like cutting off the branch you are sitting on. If God thinks this state of war in the universe a price worth paying for free will-that is, for making a live world in which creatures can do real good or harm and something of real importance can happen, instead of a toy world which only moves when He pulls the strings-then we may take it, it is worth paying.

As for your post chefmomster2 about evil (the evil of Satan and his servants including us creatures who are influenced by them) being the absence of good, I agree with you.

I don’t believe evil is an entity in and of itself like good is, as God created all there is (including Satan) and God is good itself.

As for your post however, I like this story (I think it’s what you were referring to)
Evil - Absence of Good:

The professor of a university challenged his students with this question. “Did God create everything that exists?” A student answered bravely, “Yes, he did”.

The professor then asked, "If God created everything, then he created evil. Since evil exists (as noticed by our own actions), so God is evil. The student couldn’t respond to that statement causing the professor to conclude that he had “proved” that “belief in God” was a fairy tale, and therefore worthless.

Another student raised his hand and asked the professor, "May I pose a question? " “Of course” answered the professor.

The young student stood up and asked : “Professor does Cold exists?”

The professor answered, “What kind of question is that? …Of course the cold exists… haven’t you ever been cold?”

The young student answered, “In fact sir, Cold does not exist. According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don’t have body heat or we are not hot.”

“And, does Dark exist?”, he continued. The professor answered “Of course”. This time the student responded, “Again you’re wrong, Sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light. Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there’s lack of light.”

Finally, the student asked the professor, “Sir, does evil exist?” The professor replied, “Of course it exists, as I mentioned at the beginning, we see violations, crimes and violence anywhere in the world, and those things are evil.”

The student responded, “Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God’s presence in the hearts of man.”

After this, the professor bowed down his head, and didn’t answer back.

And I agree with this.

Please continue to next post -

 

[josh987654321]

Continued from above post -

And for anyone who doubts an all loving God, who doubt God’s infinite goodness, his infinite love and mercy, I would say “Can faithless, rebellious, atheistic, unbelieving men and women possibly say that Jesus Sacrifice at the hands of His executioners was not true, so that they could unleash their rage against Him? No one can possibly deny it and prove their denial. And why do you believe that He did so? no one dies for anyone who is not intensely loved.”

God loved the world so much that he gave his only son and in turn the son loved the world so much that he gave his own life for us (the love of agape confirmed through works by the father and the son). I believe actions speak louder than words, and such actions I believe speaks volumes for an all loving God.
Romans 5:6-8:

6 For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Indeed, rarely will anyone die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person someone might actually dare to die. 8 But God proves his love for us in that while we still were sinners Christ died for us.

I think I read it in St. Faustina’s diary somewhere, where Jesus said “Why do you doubt my goodness?”
Barber story for the existence of God:

Does God exist?

A man went to a barber shop to have his hair cut and his beard trimmed. As the barber began to work, they began to have a good conversation. They talked about so many things and various subjects.

When they eventually touched on the subject of a God, the barber said:
“I don’t believe that God exists.”

Why do you say that?" asked the customer.

“Well, you just have to go out in the street to realize that God doesn’t exist. Tell me, if God exists, would there be so many sick people? Would there be abandoned children? If God existed, there would be neither suffering nor pain. I can’t imagine a loving God who allow all of these things”

The customer thought for a moment, but didn’t respond because he did not want to start an argument. The barber finished his job and the customer left the shop. Just after he left the barbershop, he saw a man in the street with dirty long hair and an untrimmed beard.

The customer turned back and entered the barber shop again and he said to the barber: “You know what? Barbers do not exist.”

“How can you say that?” asked the barber. “I am here, and I am a barber, and I just worked on you”

“No!” the customer exclaimed. “Barbers don’t exist because if they did, there would be no people with dirty long hair and untrimmed beards, like that man outside.”

“Ah, but barbers DO exist! What happens is, people do not come to me.”

“Exactly!” - affirmed the customer “That’s the point! God, too, DOES exist!
what happens, is people don’t go to Him and do not look for Him, That’s why there’s so much pain and suffering in the world.”

And as C.S. Lewis once said “There are two kinds of people in this world, those who bend their knees to God and say ‘Thy will be done.’ and those who refuse to bend their knees and God says ‘Alright, thy will be done.’”

I hope I have helped

Please feel free to reply or refute anything I have said.

p.s. I really like the quotes by C.S. Lewis in your signature chefmomster2

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[chefmomster2]

Thank you, Josh! You are right anout the first story. It is just the one I was thinking of. I have heard it attributed to Einstein, but the “who” isn’t important.

I love the barber story! I will definitely be stealing it in the future.

Your post was absolutely the explanation I was looking for. Thank you so very much!

 

[oldcelt]

The authoritative teaching of the Church on this topic is set forth in the decrees of the Fourth Lateran Council (cap. i, “Firmiter credimus”), wherein, after saying that** God in the beginning had created together two creatures, the spiritual and the corporeal**, that is to say the angelic and the earthly, and lastly man, who was made of both spirit and body, the council continues:

“Diabolus enim et alii dæmones a Deo quidem naturâ creati sunt boni, sed ipsi per se facti sunt mali.” ("the Devil and the other demons were created by God good in their nature but they by themselves have made themselves evil.")

If we define Satan as an evil being, I take issue with the statement that God created the “devil”. God created a good creature who later became consumed with evil by his own act. In other words, since it was Satan’s ACT that caused him to become the evil creature which we know, but for that act, there would be no Satan. God’s creation would have been this original part of the angelic creation. The evil did not originate with God.

None of the above statements take omniscience in to account. If a god creates someone or something with advance knowledge that they or it will do great harm, how can that god be absolved of any responsibility?

 

[josh987654321]

Thank you, Josh! You are right anout the first story. It is just the one I was thinking of. I have heard it attributed to Einstein, but the “who” isn’t important.

Thank you chefmonster2

I absolutely agree, regardless whether it was Einstein or not, it doesn’t bother me, because regardless of who said it or where it came from it doesn’t change the viability of the argument.

I love the barber story! I will definitely be stealing it in the future.

Your post was absolutely the explanation I was looking for. Thank you so very much!

Thank you chefmonster

God Bless

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[chefmomster2]

None of the above statements take omniscience in to account. If a god creates someone or something with advance knowledge that they or it will do great harm, how can that god be absolved of any responsibility?

So, the meteorologist who predicts the hurricane’s destination is responsible for its destruction?

The stock market seer who predicts the next record high should be credited with our enrichment?

Knowledge does NOT equal responsibility. God knows we will fail. He knows we will sin. He knows we will make choices against our ultimate good. But, that is due to the GIFTS of freedom and free will that we enjoy.

My son REFUSED to do homework when he was in middle school. We did all of the things good parents do to encourage, convince, force, implore, and suggest that he “change his evil ways”. We told him he would fail. We prepared ourselves for that failure.

He failed! The responsibility was his alone.

 

[Thorns]

So, the meteorologist who predicts the hurricane’s destination is responsible for its destruction?

The meteorologist isn’t all powerful like God is. The meteorologist doesn’t have the power to prevent the hurricane, God did and does.

My grandmother had a hip replacement a year ago, but was having problems with blood clotting (strokes) and the doctor wanted to put her on blood thinners to prevent the potential strokes, but he saw the potential damage that could be done to her if she fell down (her blood wouldn’t clot and she’d bleed to death). The doctor saw the good, but weighed it to the potential bad and decided not to go with that plan. It appears that God saw the potential bad and did not decide against it, for whatever reason.

 

[Richca]

I am the OP and that certainly was NOT the intention. In fact the current issue is whether evil is just the absence of good or if there another component involved? Some have argued ignorance for those who do not choose the GOOD. Others argue that it is not always ignorance. There is culpability.

How would one “absolve” God? He is GOOD. The evil comes from US. He is not associated with evil.

Maybe I misunderstood?

hello chefmomster,

St Thomas Aquinas says that evil is the absence or privation of good but not completely or entirely of good otherwise evil would not exist since evil is found only in things or beings and beings as such are good. For example, blindness is the absence of sight in a being that normally has sight. Sin is an action, though it can be an omission too, that lacks the good it should have, i.e., the right moral order established by God. As an action, a sin has being and a being as such is good. Thus only good can be a cause of evil as Augustine says " there is no possible source of evil except good." However, every sin involves an absence or privation of good that it ought to have.

 

[oldcelt]

So, the meteorologist who predicts the hurricane’s destination is responsible for its destruction?

The stock market seer who predicts the next record high should be credited with our enrichment?

Knowledge does NOT equal responsibility. God knows we will fail. He knows we will sin. He knows we will make choices against our ultimate good. But, that is due to the GIFTS of freedom and free will that we enjoy.

My son REFUSED to do homework when he was in middle school. We did all of the things good parents do to encourage, convince, force, implore, and suggest that he “change his evil ways”. We told him he would fail. We prepared ourselves for that failure.

He failed! The responsibility was his alone.

None of those instances you cite are in the same league as an omnipotent deity.
Mind you, I don’t think God has anything to do with it. To me He is the creator in the broad sense of having been the first cause, not in having created everything personally. We are on our own for good or ill.
However, a theoretical God who pre-knows the evil actions of one of his creations and does nothing to stop it is culpable in that evil. A god who would create a child that is destined to die young and horribly through disease is heartless and so on. Any entity with that type of power cannot escape a high degree of responsibility for good or evil.

 

[chefmomster2]

None of those instances you cite are in the same league as an omnipotent deity.
Mind you, I don’t think God has anything to do with it. To me He is the creator in the broad sense of having been the first cause, not in having created everything personally. We are on our own for good or ill.
However, a theoretical God who pre-knows the evil actions of one of his creations and does nothing to stop it is culpable in that evil. A god who would create a child that is destined to die young and horribly through disease is heartless and so on. Any entity with that type of power cannot escape a high degree of responsibility for good or evil.

I believe my examples do in fact answer the questions, but will agree to disagree. Knowledge is not the same as responsibility.

“In the Second Book of The Republic, Socrates is concerned about the poets, especially Homer, who picture the gods indulging in activities distinctly improper and indeed quite wrong. Socrates does not deny either the incidence of evil in the world or its attraction, but he does not want even to hint, as Homer does, that God causes or participates in evil. Socrates discusses this matter with Adeimantus. But by showing that God does not indulge in evil things, Socrates seems to limit the power of God, who, like Machiavelli’s Prince, should be able to do either good or evil, as suits His needs. Socrates, however, asks, “Then good does not cause all things; it is responsible for the things that are good; but not responsible for evil?” Adeimantus agrees to this distinction. Socrates adds, “Nor can God, since He is good, cause all things as most people say. He is responsible for a few things that happen to men, but for many he is not, for the good things we enjoy are much fewer than the evil. The former (good things) we must attribute to none else but God, but for the evil we must find some other causes, not God” (#379b-c).”

“St. Thomas affirms that what God has in mind may be so great that it involves “allowing” the possibility of evil.To “allow” is not the same as to “cause.” The fact of evil, in other words, may indicate, not the inability of God to prevent it, but His ability to overcome it in His own way in order that something greater might come to be pass.”

Augustine: “God, since He is the greatest good, in no way would permit evil to be in any of his works unless He were so omnipotent and so good, that He would be able to bring forth good even from evil.”

 

[ynotzap]

God’s fore-knowlege of evil, doesn’t interfere with freedom of will. We know that evil or sin is committed when we go against God’s will (eg. the ten commandments given for mans good) If free will did not exist and human experience does show that some humans are good, and some are bad (disobedient to God’s will) and God created them to be that way, then God becomes the author of confusion and sin. This manifests a contradiction in God which is an impossibility. The idea of no free will is fatalistic, hopless. God permits evil in order to draw good from it, according to His will.

 

[ynotzap]

None of the above statements take omniscience in to account. If a god creates someone or something with advance knowledge that they or it will do great harm, how can that god be absolved of any responsibility?

Apply my previous statements to this post

 

[oldcelt]

God’s fore-knowlege of evil, doesn’t interfere with freedom of will. We know that evil or sin is committed when we go against God’s will (eg. the ten commandments given for mans good) If free will did not exist and human experience does show that some humans are good, and some are bad (disobedient to God’s will) and God created them to be that way, then God becomes the author of confusion and sin. This manifests a contradiction in God which is an impossibility. The idea of no free will is fatalistic, hopless. God permits evil in order to draw good from it, according to His will.

But, I believe in free will…I do not believe in an interventionist God. Why, because that’s where the contradictions begin.
Now, back to your belief system: Is God omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent? I’ll wait for the answesr before proceeding, since this is a philosophy forum.

 

[oldcelt]

I believe my examples do in fact answer the questions, but will agree to disagree. Knowledge is not the same as responsibility.

“In the Second Book of The Republic, Socrates is concerned about the poets, especially Homer, who picture the gods indulging in activities distinctly improper and indeed quite wrong. Socrates does not deny either the incidence of evil in the world or its attraction, but he does not want even to hint, as Homer does, that God causes or participates in evil. Socrates discusses this matter with Adeimantus. But by showing that God does not indulge in evil things, Socrates seems to limit the power of God, who, like Machiavelli’s Prince, should be able to do either good or evil, as suits His needs. Socrates, however, asks, “Then good does not cause all things; it is responsible for the things that are good; but not responsible for evil?” Adeimantus agrees to this distinction. Socrates adds, “Nor can God, since He is good, cause all things as most people say. He is responsible for a few things that happen to men, but for many he is not, for the good things we enjoy are much fewer than the evil. The former (good things) we must attribute to none else but God, but for the evil we must find some other causes, not God” (#379b-c).”

“St. Thomas affirms that what God has in mind may be so great that it involves “allowing” the possibility of evil.To “allow” is not the same as to “cause.” The fact of evil, in other words, may indicate, not the inability of God to prevent it, but His ability to overcome it in His own way in order that something greater might come to be pass.”

Augustine: “God, since He is the greatest good, in no way would permit evil to be in any of his works unless He were so omnipotent and so good, that He would be able to bring forth good even from evil.”

Interesting point…not one of these saints(obviously excluding Socrates) cites a specific situation where allowing evil to win the day leads to a greater good. Why do you think that is?
Can you tell me, or anyone else, why they cite no specifics? Can anyone offer a greater good to allowing a seven-year-old girl to be consumed by leukemia?
If this version of God wishes to be loved, then there are other ways that I can think of with my puny human mind.