How would you respond to this question?

[capoly]

I will only reflect on those parts which have not been touched upon before.

You are way out of bounds here. God provides everything you have: life, reason, free will, the skills you have, conscience. You are disappointed when God presents you with a challenge. Would you rather everything be handed to you and that nothing you did mattered?

if Go accepted everyone into heaven unconditionally, nothing you did would matter. Is that what you really want, a pointless life

If I would believe in God, and heaven, I would not want life there at all. If I would want anything, it would be to have eternal bliss. As some other apologists said: “why worry about pain and suffering at all? Whatever happens here and now is irrelevant when compared to the eternal bliss which we shall enjoy in heaven”.

really? God did nothing to command your respect and adoration? How about the fact that he gave you everything you have? Including your life.

Please do not try to present your unsubstatiated beliefs as “facts”.

Being angry with God isn’t really helpful, now is it?

Angry? This “you are angry at God” argument is wearing really thin. If one does not believe in God’s existence then one cannot be angry at God. I am simply pointing out that truly loving God would not hide above the clouds and turning a deaf ear to the pleas of the millions of sufferers and that the apologists are unable to give a solid, rational argument, why is it so? Read The tale of the twelve officers. It shows all the different “explanations” for the problem of evil.

 

[mytruepower2]

The topic of this thread is an interesting one, but it ultimately boils down to “if God is good, why do bad things happen.” In other words, the “problem of evil.” On this subject, I must simply issue the following advice; if you are suffering greatly under evil right now, and are in an emotionally-distraught state, proceed no further into this post. I’ll be addressing evil from the most coldly-logical perspective.

Now, in the cases of cancer, and many other ills, I don’t see any logical contradiction here, between the existence of God and the existence of evil. Those two statements, by themselves, don’t contradict one another.

Now, of course, you could make them a contradiction by adding a third statement; God does not have any morally-sufficient reasons for allowing evil (cancer) to occur, but the problem with that statement is that we have absolutely no way of justifying it, much less proving it.

In fact, I think we can come up with an equation for the existence of evil that falls well within human understanding.

1. God is a God of love.
2. Love must be reciprocated.
3. Reciprocal love involves the free choice to love.
4. Free choice involves something to choose between.
5. Therefore, in order to love, we must have the opportunity to refuse to love.
6. When we refuse to love God, bad things happen.

In this equation, point 5 demonstrated the need for the existence of immoral actions and moral evils to exist in an order containing love, while point 6 demonstrates how natural evils come to exist as a result of moral evils.

It all makes sense to me. I don’t see the “problem” of evil as a problem of logic, so much as an emotional obstacle for some people to get over.

 

[paul_c]

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
The logical error here is placing people on the same plane as God.

But who is the arbiter of morality? Is it you, a sentient being that doesn’t know what is happening in the next room? Or is it God, who is omniscient? You see, we humans are very limited in what we see and therefore, what we can understand. How many times in your life did you think something to be true, only later finding out that you missed a key assumption that made your view totally false? So what you think is moral or immoral can just as easily be flawed by lack of insight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
Of course the sufferers didn’t volunteer for their role. Neither do the healthy get a real choice. But that doesn’t make them tools.

Yes, but you are missing the synergy in the situation. The sufferer also benefits, directly from the help they get and the knowledge that others care for them, and indirectly from the the example of those helping them which they can follow when the table is turned and they enter a situation where someone else needs their help.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
I’m sorry, but you are misusing this teaching. It denies the concept that doing evil can be justified by some good that comes out of it. Contracting cancer is not a sin, it is simply part of life.

No, it is not. God is creating a situation where all parties can grow and learn. In your “utopia”, there are no challenges, hence no personal growth.

Let me point out again: I am not arguing here that there is no God. Nor do I argue that the existence of evil makes God evil. I am simply pointing out that the argument: “the existence of suffering allows others to grow in virtue and that fact makes the suffering justified” is unacceptable. There never was a good, rational argument to solve the problem of evil, and this one fails, too.

You are missing the point that suffering also allows the sufferer to grow in virtue. It teaches patience, fortitude and humility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
You do realize that we aren’t speaking for God, we are merely repeating what God in the person of Jesus Christ taught his Church.

What belief are you saying is unsubstantiated?

 

[paul_c]

I will only reflect on those parts which have not been touched upon before.

Fine, that’s more efficient

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
You are way out of bounds here. God provides everything you have: life, reason, free will, the skills you have, conscience. You are disappointed when God presents you with a challenge. Would you rather everything be handed to you and that nothing you did mattered?

Okay, you want to go straight to heaven. The problem is heaven wouldn’t be a world of eternal bliss if it was populated with people who still want to sin, which is to do things in opposition to God’s will. Heaven is heaven in part because everyone there loves everyone else, doing what is best for them. Hell is hell in part because every one there is pursuing their self interests, just as they did on earth. This world is a training ground for both. have you thought about what you are training for.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
really? God did nothing to command your respect and adoration? How about the fact that he gave you everything you have? Including your life.

Are you denying that God gave you life? How is your view substantiated?

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
Being angry with God isn’t really helpful, now is it?

Are you so blind to your own feelings? I’ll give you some examples from your last few posts:

• “a truly loving God would not hide above the clouds and turning a deaf ear to the pleas of the millions of sufferers”
• “The created ones were not created with their consent, so it is the absolute responsibility of the creator to protect and keep them. The parents have the same responsibility toward the children - up until the children become adults. Even after that a good parent will come to the help of the children when it becomes necessary. God does nothing of the kind.”
• “God did not “erase” the original sin, and he does not accept everyone into heaven - unconditionally. He requires worship, submission, adoration and does nothing to deserve it. There is no help for sick, no food for the starving, there is nothing. This is as far from agape as it can get”

These are your own words over the last days posts to me. How can you deny that these are words of anger expressed toward God? Sometimes we are blinded to our own situation. This is part of the human condition. Now that its been pointed out to you, you can take some positive action - perhaps contemplating the issue of evil and suffering in the world in a way other than simply blaming God.

 

[capoly]

But who is the arbiter of morality? Is it you, a sentient being that doesn’t know what is happening in the next room? Or is it God, who is omniscient?

This is the age-old “euthyphro dilemma”. If God “decides” what moral is, then morality is reduced to to the whim of God. If God tells you to slaughter your neighbor for worshipping “false” gods, then that becomes “moral”. If there is a real, absolute moral code, then God is bound by it. Can’t have both ways.

Yes, but you are missing the synergy in the situation. The sufferer also benefits, directly from the help they get and the knowledge that others care for them, and indirectly from the the example of those helping them which they can follow when the table is turned and they enter a situation where someone else needs their help.

Maybe in some cases it might happen, but it is not happening generally. What does an infant or a toddler benefit? They have no idea what is happening.

No, it is not. God is creating a situation where all parties can grow and learn. In your “utopia”, there are no challenges, hence no personal growth.

Who cares?

You are missing the point that suffering also allows the sufferer to grow in virtue. It teaches patience, fortitude and humility.

An infant or a toddler???

What belief are you saying is unsubstantiated?

All of them.

Okay, you want to go straight to heaven.

Actually I do not. The believers want it, however.

The problem is heaven wouldn’t be a world of eternal bliss if it was populated with people who still want to sin, which is to do things in opposition to God’s will. Heaven is heaven in part because everyone there loves everyone else, doing what is best for them.

You have no idea what heaven is all about. Although it is generally assumed that people in heaven are so overwhelmed with God’s bliss that they do not want to go against God’s wishes.

Hell is hell in part because every one there is pursuing their self interests, just as they did on earth. This world is a training ground for both. have you thought about what you are training for.

If God has omniscience, then he needs no “training gound”, he already knows who will pass the “test” and who will fail. Just like if a omniscient God “knows” who will win the marathon, there is no need to actually run it, God can pass the medal to the person who would have won the run if it actually were taken place.

Are you denying that God gave you life? How is your view substantiated?

I am saying that there is no evidence for God existing at all. It is you who assert a positive claim, so the onus is on you give evidence for it.

Are you so blind to your own feelings? I’ll give you some examples from your last few posts:

• “a truly loving God would not hide above the clouds and turning a deaf ear to the pleas of the millions of sufferers”
• “The created ones were not created with their consent, so it is the absolute responsibility of the creator to protect and keep them. The parents have the same responsibility toward the children - up until the children become adults. Even after that a good parent will come to the help of the children when it becomes necessary. God does nothing of the kind.”
• “God did not “erase” the original sin, and he does not accept everyone into heaven - unconditionally. He requires worship, submission, adoration and does nothing to deserve it. There is no help for sick, no food for the starving, there is nothing. This is as far from agape as it can get”

These are your own words over the last days posts to me. How can you deny that these are words of anger expressed toward God?

There is no “anger” there at all. If you cannot understand that it is a LOGICAL NONSENSE to feel anger toward someone whose existence is not believed, then we had better stop this conversation.

 

[missmorgan389]

I would direct them to the book “The Problem of Pain” by C.S Lewis.

 

[paul_c]

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
But who is the arbiter of morality? Is it you, a sentient being that doesn’t know what is happening in the next room? Or is it God, who is omniscient?

The whim of God? The entire universe is a whim of God. He created the universe and with it the expectations of what is right and wrong. As for the your example, the moral lesson was “there is only one God”, not " its okay to slaughter your neighbors." Unlike you, the Israelites got the message.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
Yes, but you are missing the synergy in the situation. The sufferer also benefits, directly from the help they get and the knowledge that others care for them, and indirectly from the the example of those helping them which they can follow when the table is turned and they enter a situation where someone else needs their help.

Who cares? anyone who values personal growth

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
You are missing the point that suffering also allows the sufferer to grow in virtue. It teaches patience, fortitude and humility.

An infant or a toddler??? Infants and toddlers also learn from their experiences. Do you deny this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
What belief are you saying is unsubstantiated?

All of them. All my beliefs are unsubstantiated? hardly. Pick one and I’ll substantiated it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
Okay, you want to go straight to heaven.

Actually I do not. The believers want it, however. This is the normal dynamic between the condemned and the saved. Fortunately for you, there is time to change your mind.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
The problem is heaven wouldn’t be a world of eternal bliss if it was populated with people who still want to sin, which is to do things in opposition to God’s will. Heaven is heaven in part because everyone there loves everyone else, doing what is best for them.

You have no idea what heaven is all about. Although it is generally assumed that people in heaven are so overwhelmed with God’s bliss that they do not want to go against God’s wishes. Generally assumed by whom? Why do you think you know more about heaven than I do? You don’t even believe it exists? or do you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
Hell is hell in part because every one there is pursuing their self interests, just as they did on earth. This world is a training ground for both. have you thought about what you are training for.

If God has omniscience, then he needs no “training gound”, he already knows who will pass the “test” and who will fail. Just like if a omniscient God “knows” who will win the marathon, there is no need to actually run it, God can pass the medal to the person who would have won the run if it actually were taken place. Sure . God know who will choose heaven or hell. But the person still has to choose his path and ultimately his destiny. God respects us enough to let us live our lives rather than just define the results for us.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
Are you denying that God gave you life? How is your view substantiated?

I am saying that there is no evidence for God existing at all. It is you who assert a positive claim, so the onus is on you give evidence for it.
The evidence of God is all around you. You can’t see or measure God, but you can’t see or measure the wind either. But you can see and measure the effects of each. If you know anything about physics, you know that order takes power and intelligence. The universe is an orderly place, following a set of rules and based on a consistent set of particles. Order on a universal scale takes infinite power and intelligence. There are many, many other… There are many other logical proofs. Thomas Aquinas provides many of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by paul c View Post
Are you so blind to your own feelings? I’ll give you some examples from your last few posts:

There is no “anger” there at all. If you cannot understand that it is a LOGICAL NONSENSE to feel anger toward someone whose existence is not believed, then we had better stop this conversation. I don’t think I am the only one who can see the anger here. It IS logic nonsense to be mad at someone you don’t believe in, which must mean that deep down, you DO believe in God.

 

[capoly]

I don’t think I am the only one who can see the anger here. It IS logic nonsense to be mad at someone you don’t believe in, which must mean that deep down, you DO believe in God.

Yeah, right. This is the perfect time to stop this conversation. I don’t care to waste more time on this kind of nonsense. Good bye.

 

[WmB]

Thinking back over the responses to this thread, I think one problem that some of the atheists are having is that they have an extremely distorted view of God and of Catholic Christian faith and beliefs. Some of the atheist statements about who they think we think God is and what God is like are totally made up, unrelated to anything revealed in scripture, contained in the teachings of the Church, or believed by faithful, orthodox Catholic Christians. Some of the statements from some of the atheists are just bizarre – if this were a face-to-face conversation, I would have to ask, “Where in the world did you hear that? What in the world would make you think that?” You know, “Where’s your evidence?”

I’d go so far as to say, if I thought any of those things were what Catholics believed about God, I wouldn’t be Catholic. In fact, if I thought some (maybe even any) of those things were what the Catholic faith says God is like, I wouldn’t believe in that God either. But as it is, the statements the atheists have made here are totally unsupported and unsupportable. It is hard to argue against a delusion, and that is what atheism (as presented in this thread, at least) is – a delusion, based on distortion, misunderstanding, and, dare I say it, ignorance, even willful, obstinate ignorance.

If someone wants to continue in that atheist delusion, that is their privilege. But I pray that the Holy Spirit will shine a little light into that darkness of theirs, and help them to come to find the source of that light.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Thinking back over the responses to this thread, I think one problem that some of the atheists are having is that they have an extremely distorted view of God and of Catholic Christian faith and beliefs.

I can only speak for myself. But I am not working with a singular view of God. I am working with multiple sets of god concepts that come from the descriptions of others. If I have a theological conversation with some one I usually have to figure out what their god concept is because not every one shares the same or compatible description of their god. Even if they label themselves to be of the same denomination two people may not necessarily have compatible descriptions of their god.

. It is hard to argue against a delusion, and that is what atheism (as presented in this thread, at least) is – a delusion, based on distortion, misunderstanding, and, dare I say it, ignorance, even willful, obstinate ignorance.

I’m also inclined to disagree with this too on anything that I’ve said thus far.

 

[CopticChristian]

A typical answer from someone who is not the sufferer himself. There is a German proverb: “aus der Not eine Tugend machen” (“to make a virtue of necessity”) which describes this kind of heartless rationalization. Somehow I don’t think that a child starving in Africa would rejoice that his suffering gives an opportunity to others to try to help (usually in vain). Of course that child might be just a selfish brat, who would prefer not to starve even if his lack of starvation would deprive some people from becoming virtuous helpers. I would venture to say that all the sufferers would gladly forego the chance of others to become “virtuous” if only the suffering would be missing from the world.

Such a heartless way of viewing the suffering of others. I suggest reading the remarks of the second officer in The tale of the twevle officers. Quite an eye-opener.

Twelve officers is hypothetical garbage.

 

[WmB]

I can only speak for myself. But I am not working with a singular view of God. I am working with multiple sets of god concepts that come from the descriptions of others. If I have a theological conversation with some one I usually have to figure out what their god concept is because not every one shares the same or compatible description of their god. Even if they label themselves to be of the same denomination two people may not necessarily have compatible descriptions of their god.

You may have noticed that this is the Catholic Answers Forum. As far as I can tell, the only people participating in this discussion thread are Catholics and atheists. (There is now one person taking part named CopticChristian, and I don’t know if this is a Catholic Coptic or an Orthodox Coptic, but there’s not a lot of difference where the topic of the thread is concerned). So a shotgun response to what others post here is inappropriate. You’re dealing with Catholics. That’s why I specified “Catholic Christian” in my most recent response. Catholics are amazingly uniform in their beliefs about God, if not always about matters of church disciplines (e.g., eating meat on Friday, ordination of women, etc.)

I’m also inclined to disagree with this too on anything that I’ve said thus far.

I wasn’t necessarily talking about you across the board. I was trying to summarize what several people have been saying. If the shoe doesn’t fit, don’t try to wear it. However, I will say that generally speaking, atheism is a delusion, especially for scientists. I can see how it is possible for a scientist to claim to be an agnostic (though I think that involves ignoring an incredible amount of evidence – if physicists can claim to have “proven” the existence of the Higgs boson based on very circumstantial evidence, it’s hard to see how they can deny equally reliable evidence for the existence of God). On the other hand, claiming to be an atheist requires adoption of a very non-scientific rationale. Perhaps you are not a scientist, so don’t take it that I am talking about you here.

 

[CopticChristian]

I can only speak for myself. But I am not working with a singular view of God. I am working with multiple sets of god concepts that come from the descriptions of others. If I have a theological conversation with some one I usually have to figure out what their god concept is because not every one shares the same or compatible description of their god. Even if they label themselves to be of the same denomination two people may not necessarily have compatible descriptions of their god.

I’m also inclined to disagree with this too on anything that I’ve said thus far.

Sapien,

You need correction. This is Catholic Answers and all Catholics believe in a triune God and since there are resources for you to examine here you should be able to come to some understanding of that God as we see it. Next, the OHCAC is not a denomination. This has been discussed many times on many threads and I won’t go into particulars. We are not labeled as a denomination.

I agree that all see God in many different ways. This is humanity and not anything but that. The same would be true for Athiesm and the like. Beliefs tend to be less uniform when there is no guiding force. There is no guiding force for the Athiestic group except as I see and understand it the all powerful, all knowing “reason”. I understand that.

It is hard to argue against a delusion, and that is what atheism (as presented in this thread, at least) is – a delusion, based on distortion, misunderstanding, and, dare I say it, ignorance, even willful, obstinate ignorance.

Now if we both look at Will and his notions…

delusions, you can understand that someone that believes wholeheartedly in God will see someone that denies that as delusional as someone denying popcorn.

distortion, you are aware that our minds work with filters and among them are distortions, generalities and deletions. You will have to admit as I do that many of our beliefs yours and mine are distorted one way or another, so Will is correct.

misunderstanding, certainly you can understand that someone that sees something as absolute will argue that it due to misunderstanding that you cannot accept what I say. I would say you misunderstand and you would say that I misunderstand, so Will is also correct here.

Ignorance, now I am going to be the first to say that I am as ignorant as the day is long…I don’t know everything and I pray you don’t tell me that you do, so Will is correct here as well.

Now when it gets to the willfull obstinate part…I am as guilty of that as you are so I am going to give the hedge to Will on this one as well…

So I would ask you to look at your disagreement as nothing more that just a lack of proper communication and I dare say understanding…OK…

 

[capoly]

Twelve officers is hypothetical garbage.

Funny you should say that. The text reflects precisely what the christian apologists bring up when they attempt to explain away the problem of evil.

 

[CopticChristian]

Funny you should say that. The text reflects precisely what the christian apologists bring up when they attempt to explain away the problem of evil.

Cap,

Wow you have insight I don’t have.

Let’s start with this.

I made a statement of fact. You say that is funny. I like funny. Explain the humor for me.

You say that the text reflects what christian apologetics bring up to explain away the problem of evil. Tell me more. Where did you get this insight? What Christians are you speaking of? An inquiring mind wants to know.

Please tell me and clarify this for me.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

You may have noticed that this is the Catholic Answers Forum.

Indeed it is.

So a shotgun response to what others post here is inappropriate. You’re dealing with Catholics.

Even among those that identify themselves as Catholics I’ve received descriptions and interpretations that are not necessarily compatible with each other.

You need correction. This is Catholic Answers and all Catholics believe in a triune God

I’m aware that Catholicism is monotheistic. But I don’t have a “view of God.” I do have views about the descriptions people share about how they see God, so I work with those descriptions (God concepts) in a discussion. I shared this in response to “[some atheist] have an extremely distorted view of God” for the sake of making known where I stand.

 

[CopticChristian]

Indeed it is.

Even among those that identify themselves as Catholics I’ve received descriptions and interpretations that are not necessarily compatible with each other.

I’m aware that Catholicism is monotheistic. But I don’t have a “view of God.” I do have views about the descriptions people share about how they see God, so I work with those descriptions (God concepts) in a discussion. I shared this in response to “[some atheist] have an extremely distorted view of God” for the sake of making known where I stand.

So I was correct…

So this disagreement is nothing more that just a lack of proper communication and I dare say understanding…OK…

 

[capoly]

I made a statement of fact.

Actually you made a statement of opinion.

You say that the text reflects what christian apologetics bring up to explain away the problem of evil. Tell me more. Where did you get this insight? What Christians are you speaking of? An inquiring mind wants to know.

From this board. People keep on attempting to explain away the problem of evil, and they keep on bringing up the very same arguments the “tale of the twelve officers” describe. The funny part was that you considered those “arguments” as “hypothetical garbage”. Of course I agree that those attempts are garbage… what I found funny that you used the word “garbage” when you described what your fellow brethren apologists said…

 

[CopticChristian]

Actually you made a statement of opinion.

From this board. People keep on attempting to explain away the problem of evil, and they keep on bringing up the very same arguments the “tale of the twelve officers” describe. The funny part was that you considered those “arguments” as “hypothetical garbage”. Of course I agree that those attempts are garbage… what I found funny that you used the word “garbage” when you described what your fellow brethren apologists said…

My opinion is fact based on my perception. My perceptionis my reality.

So you believe that this is funny.

You still have yet to tell me where you find the Christian apologists that say this. Let me know.

 

[CopticChristian]

Actually you made a statement of opinion.

From this board. People keep on attempting to explain away the problem of evil, and they keep on bringing up the very same arguments the “tale of the twelve officers” describe. The funny part was that you considered those “arguments” as “hypothetical garbage”. Of course I agree that those attempts are garbage… what I found funny that you used the word “garbage” when you described what your fellow brethren apologists said…

My opinion is fact based on my perception. My perception is my reality.

So you believe that this is funny.

You still have yet to tell me where you find the Christian apologists that say this. Let me know.

You posted it to be read as an eye opener and here I find that you have foreknowledge that infers some bias in opinion that was not foretold or known. This makes me sad. This causes me to view you as suspect in your motives and causes me to reflect on your statements.

I wait for you to provide me the evidence of each statement as it relates to a specific Christian apologist or else I view you as less than credible.