Natural Evil

[Charlemagne_III]

Great point. I think the issue here is that Pallas only accepts measurable, physical evidence. (From an English philosophical school called Empiricism)

In our daily lives, we accept many types of evidence:

1.) Empirical: Accepting something as true because I have physical, material, quantifiable, measurable data that backs up my claim - often called in recent times “scientific”.

2.) Logical: Accepting that a conclusion is true because of the truth of the reasons. (If a wheel is missing, I don’t have to try to drive my Chrysler to know that it won’t work.)

3.) Authority: Accepting something as true because of the authority of the one who claims that it is true. (Even much of modern science is based on authority - I don’t have a particle accelerator in my backyard, but I still accept the data that scientists have gathered in their experiments because I believe they are competent and honest.)

While there is no directly Empirical data for the existence of God, there are many reasons for believing based on Logic and Authority.

I would only add a

4). Experiential evidence: the growing realization in varying degrees that God is in us and we are in God.

 

[inocente]

I think Satan creates evil - likewise men who follow the path of Satan. God is all good. Those who follow His teachings are combatting the evil of Satan. I think this world is a battlefield between good and evil, likewise every life is a battle.

As for the innocent suffering, that is caused by evil people - greedy and selfish people who only want more for themselves. How can we alleviate all this suffering? By giving, sharing, caring, praying.

It seems like you consider anything that causes death as being evil though. None of us is going to get out of this world alive. If you believe in the afterlife, death is the doorway to the end of suffering for the good. We are all going to suffer and die at some point.

Natural evil (physical evil) is defined as evil (suffering) for which no human is responsible, as compared to moral evil where human agency is responsible. - newadvent.org/cathen/05649a.htm

Death isn’t in itself considered evil, but unnecessary suffering is.

 

[inocente]

God created this magnificent universe full of wonders and exquisite beauty because He knows it proclaims His power and glory in addition to giving His creatures immense delight, satisfaction and physical fulfilment. You seem to have fallen into the trap of Manicheism.To confine the Creator to spiritual reality implies supernatural insight into what He should not have created…

I’m simply applying logic to your argument. There is no logical necessity for God to create the world. The children who die every minute of every day from diarrhea are not given immense delight, satisfaction and physical fulfillment. There are no wonders or beauty in the physical world which are of logically necessity absent from heaven.

No reply.

Yes I did.

No reply.

The idea that children have to die from diarrhea every minute of every day to avoid you being certain that your thoughts are known to God was too obscene to comment. It also paints God as deceiving us. God is not a deceiver.

You need to produce a feasible blueprint of a better world.

No I don’t, I only need to point out the flaws in your logic, of which more appear every day.

It is well known the diseases of civilisation are caused by man’s unwitting - but also deliberate - abuse of his environment. Leukaemia is caused by exposure to radioactivity, natural and man-made. Epidemics are the result of colonisation and urbanisation.The world could easily produce enough food and water for everyone but vested interests ensure that one third of the population don’t have the basic necessities of life and many die of hunger, malnutrition and lack of resistance to disease.

Now you’re making it up. There is no known cause for leukemia - mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/leukemia/basics/causes/con-20024914

And so on.

Do you reject the value of free will?

I reject your claim that some people must suffer epidemics, droughts, earthquakes, etc. in order to give others the “freedom to choose what to believe and how to live”. It’s obscene to claim that others have to suffer so as to keep you in the lifestyle to which you’ve become accustomed. It paints God as a monster.

How could God have arranged the world so that there is no need to build flood defences and earthquake-proof buildings or ensure floods and earthquakes never harm or kill people? It is very easy to suggest piecemeal improvements but to design the entire biosystem is rather more difficult.

Irrelevant, you paint God as weaker than humans.

Only Fundamentalists interpret every statement in the Old Testament literally. Isaiah was a prophet not a theologian.The selection of his work by the Apostolic Church reveals the fatal flaw of Sola Scriptura. Scripture cannot be self-authenticating because it cannot interpret itself. It requires an authority to select the wheat from the chaff. The failure to acknowledge that authority explains why there are more than thirty thousand Christian sects.

I’m stunned that you would paint your Church as being in opposition to the prophet of the Messiah.

Tony, I’ve not got much time for the next few days as I’m helping a friend through something, and your strange and unusual theology on this subject gets me very angry, so it’s probably best if we stop here.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Death isn’t in itself considered evil, but unnecessary suffering is.

Was it necessary or unnecessary that Christ should die on the cross?

If it was not necessary, was it evil?

 

[ynotzap]

Death: the termination of physical life one common form of death,( there is spiritual death which represents a person’s state of suffering eternally in Hell, separation from God.)
To live an eternal physical life was a gift of sanctifying grace to Adam and Eve. As a consequence of sin (disobedience to God) it was lost to mankind Man now experiences the natural limitations of the physical life, he is limited, finite, and completely dependent by his own nature.
Jesus allowed Himself to be crucified, for by it, He ransomed those that accept Him as Savior from the dominion of Satan. Jesus said that Satan had no power over Him. Due to Satan’s blindness (pride) he crossed the line of his jurisdiction and led men to crucify the Savior (by the Savior’s will, He gave His life willingly, no one took it form Him): Jesus was pure innocence , also being God had merited infinite graces and salvation for mankind. Satan lost his reign over those that accepted Christ because he took the life of “Just Man” who was also God. Jesus defeated Satan by His “humbling Himself to the death on the cross”, something that was beyond Satan’s
understanding. I offer for your consideration, does Satan have power over nature? He definitely has power over human nature (deceit, concupiscence, ignorance, weakness of will, he takes advantage of these weaknesses.) He has power over physical things, I have witnessed this myself. Ask any legitimate exorcist. He causes disorder, is it just moral, can it be physical like disease? I am very inclined to think so. I think many are attributing to God what they shouldn’t, although He allows it, as He allows sin, He also provided a remedy with His coming as Savior, the Good News. Have a holy, love and peace filled Christmas everyone.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Death: the termination of physical life one common form of death,( there is spiritual death which represents a person’s state of suffering eternally in Hell, separation from God.)
To live an eternal physical life was a gift of sanctifying grace to Adam and Eve. As a consequence of sin (disobedience to God) it was lost to mankind Man now experiences the natural limitations of the physical life, he is limited, finite, and completely dependent by his own nature.
Jesus allowed Himself to be crucified, for by it, He ransomed those that accept Him as Savior from the dominion of Satan. Jesus said that Satan had no power over Him. Due to Satan’s blindness (pride) he crossed the line of his jurisdiction and led men to crucify the Savior (by the Savior’s will, He gave His life willingly, no one took it form Him): Jesus was pure innocence , also being God had merited infinite graces and salvation for mankind. Satan lost his reign over those that accepted Christ because he took the life of “Just Man” who was also God. Jesus defeated Satan by His “humbling Himself to the death on the cross”, something that was beyond Satan’s
understanding. I offer for your consideration, does Satan have power over nature? He definitely has power over human nature (deceit, concupiscence, ignorance, weakness of will, he takes advantage of these weaknesses.) He has power over physical things, I have witnessed this myself. Ask any legitimate exorcist. He causes disorder, is it just moral, can it be physical like disease? I am very inclined to think so. I think many are attributing to God what they shouldn’t, although He allows it, as He allows sin, He also provided a remedy with His coming as Savior, the Good News. Have a holy, love and peace filled Christmas everyone.

Amen, amen, amen!

Christ came to save us all from Satan’s power… Have a happy, holy Christmas too, ynotzap!

 

[tonyrey]

I’m simply applying logic to your argument. There is no logical necessity for God to create the world. The children who die every minute of every day from diarrhea are not given immense delight, satisfaction and physical fulfillment. There are no wonders or beauty in the physical world which are of logically necessity absent from heaven.

You are obviously denying the value of life in this world which is, to use your own words, strange and unusual theology (on the part of a Christian)…

Yes I did.

!

The idea that children have to die from diarrhea every minute of every day to avoid you being certain that your thoughts are known to God was too obscene to comment. It also paints God as deceiving us. God is not a deceiver.

Non sequitur. The main point is that natural laws are essential for a rational existence and they cannot possibly cater for every contingency. God works miracles but a constant spate of miracles is out of the question if we are to be realistic.

No I don’t, I only need to point out the flaws in your logic, of which more appear every day.

Yet another unsupported assertion and evasion…

“your logic” = an unChristian violation of the forum rule of courtesy

Now you’re making it up. There is no known cause for leukemia - mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/leukemia/basics/causes/con-20024914

False:

Excess leukemia was the earliest delayed effect of radiation exposure seen in A-bomb survivors. Japanese physician Takuso Yamawaki in Hiroshima first noted an increase of leukemia cases in his clinical practice in the late 1940s. This led to the establishment of a registry of leukemia and related disorders and to the initial reports on elevated leukemia risks published in the early 1950s.

          Risks for radiation-induced leukemia differ in two major respects from               those for most solid cancers. First, radiation causes a larger percent               increase in leukemia rates (but a smaller number of cases since leukemia               is relatively rare, even in heavily exposed survivors), and second, the               increase appears sooner after exposure, especially in children. The excess               leukemias began appearing about two years after radiation exposure, and               the excess peaked at about 6-8 years after exposure. Today, little if any               excess of leukemia is occurring.

rerf.jp/radefx/late_e/leukemia.html

I reject your claim that some people must suffer epidemics, droughts, earthquakes, etc. in order to give others the “freedom to choose what to believe and how to live”. It’s obscene to claim that others have to suffer so as to keep you in the lifestyle to which you’ve become accustomed. It paints God as a monster.

Misrepresentation.The main point is that natural laws are essential for a rational existence and they cannot possibly cater for every contingency but it is also irrefutable that there must be a limit to the number of miracles to prevent disasters.

Irrelevant, you paint God as weaker than humans.

Nonsense. How many members of the human race have created a universe?

I’m stunned that you would paint your Church as being in opposition to the prophet of the Messiah.

Another non sequitur. Isaiah predicted the coming and Passion of Jesus in great detail but to believe a loving God “creates disaster” is undoubtedly unChristian because it implies a specific intention that people and animals are maimed and killed. You allege that I paint God as weaker than humans but you are painting God as more evil than anyone He has created!

Tony, I’ve not got much time for the next few days as I’m helping a friend through something, and your strange and unusual theology on this subject gets me very angry, so it’s probably best if we stop here.

Emotion has certainly prevented you from considering natural evil objectively but far more important that is you and your friend have a joyful Christmas. I hope and pray you will.

 

[tonyrey]

Two hundred posts and no one has explained how natural evil could be prevented or even reduced - except by human intervention.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Two hundred posts and no one has explained how natural evil could be prevented or even reduced - except by human intervention.

Yes, and yet they accuse the God who they do not believe exists of not doing anything about it!!

 

[tonyrey]

Two hundred posts and no one has explained how natural evil could be prevented or even reduced - except by human intervention.

The silence of atheists reflects the emptiness of the eternal darkness which surrounds them…

 

[CHRISTINE77]

The silence of atheists reflects the emptiness of the eternal darkness which surrounds them…

They think this life in this world is all there is.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

They think this life in this world is all there is.

That is the philosophy of animalism … we are just another animal.

“What use is it to us to hear it said of a man that he has thrown off the yoke, that he does not believe there is a God to watch over his actions, that he reckons himself the sole master of his behavior, and that he does not intend to give an account of it to anyone but himself? … Do such men think that they have delighted us by telling us that they hold our souls to be nothing but a little wind and smoke – and by saying it in conceited and complacent tones? Is that a thing to say blithely? Is it not rather a thing to say sadly – as if it were the saddest thing in the world?” Blaise Pascal

 

[tonyrey]

The silence of atheists reflects the emptiness of the eternal darkness which surrounds them…

Indeed. It is very sad, Christine, especially at Christmas that atheists believe we are utterly alone in the immense universe with no one to care for us beyond this planet but far worse than that is their belief life is ultimately meaningless. It doesn’t seem to make sense that we can make sense of anything if everything is fundamentally senseless! Our belief that God manifests Himself as helpless child is far more coherent because we know love is more important than anything else and without love life is certainly empty and meaningless.

Glory be to God on high…

 

[tonyrey]

Natural evil (physical evil) is defined as evil (suffering) for which no human is responsible, as compared to moral evil where human agency is responsible. - newadvent.org/cathen/05649a.htm

Death isn’t in itself considered evil, but unnecessary suffering is.

Death would be evil if it had no sequel beyond this life because it would make a mockery of our belief in justice and divine love. Camus was right in stating that death is “le suprême abus” (in the atheist’s scheme of things).

 

[inocente]

Was it necessary or unnecessary that Christ should die on the cross?

If it was not necessary, was it evil?

Strange questions. To a Christian His sacrifice is a gift which none of us deserve, there’s nothing necessary about it, nothing the slightest bit necessary. As for whether it was evil, is being betrayed not evil? Is a trumped-up trial not evil? Is being made to carry the instrument of your own torture and death not evil? Is execution by crucifixion not evil? The hands paralyzed by the severing of the nerves, the legs nailed bent so they cannot support the body, death coming finally after hours of slowly suffocating painfully and fearfully (like a long drawn-out water-boarding, the CIA’s torture of choice)? Not evil?

Strange questions.

 

[inocente]

You are obviously denying the value of life in this world which is, to use your own words, strange and unusual theology (on the part of a Christian).

I’m simply applying logic to your argument. There is no logical necessity for God to create the world. The children who die every minute of every day from diarrhea are not given immense delight, satisfaction and physical fulfillment. There are no wonders or beauty in the physical world which are of logically necessity absent from heaven.

Non sequitur. The main point is that natural laws are essential for a rational existence and they cannot possibly cater for every contingency. God works miracles but a constant spate of miracles is out of the question if we are to be realistic.

The idea that every minute of every day a child has to die from diarrhea because an omnipotent God is impotent is logically flawed.

*Yet another unsupported assertion and evasion…

“your logic” = an unChristian violation of the forum rule of courtesy*

You get to make a totally unfounded slur of my person, but I can’t point out the flaws in your logic? How is it evading to point out the flaws in your logic? How is it unChristian to point out the flaws in your logic? I mean I know you’d prefer me not to point out the flaws in your logic, but as I’m a logical person on an philosophy forum, I can only keep my integrity by pointing out the flaws in your logic.

False:
rerf.jp/radefx/late_e/leukemia.html

Allow me to point out the flaw in your logic. Just because that’s one of the causes doesn’t make it the only cause. As another example, just because road traffic accidents are one cause of death doesn’t make it the only cause of death.

Misrepresentation.The main point is that natural laws are essential for a rational existence and they cannot possibly cater for every contingency but it is also irrefutable that there must be a limit to the number of miracles to prevent disasters.

Try limiting yourself to one unfounded slur a week.

You said in post #200: “Obviously there are disasters such as epidemics, droughts, earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, and avalanches but how could they all be prevented without depriving us of our freedom to choose what to believe and how to live? If we object to Big Brother observing all our activity how much more constrained would we be if we knew for certain every single thought, feeling and temptation is known to God.”

I said in post #223: “I reject your claim that some people must suffer epidemics, droughts, earthquakes, etc. in order to give others the “freedom to choose what to believe and how to live”. It’s obscene to claim that others have to suffer so as to keep you in the lifestyle to which you’ve become accustomed. It paints God as a monster.”

Presumably you already believe that “every single thought, feeling and temptation is known to God”, so to argue that every minute of every day a child has to die of diarrhea just to give you the freedom to choose what to believe is, shall we say, flawed.

Nonsense. How many members of the human race have created a universe?

Irrelevant. Your argument was that God cannot prevent suffering which people can. Your logic makes people more powerful than God. Your logic is flawed.

*Another non sequitur. Isaiah predicted the coming and Passion of Jesus in great detail but to believe a loving God “creates disaster” is undoubtedly unChristian because it implies a specific intention that people and animals are maimed and killed. You allege that I paint God as weaker than humans but you are painting God as more evil than anyone He has created! *

Extraordinary. It isn’t me who says it, it’s the LORD Himself in Isaiah. The fact that you find yourself having to deny the LORD Himself might tell you that your logic is flawed.

I recommend that rather than simply dismissing the words, you study their import, read commentaries, chat with your priest. They speak of a greater conception of the Almighty, IAM who IAM, God beyond definition, the name of whom is too holy to speak, God unconstrained:

I form the light and create darkness,
I bring prosperity and create disaster;
I, the LORD, do all these things. - Is 45

Emotion has certainly prevented you from considering natural evil objectively but far more important that is you and your friend have a joyful Christmas. I hope and pray you will.

Thanks, you too. Hopefully my friend is now out of the woods. Please have a think about the Isaiah.

 

[tonyrey]

I’m simply applying logic to your argument. There is no logical necessity for God to create the world. The children who die every minute of every day from diarrhea are not given immense delight, satisfaction and physical fulfillment. There are no wonders or beauty in the physical world which are of logically necessity absent from heaven…

Those who suffer are given even greater delight, satisfaction and physical fulfilment in heaven if we accept the Beatitudes given to us by Jesus.

The idea that every minute of every day a child has to die from diarrhea because an omnipotent God is impotent is logically flawed.

God is not responsible for man’s ignorance and indifference nor for the limitations of natural laws.

You get to make a totally unfounded slur of my person, but I can’t point out the flaws in your logic? How is it evading to point out the flaws in your logic? How is it unChristian to point out the flaws in your logic? I mean I know you’d prefer me not to point out the flaws in your logic, but as I’m a logical person on an philosophy forum, I can only keep my integrity by pointing out the flaws in your logic.

It is unChristian to imply that God is **directly **responsible for all the suffering in the world.

Allow me to point out the flaw in your logic. Just because that’s one of the causes doesn’t make it the only cause. As another example, just because road traffic accidents are one cause of death doesn’t make it the only cause of death.

There are many causes but **not directly **willed by God.

The main point is that natural laws are essential for a rational existence and they cannot possibly cater for every contingency but it is also irrefutable that there must be a limit to the number of miracles to prevent disasters.

Try limiting yourself to one unfounded slur a week.

It is not a slur to state a fact.

You said in post #200: “Obviously there are disasters such as epidemics, droughts, earthquakes, hurricanes, tsunamis, and avalanches but how could they all be prevented without depriving us of our freedom to choose what to believe and how to live? If we object to Big Brother observing all our activity how much more constrained would we be if we knew for certain every single thought, feeling and temptation is known to God.”

I said in post #223: “I reject your claim that some people must suffer epidemics, droughts, earthquakes, etc. in order to give others the “freedom to choose what to believe and how to live”. It’s obscene to claim that others have to suffer so as to keep you in the lifestyle to which you’ve become accustomed. It paints God as a monster.”

There is a vital distinction between willing and permitting…

Presumably you already believe that “every single thought, feeling and temptation is known to God”, so to argue that every minute of every day a child has to die of diarrhea just to give you the freedom to choose what to believe is, shall we say, flawed.

“just” is a misrepresentation.The inability of natural laws to cater for every contingency is another factor.

How many members of the human race have created a universe?

Irrelevant. Your argument was that God cannot prevent suffering which people can. Your logic makes people more powerful than God. Your logic is flawed.

God does not override our decisions. Otherwise there would be no point in giving us free will.

Isaiah predicted the coming and Passion of Jesus in great detail but to believe a loving God “creates disaster” is undoubtedly unChristian because it implies a specific intention that people and animals are maimed and killed. You allege that I paint God as weaker than humans but you are painting God as more evil than anyone He has created!

Extraordinary. It isn’t me who says it, it’s the LORD Himself in Isaiah. The fact that you find yourself having to deny the LORD Himself might tell you that your logic is flawed.

I deny that God wills disasters - instead of permitting them.

I recommend that rather than simply dismissing the words, you study their import, read commentaries, chat with your priest. They speak of a greater conception of the Almighty, IAM who IAM, God beyond definition, the name of whom is too holy to speak, God unconstrained:

I form the light and create darkness,
I bring prosperity and create disaster;
I, the LORD, do all these things. - Is 45

In spite of your suggestions the distinction remains between God willing disasters and permitting them - and between direct and ultimate responsibility which is valid in every court of law throughout the world. The principle of choosing the lesser evil has to be taken into account.

Emotion has certainly prevented you from considering natural evil objectively but far more important that is you and your friend have a joyful Christmas. I hope and pray you will.

Thanks, you too. Hopefully my friend is now out of the woods. Please have a think about the Isaiah.

I have done so for more than sixty years and find no reason to doubt the validity of the two points I have just made. God does not create darkness; it is the absence of light. Similarly disaster is the absence of prosperity (in the fullest sense of the term). Obviously everything comes from the Creator but He is not the immediate cause of everything that occurs. It would be a greater evil not to create the physical universe and not give us free will rather than take the easy way out and give us paradise on a plate…

I’m sure your help has made all the difference. A friend in need is a friend indeed.
Keep up the good work. If the physical world didn’t exist you wouldn’t have had that opportunity!

 

[inocente]

I deny that God wills disasters - instead of permitting them.

In spite of your suggestions the distinction remains between God willing disasters and permitting them - and between direct and ultimate responsibility which is valid in every court of law throughout the world. The principle of choosing the lesser evil has to be taken into account.

I have done so for more than sixty years and find no reason to doubt the validity of the two points I have just made. God does not create darkness; it is the absence of light. Similarly disaster is the absence of prosperity (in the fullest sense of the term). Obviously everything comes from the Creator but He is not the immediate cause of everything that occurs. It would be a greater evil not to create the physical universe and not give us free will rather than take the easy way out and give us paradise on a plate.

This is the issue then, the other matters are sidelines. You say “God does not create darkness” even though God says He does create darkness. I looked at the bible on vatican.va and the NAB translation is very similar: “I form the light, and create the darkness, I make well-being and create woe; I, the LORD, do all these things.” (Isaiah 45)

Scripture tells us the LORD creates darkness and creates woe/disaster - God is always the primary cause since God is the creator of all. Things done by humans in our free will are permitted by God, but otherwise cause and effect always leads back to God. Everything that happens is the will of God, since otherwise God is not in control of His creation (not omnipotent) or is unaware of what is happening (not omniscient).

In polytheism, disasters and disease are often caused by evil deities who battle against good deities. It’s perhaps tempting in this scientific age to imagine Nature as a separate “deity” to God. But Isaiah is a monotheist, and in this verse he may explicitly be arguing against Mesopotamian polytheism by stating in no uncertain terms that there is one single deity and can be no other. Monotheism automatically has the tension stated by Epicurus in the Problem of Evil since the buck has to stop somewhere, and there’s only one place it can stop, otherwise God isn’t both omnipotent and omniscient.

I’m sure your help has made all the difference. A friend in need is a friend indeed.
Keep up the good work. If the physical world didn’t exist you wouldn’t have had that opportunity!

Wouldn’t have had to as it wouldn’t have happened .

 

[tonyrey]

This is the issue then, the other matters are sidelines. You say “God does not create darkness” even though God says He does create darkness. I looked at the bible on vatican.va and the NAB translation is very similar: “I form the light, and create the darkness, I make well-being and create woe; I, the LORD, do all these things.” (Isaiah 45)

Only Fundamentalists interpret every statement on the Old Testament literally.

Scripture tells us the LORD creates darkness and creates woe/disaster - God is always the primary cause since God is the creator of all. Things done by humans in our free will are permitted by God, but otherwise cause and effect always leads back to God. Everything that happens is the will of God, since otherwise God is not in control of His creation (not omnipotent) or is unaware of what is happening (not omniscient).

Everything that happens is the ultimate not the direct will of God - a very significant distinction.

In polytheism, disasters and disease are often caused by evil deities who battle against good deities. It’s perhaps tempting in this scientific age to imagine Nature as a separate “deity” to God. But Isaiah is a monotheist, and in this verse he may explicitly be arguing against Mesopotamian polytheism by stating in no uncertain terms that there is one single deity and can be no other. Monotheism automatically has the tension stated by Epicurus in the Problem of Evil since the buck has to stop somewhere, and there’s only one place it can stop, otherwise God isn’t both omnipotent and omniscient.

Since we are made in the image of God we participate in His power and are responsible for our choices, decisions and behaviour.

Wouldn’t have had to as it wouldn’t have happened .

Life without any challenges leaves no room for unselfish love, compassion and self-sacrifice - which would make the teaching of Jesus superfluous…

 

[tonyrey]

Wouldn’t have had to as it wouldn’t have happened .

Then your life would have been poorer in that respect. It’s easy to be a friend when we are not challenged in any way. Being on earth does have its advantages in spite of its drawbacks. We can’t have everything for nothing… What would we think ofJesus if He had been born in a five-star hotel?