The divine soap opera

[Spock]

Of course I refer to the alleged “war” between God and the Devil. It is maintained by the theists that the devil is a very powerful adversary, and it is hell-bent (pardon the pun) to destroy all the good and noble that God values. God is much more powerful, however, and if he so decided, he could destroy the evil forces at will. Yet, he does not do it.

The whole situation goes along the script of a mediocre soap-opera, or a lousy western. The “good guy” always allows the “bad guy” to slip away, and continue his evil activities. At the end the good guy wins, but until that point the bad guy committed all sorts of murders, mayhem and atrocities. Naturally, in a soap opera this script is necessary, otherwise there would be no continuation. And “the show must go on!”. However, this is simple-minded entertainment, not real life.

Also according to the theists God “loves” us like his children. Yet he allows the arch-evil to continue to prey upon us; to drag us down, to dupe us, to decieve us. It is alleged that the devil is much more powerful than us, is very deceptive, and can deceive the humans to turn against God. Yet, the enemy is allowed to roam free, and the “duped” humans are punished (with eternal damnation) for succumbing to the ruse. Is that “love”?

If you would be aware of a pusher in your neighborhood, who wishes to turn your children into drug-addicts, would you just stand on the side and allow him to do it?

The usual cop-out does not works here. In all the cases there is a lame excuse, saying that “maybe” the intervention would be somehow worse, it appeals to our “ignorance” and asserts that we are not in the position to make a judgment. Not in this case. It would be totally illogical to say that removing the devil would somehow make the situation “worse”.

To sum it up with another lousy pun: “because of your assertion of the God-Devil war - your credibility is now shot to hell”.

 

[tonyrey]

Of course I refer to the alleged “war” between God and the Devil. It is maintained by the theists that the devil is a very powerful adversary, and it is hell-bent (pardon the pun) to destroy all the good and noble that God values. God is much more powerful, however, and if he so decided, he could destroy the evil forces at will. Yet, he does not do it.

The whole situation goes along the script of a mediocre soap-opera, or a lousy western. The “good guy” always allows the “bad guy” to slip away, and continue his evil activities. At the end the good guy wins, but until that point the bad guy committed all sorts of murders, mayhem and atrocities. Naturally, in a soap opera this script is necessary, otherwise there would be no continuation. And “the show must go on!”. However, this is simple-minded entertainment, not real life.

The flaw in your simplistic caricature of Christianity is that evil does succeed - as we all know to our cost. In your scenario good and evil don’t even exist: they are just figments of the imagination and the script is written by the mindless magician you revere, i.e. inanimate matter…

Also according to the theists God “loves” us like his children. Yet he allows the arch-evil to continue to prey upon us; to drag us down, to dupe us, to decieve us. It is alleged that the devil is much more powerful than us, is very deceptive, and can deceive the humans to turn against God. Yet, the enemy is allowed to roam free, and the “duped” humans are punished (with eternal damnation) for succumbing to the ruse. Is that “love”?

According to you there is no such thing as love or justice - yet you moan incoherently about injustice!
BTW Your scornful view of the stupidity of humanity is baseless. Human beings are neither deceived, duped nor punished. They know perfectly what they are doing and are prepared to pay the price for getting their own way. You are obviously unaware that hell has its compensations. No one would be insane enough to opt for undiluted misery…

If you would be aware of a pusher in your neighborhood, who wishes to turn your children into drug-addicts, would you just stand on the side and allow him to do it?

Your analogy collapses given that God is not a helpless spectator of events.

The usual cop-out does not works here. In all the cases there is a lame excuse, saying that “maybe” the intervention would be somehow worse, it appeals to our “ignorance” and asserts that we are not in the position to make a judgment. Not in this case. It would be totally illogical to say that removing the devil would somehow make the situation “worse”.

If the devil should be removed why not you as well? Why not me? Or anyone you care to name? After all you believe we exist for no reason…

To sum it up with another lousy pun: “because of your assertion of the God-Devil war - your credibility is now shot to hell”.

Your incredibility is not even worth firing at because it merely reflects your inconsistency. You select the features of existence - such as the power of reason - you need to make your case and then make everything explode into meaningless chaos. You have lost the battle before you begin. Why not examine your preconceptions?

The “divine soap opera” is concocted out of Spock’s futile farce…

 

[Spock]

The flaw in your simplistic caricature of Christianity is that evil does succeed - as we all know to our cost.

Oh, yes. If there is no answer, declare that it is a “caricature”, and pretend that it was not asked. One of the typical, lame cop-outs.

If the devil should be removed why not you as well?

To answer your nonsensical little question: “because I am not God’s enemy, I have no desire to work against God”. (Though it is true that I intend to expose the inconsistency of those who “claim” to be rational Christians.)

Your analogy collapses given that God is not a helpless spectator of events.

If he is not helpless, why is he inactive? When did God smite the devil? I somehow missed it on the evening news…

I will make it real simple for you. Maybe you will understand without the hyperbole. According to the Catholic belief:

1. Is God more powerful then the devil?
2. Does the devil try to thwart God’s “plan”?
3. Can the devil sometimes dupe humans?
4. Could God defeat the devil if he wanted?
5. Is the devil God’s arch-enemy?
6. Is the devil the embodiment of evil?
7. Does God allow the devil to roam freely?

Simple questions for you. All can be answered by a “yes” or a “no”. (Hint for you, just in case…: all the answers are “yes”.) The final question is:

Why doesn’t God get rid of the devil?

 

[JDaniel]

Oh, yes. If there is no answer, declare that it is a “caricature”, and pretend that it was not asked. One of the typical, lame cop-outs.

To answer your nonsensical little question: “because I am not God’s enemy, I have no desire to work against God”. (Though it is true that I intend to expose the inconsistency of those who “claim” to be rational Christians.)

If he is not helpless, why is he inactive? When did God smite the devil? I somehow missed it on the evening news…

I will make it real simple for you. Maybe you will understand without the hyperbole. According to the Catholic belief:

1. Is God more powerful then the devil?
2. Does the devil try to thwart God’s “plan”?
3. Can the devil sometimes dupe humans?
4. Could God defeat the devil if he wanted?
5. Is the devil God’s arch-enemy?
6. Is the devil the embodiment of evil?
7. Does God allow the devil to roam freely?

Simple questions for you. All can be answered by a “yes” or a “no”. (Hint for you, just in case…: all the answers are “yes”.) The final question is:

Why doesn’t God get rid of the devil?

Spockmeister!

Good question, monsieur.

Well, as Scripture has it, Lucifer was created good and pure. He changed, for various reasons, and God did banish him from Heaven (the Beatific Vision). In so doing, Lucifer determined that he wanted to take over from God: to sit in God’s place: to overthrow God, as it were - like some human beings are want to do.

It would appear that when God creates Souls or Angels - eternal creatures, they are created to exist eternally. (How strangely consistent!) The destruction of that which is eternal is a contradiction. So, God just keeps Lucifer at bay.

This should tell us something about hell.

God bless,
jd

 

[steveb1]

Why doesn’t God get rid of the devil?

I doubt the Devil exists. Certainly there is no evidence for his existence. No “demonic possession” case indicates anything stronger than the mere paranormal. No truly supernatural, “Satanic” activity has ever been quantified.Scriptural affirmations of Satan’s existence are faith-statements, not quantifiable facts. Physical and moral evil are all attributable to well-understood scientific and psychological factors. As the Letter of James says, God tempts no one, rather, evil comes from within the human heart; as Jesus said, it is what comes out of a person that is defiling. There is no need to interject a supernatural causal factor into what is plainly a fully human, natural set of unhappy conditions.

But even deleting the Devil from the equation, evil certainly does exist.

So doesn’t the primary question then become, Why did God create a universe which includes potential as well as actual evil?

Doesn’t the question become, How can a supposedly all-good, all-compassionate, all-powerful deity stand by doing nothing, while sufferers cry out to him in agony?

Doesn’t the question become, How is the existence of evil - and more importantly, the persistence of evil after so many purported “divine” revelations, atonements, etc. - compatible with claims that the Creator is all-powerful and all-compassionate?

A God conceived as a Creator bears the ultimate responsibility for his creation’s maintenance and its fate or destiny. Interjecting Satan as an explanatory factor only removes the Creator by one small step. But even with the arbitrary, unnecessary introduction of Satan as a causal factor, God still bears ultimate responsibility for his creation of Satan, his permissiveness toward Satan, and his ongoing refusal to eliminate or restrain Satan.

To date, no Creatorist religion - “Creatorist” meaning belief in a deity that creates - has devised a successful theodicy, i.e., a model that explains the existence and the persistence of evil in a “good” creation created by a “good” God.

 

[Spock]

Spockmeister!

Good question, monsieur.

Well, as Scripture has it, Lucifer was created good and pure. He changed, for various reasons, and God did banish him from Heaven (the Beatific Vision). In so doing, Lucifer determined that he wanted to take over from God: to sit in God’s place: to overthrow God, as it were - like some human beings are want to do.

It would appear that when God creates Souls or Angels - eternal creatures, they are created to exist eternally. (How strangely consistent!) The destruction of that which is eternal is a contradiction. So, God just keeps Lucifer at bay.

This should tell us something about hell.

Not a bad answer, my friend! But I am afraid you did not cover all the bases.

1. What did you mean when you said that “God keeps Lucifer at bay”?
2. I did not say “destroy”, I just said “get rid of”. And it could be achieved by banishing Lucifer (the Lightbringer) to hell right now. That way he could not do his evil work right now. Presumably, and according to many, many posts here, the devil is strong, and keeps on doing his evil work, right now, and supposedly he is successful. In each case he is successful, he can “pry” off one possible human from heaven. Why does God allow that to happen? Does that make any sense?
3. Of course what God did, God could undo. There is nothing contradictory about “withdrawing” the “eternal” feature. (Or did God “paint himself” into a corner?) Besides, allegedly God will “destroy” the devil in a final battle at the end of times… so does eternity end? (Just another strange belief of Christians, isn’t it?) As I said in the OP, if you knew that there is a pusher in your neighborhood, who wants to destroy the children by hooking them on drugs, and you had the power to prevent this, wouldn’t you do it? Would you allow that person to carry out his plan? It is possible that some children would get hooked on drugs on their own. But why allow for the extra possibility?
4. Also, God is supposed to be omniscient, and he knew what Lucifer will do before he created him. Why create someone, who will do only evil? Simply does not make sense, does it?

 

[Spock]

I doubt the Devil exists. Certainly there is no evidence for his existence. No “demonic possession” case indicates anything stronger than the mere paranormal. No truly supernatural, “Satanic” activity has ever been quantified.Scriptural affirmations of Satan’s existence are faith-statements, not quantifiable facts. Physical and moral evil are all attributable to well-understood scientific and psychological factors. As the Letter of James says, God tempts no one, rather, evil comes from within the human heart; as Jesus said, it is what comes out of a person that is defiling. There is no need to interject a supernatural causal factor into what is plainly a fully human, natural set of unhappy conditions.

But even deleting the Devil from the equation, evil certainly does exist.

So doesn’t the primary question then become, Why did God create a universe which includes potential as well as actual evil?

Doesn’t the question become, How can a supposedly all-good, all-compassionate, all-powerful deity stand by doing nothing, while sufferers cry out to him in agony?

Doesn’t the question become, How is the existence of evil - and more importantly, the persistence of evil after so many purported “divine” revelations, atonements, etc. - compatible with claims that the Creator is all-powerful and all-compassionate?

A God conceived as a Creator bears the ultimate responsibility for his creation’s maintenance and its fate or destiny. Interjecting Satan as an explanatory factor only removes the Creator by one small step. But even with the arbitrary, unnecessary introduction of Satan as a causal factor, God still bears ultimate responsibility for his creation of Satan, his permissiveness toward Satan, and his ongoing refusal to eliminate or restrain Satan.

To date, no Creatorist religion - “Creatorist” meaning belief in a deity that creates - has devised a successful theodicy, i.e., a model that explains the existence and the persistence of evil in a “good” creation created by a “good” God.

Well said! But in this thread I wanted to point out the total inconsistency of Christianity concerning the alleged existence of the devil and demons.

 

[The_Exodus]

Also according to the theists God “loves” us like his children. Yet he allows the arch-evil to continue to prey upon us; to drag us down, to dupe us, to decieve us.

According to Christianity, Satan does not tempt man in such a way that he is “duped” without his own free consent to evil. Ergo, straw man.

spock:

If you would be aware of a pusher in your neighborhood, who wishes to turn your children into drug-addicts, would you just stand on the side and allow him to do it?

God has done very much – became man and died. But he does not violate creaturely freedom. Ergo, straw man.

spock:

The usual cop-out does not works here. In all the cases there is a lame excuse, saying that “maybe” the intervention would be somehow worse, it appeals to our “ignorance” and asserts that we are not in the position to make a judgment. Not in this case. It would be totally illogical to say that removing the devil would somehow make the situation “worse”.

I must admit I’ve never heard this “usual cop-out,” and would think that if this is the type of stuff you’re commonly seeing in the literature, you’re not reading the right literature.

The claim from Christianity is that God permits evil to be done, in order to bring about a greater good, which your point about does nothing to endanger.

 

[Spock]

According to Christianity, Satan does not tempt man in such a way that he is “duped” without his own free consent to evil. Ergo, straw man.

My goodnes, are you really that naive? Have you never heard of clever and convincing con-artists duping old ladies to to give their last pennies to support a bogus endeavor? They act on false information, they freely choose to do what leads to their own destruction. Do you blame them? And not the one who fed them false information? Get real, buddy!

God has done very much – became man and died. But he does not violate creaturely freedom. Ergo, straw man.

That does not help those who are deceived now. Also, what is wrong about curtailing the freedom of evil people? We routinely curtail the freedom of criminals, by putting them into jail. They are still “free” to “will” to do evil, but their ability to carry it out is taken away. Are you against this procedure, too?

I must admit I’ve never heard this “usual cop-out,” and would think that if this is the type of stuff you’re commonly seeing in the literature, you’re not reading the right literature.

The only literature I read is this board. It sure could be the wrong place. But at least it is fun reading.

The claim from Christianity is that God permits evil to be done, in order to bring about a greater good, which your point about does nothing to endanger.

Oh, yes it does. Show me how the existence of devil can bring forth some “greater good”, which could not be done without the existence of the devil. Be specific.

 

[tonyrey]

The flaw in your simplistic caricature of Christianity is that evil does succeed - as we all know to our cost.

You deny that evil often succeeds?

If the devil should be removed why not you as well?

…“because I am not God’s enemy, I have no desire to work against God”. (Though it is true that I intend to expose the inconsistency of those who “claim” to be rational Christians.)

Surely to attempt to show that God doesn’t exist is a form of hostility to God…

Your analogy collapses given that God is not a helpless spectator of events.

If he is not helpless, why is he inactive?

How do you know He is inactive?

When did God smite the devil?

God smites no one. They smite themselves.

According to the Catholic belief:

1. Is God more powerful then the devil?
2. Does the devil try to thwart God’s “plan”?
3. Can the devil sometimes dupe humans?
4. Could God defeat the devil if he wanted?
5. Is the devil God’s arch-enemy?
6. Is the devil the embodiment of evil?
7. Does God allow the devil to roam freely?

Yes to all questions except the last.

Why doesn’t God get rid of the devil?

Because He is the Creator not the Destroyer. It would be inconsistent to eliminate a person He has made in His own image and likeness - and defeat the purpose for which we are all created: to choose what to believe and how to live.

 

[The_Exodus]

My goodnes, are you really that naive? Have you never heard of clever and convincing con-artists duping old ladies to to give their last pennies to support a bogus endeavor? They act on false information, they freely choose to do what leads to their own destruction. Do you blame them? And not the one who fed them false information? Get real, buddy!

This has nothing to do with con-artists and old ladies. You are presenting a false representation of a view you are attacking, and that is called a straw man.

If you are claiming that Satan has the ability to “dupe” people, where they sin or do evil without knowing it (like an old lady getting scammed by a con-artist), that is simply a straw man, and is not what Christianity has ever claimed.

The correct view is that Satan tempts man in such a way that man still has the power and free choice to resist.

spock:

That does not help those who are deceived now. Also, what is wrong about curtailing the freedom of evil people? We routinely curtail the freedom of criminals, by putting them into jail. They are still “free” to “will” to do evil, but their ability to carry it out is taken away. Are you against this procedure, too?

It does absolutely everything to help those who are deceived now, because grace is spread abroad and offered to all men in ways known only to God. You may not think this is true, but this is the view of Christianity.

Also, how do you know evil isn’t curtailed, even a great deal? Again, this is a straw man (false representation) of Christianity, which has always taught that God is omnipotent in such a way that, he allows evil to exist in order to bring about a great good.

spock:

Oh, yes it does. Show me how the existence of devil can bring forth some “greater good”, which could not be done without the existence of the devil. Be specific.

The patience and courage of martyrs could not exist without persecutors.

Why do you think evil cannot bring about a greater good, a deeper appreciation for good, or a closer union with good?

 

[JDaniel]

Not a bad answer, my friend! But I am afraid you did not cover all the bases.

Likewise, not a bad response. Of course, I expected a good response from you. Strange: why would I respond to yours knowing you would give a good response?

1. What did you mean when you said that “God keeps Lucifer at bay”?

I suspect that he keeps him out of Heaven, but, permits him in the in-between realms. If I knew the complete answer, you would not have asked the question.

1. I did not say “destroy”, I just said “get rid of”. And it could be achieved by banishing Lucifer (the Lightbringer) to hell right now. That way he could not do his evil work right now. Presumably, and according to many, many posts here, the devil is strong, and keeps on doing his evil work, right now, and supposedly he is successful. In each case he is successful, he can “pry” off one possible human from heaven. Why does God allow that to happen? Does that make any sense?

But, he did that (see above). We are essentially spiritual creatures, in my opinion. We are creatures with the freedom to choose. Now, what could that possibly mean if there were nothing to choose? But, I do understand your lament.

1. Of course what God did, God could undo. There is nothing contradictory about “withdrawing” the “eternal” feature. (Or did God “paint himself” into a corner?)

Well, I don’t know about you, but, I for one do not want it withdrawn! Count me out.

Besides, allegedly God will “destroy” the devil in a final battle at the end of times… so does eternity end? (Just another strange belief of Christians, isn’t it?) As I said in the OP, if you knew that there is a pusher in your neighborhood, who wants to destroy the children by hooking them on drugs, and you had the power to prevent this, wouldn’t you do it? Would you allow that person to carry out his plan? It is possible that some children would get hooked on drugs on their own. But why allow for the extra possibility?

To test their metal?

1. Also, God is supposed to be omniscient, and he knew what Lucifer will do before he created him. Why create someone, who will do only evil? Simply does not make sense, does it?

To test our metal?

From my lowly POV, a higher thing creates a lower thing. Whenever lower things are created, especially in huge numbers, the expected unexpected does occur. I suppose one could, but, I think that the expectation of absolute perfection from lower things is patently absurd, no matter how good the maker is.

God bless,
jd

 

[fhansen]

Actually the faith maintains that the devil’s a wimp-and yet as strong as we allow him to be. IOW, God lets us decide how much of a stronghold evil will have over us. Rapists, torturers, murderers, pedophiles are those who’ve come to take it very seriously-to become captivated by it. At any rate, the consequences of the evil in mens’ hearts produce no mere soap opera. The result is war, genocide, the worst that human failure to love can come up with.

 

[4Horsemen]

Also according to the theists God “loves” us like his children. Yet he allows the arch-evil to continue to prey upon us; to drag us down, to dupe us, to decieve us. It is alleged that the devil is much more powerful than us, is very deceptive, and can deceive the humans to turn against God. Yet, the enemy is allowed to roam free, and the “duped” humans are punished (with eternal damnation) for succumbing to the ruse. Is that “love”?

God, in His Infinite Mercy and Wisdom has invited His faithful to participate in His great sacrifice by uniting our prayers, works, and sacrifices to His for the salvation of the world. Not that Jesus, Himself, didn’t fully merit the grace of salvation for all, but that by our participation in His sufferings, we should be raised up in greater glory for the sake of the salvation of souls.

There are “victim souls” in the world who have offered up their whole lives for the salvation of souls. St. Faustina is one. Sr. Josepha (known from the book Divine Love is another. Even the little children of Fatima were capable of making the decision to accept whatever God sends them for the sake of saving souls.

There is no “ruse.” The devil is allowed a time to try to win his minions, but that time will effectually serve to widen the division between the saved and unsaved. Those who choose goodness will, in effect, choose God. Those who choose evil will choose evil of their own free will.

 

[Spock]

Likewise, not a bad response. Of course, I expected a good response from you. Strange: why would I respond to yours knowing you would give a good response?

Thank you very much.

I suspect that he keeps him out of Heaven, but, permits him in the in-between realms. If I knew the complete answer, you would not have asked the question.

The good old “I don’t know” is always an honest answer. But this answer does not elaborate on the “why?”.

But, he did that (see above). We are essentially spiritual creatures, in my opinion. We are creatures with the freedom to choose. Now, what could that possibly mean if there were nothing to choose? But, I do understand your lament.

I did not argue for the removal of choice. I am only questioning why the arch-evil is allowed to do his destructive work? We would be perfectly capable of making our own (bad) choices without having the arch-evil among us.

Well, I don’t know about you, but, I for one do not want it withdrawn! Count me out.

Again, I am not talking about me and you. I am talking about the arch-evil.

To test their metal?
To test our metal?

An omniscient God needs no “testing”. That is absurd.

From my lowly POV, a higher thing creates a lower thing. Whenever lower things are created, especially in huge numbers, the expected unexpected does occur. I suppose one could, but, I think that the expectation of absolute perfection from lower things is patently absurd, no matter how good the maker is.

No, it is not absurd at all. You cannot “hide” behind large numbers. There are several ways and means to achieve that. But that is not the current point. It boils down to one question only.

Here is a short analysis.

1. It is doctrine that good never comes out of evil.
2. It is also a doctrine that the end does not justify the means.
3. The devil is the ultimate evil.
4. One of the major defenses against the problem of evil that God can take any evil action and make it into some “greater good”, which is so good that the “evil” aspect is negiligible (justifyable) and which evil part is logically necessary for that greater good to occur.
5. From #4 it follows that the removal of “evil” part would cause more harm than permitting it. Therefore the “removal” of the evil is not justifyable. The “evil” must be kept.
6. From #4 and #5 it follows that the “removal” of the ultimate evil would bring forth some even “greater evil”, than keeping it.
   But that is a contradiction! How could the devil be the ultimate evil, if its removal would lead to an even greater evil?

Therefore it is logically inevitable that the removal or containment of the arch-evil would improve on this world. The containment could be done by banishing the devil and all his cohorts to hell, and keeping them there.

So the question stays the same: “Why does God not take the logically necessary step to make this world better?”

 

[vera_dicere]

I’m sure someone’s mentioned it, and you’ve most likely heard it before… but the whole free choice business.

Just like us, satan had his choice and he made it, and it was to his and our determent. Just like God won’t interfer in anyone’s choices, for good or bad, He won’t currently interfer with satan’s choices.

I mean, your drug pusher analogy is one thing, but say you have two adult children, one decides to live a chaste life, doing good, helping the poor and knitting sweaters for bald puppies, your other child, he decides to shun good things, he involves himself in raunchy living. You can’t really stop either child, and would you want to? You’d want only the best for your naughty child, but he’ll learn in time. I think most parents can agree that watching an adult child engage in destructive, but not neccesarily illegal behaviour is frustrating, and ranting against their shenanigans won’t help them get on the straight and narrow. In fact, sometimes it takes a bout of eyeball herpes to get someone back on the right track.

I, like probably everyone else, have friends and family who have “learnt the hardway”, and while no one in their circle of friends or family wants to see whoever get hurt we all acknowledge that unless they want to change, they ain’t gonna and our ramblings won’t help.

God, however, has intervened in giving us instruction, through the Bible, the Didache, almost 2000 years of teaching from saints, popes [the good ones, not the dodgey ones], and so on and so fourth. People really are in no place to plead ignorance that this instruction isn’t out there. Any further intervention from God, openly, and obviously, would negate the need for faiht, I mean, you put up a brave face, Spock, but I bet if God showed up in your room tonight to save you from rape minded robbers you might be hard pressed to tell him to sod off. But what kind of choice is it if it is forced or acheived by duress?

I do applaud your questioning of God and theists in general.

 

[Spock]

I’m sure someone’s mentioned it, and you’ve most likely heard it before… but the whole free choice business.

Of course I heard it so many times that it makes me feel nauseous. It simply does not cut it. We all have an awful lot of choices, some are good, some are bad. There are some possibilities which we would like to do (some good, some bad), but we are unable to do them. Good people would like to help all those in need, but they cannot. Does this limit their freedom? Of course it does. Does it eliminate their freedom? Of course it does not. Conversely, there are people who wish to perform genocides, but they cannot do it. Does this limit their freedom? Yes. Does it eliminate their freedom? No.

This whole appeal to “freedom” is simply vacuous. We are limited by many constraints. There is no “total” freedom. As long as we are not forced to worship God, we are “free enough” to make this decision, and according to theists that is the most important decision we can make.

Just like us, satan had his choice and he made it, and it was to his and our determent. Just like God won’t interfer in anyone’s choices, for good or bad, He won’t currently interfer with satan’s choices.

That is the point. Why not? There is nothing wrong to prevent something evil that is being planned. We do it all the time, when we can. If we cannot prevent it, we try at least to prevent its re-occurrence, by eliminating the bad guy’s freedom to carry out the next instance - by putting him into jail.

I mean, your drug pusher analogy is one thing, but say you have two adult children…

The adult child analogy is incorrect. If God is the adult, then we shall never be adults ourselves. And you can bet your last penny, if I had an adult child, of whom I knew that he plans some atrocity, and I could prevent it, I would not hesitate for one moment to prevent it. Peacefully, if possible, forcefully if necessary. It is nonsense to say, let’s allow him, and maybe he will learn from it. The pusher-type of analogy is the only one which is apt. And there is no rational argument against it. Leastways, I never heard one.

God, however, has intervened in giving us instruction, through the Bible, the Didache, almost 2000 years of teaching from saints, popes [the good ones, not the dodgey ones], and so on and so fourth. People really are in no place to plead ignorance that this instruction isn’t out there.

Oh, yes they certainly can. None of what you quote is evidence, much less proof. I am demanding evidence in these threads - and none is forthcoming. I appreciate your effort, I really do. But your explanation simply does not work.

Any further intervention from God, openly, and obviously, would negate the need for faiht,

Undoubtedly. Of course, who needs faith, if one can have knowledge. But it does not eliminate the freedom not to worship God.

I mean, you put up a brave face, Spock, but I bet if God showed up in your room tonight to save you from rape minded robbers you might be hard pressed to tell him to sod off.

Why would I? of course I would welcome him. I would welcome God any time for a friendly chat. And I would ask him the very same questions I am asking here. And if he could not give me a satisfactory answer, then I would be very disappointed, and would definitely not welcome him any more. I would give God the benefit of the doubt, but if he refused to come clean, then the gloves would come off - figuratively speaking, of course.

I do applaud your questioning of God and theists in general.

Thank you kindly.

 

[JDaniel]

Thank you very much.

It was said because you deserve it: no need to thank me for your honesty, forthrightness, and honor. You, sir, are an honorable man.

The good old “I don’t know” is always an honest answer. But this answer does not elaborate on the “why?”.

And, the “good old” presumption that men can actually know the mind of God really doesn’t help men do that.

I did not argue for the removal of choice. I am only questioning why the arch-evil is allowed to do his destructive work? We would be perfectly capable of making our own (bad) choices without having the arch-evil among us.

But, don’t you see: the removal of choice would effect and affect all of us. That, anyway, is how I took your earlier statement, though I could have taken it wrongly.

Again, I am not talking about me and you. I am talking about the arch-evil.

Oh, thank you. Whew!

An omniscient God needs no “testing”. That is absurd.

That’s how you are going to dismiss me? I am sure that you barely considered my two statements.

Why is that necessarily “absurd?” Almost every action we participate in, in life, is a “test” of some sort or other. Drink a cocktail, and it’s a “test” of our temperance. Chew and swallow a morsel, and it’s a “test” of our gluttony. Lift weights, and it’s a “test” of our vanity. Win an argument, and it’s a “test” of our vanity. Couch-potato too much and it’s a test of our slovenliness. So, why, again, is it absurd? Just because God is Omnipotent or, Omniscient?

No, it is not absurd at all. You cannot “hide” behind large numbers. There are several ways and means to achieve that. But that is not the current point. It boils down to one question only.

Here is a short analysis.

1. It is doctrine that good never comes out of evil. [Really?]
2. It is also a doctrine that the end does not justify the means.
3. The devil is the ultimate evil. [No. He is not the “ultimate evil.” Being unable to see God’s face, when our time comes, is an even greater evil - but, not in the way you might think I mean that. And we alone are the cause of it.]
4. One of the major defenses against the problem of evil that God can take any evil action and make it into some “greater good”, which is so good that the “evil” aspect is negiligible (justifyable) and which evil part is logically necessary for that greater good to occur.******
5. From #4 it follows that the removal of “evil” part would cause more harm than permitting it. Therefore the “removal” of the evil is not justifyable. The “evil” must be kept. [Can’t remove evil. Evil is not a “thing.” It is a condition of a thing, like "slovenliness is a condition of a thing.]
6. From #4 and #5 it follows that the “removal” of the ultimate evil would bring forth some even “greater evil”, than keeping it.[Incorrect conclusion. You figure it out]

But that is a contradiction! How could the devil be the ultimate evil, if its removal would lead to an even greater evil?

Proof, then, that your conclusion is false.

Therefore it is logically inevitable

that the removal or containment of the arch-evil would improve on this world. The containment could be done by banishing the devil and all his cohorts to hell, and keeping them there.

True: if Hell were a “place.”

So the question stays the same: "Why does God not take the logically necessary step to make this world better?

"

“Logically necessary step…” for whom? For you, Spock? He has made this an incredible world, but, not so incredible as to preclude the Beatific Vision. Why must the world be “perfect?” Especially now? Why can’t it be a gigantic series of tests, as it were? Are you that anxious? That anxious to find out the grade you might be receiving? Why doesn’t the teacher simply give us the answers - beforehand? Why doesn’t the teacher simply do away with testing altogether? What’s so important about passing or failing? We’re still valuable. We’re still precious. We’re still awesome.

Oh, well, I was just wandering . . .

God bless,
jd

 

[Spock]

And, the “good old” presumption that men can actually know the mind of God really doesn’t help men do that.

But we still can speculate, can’t we? Looking at it logically, God’s mind cannot be irrational, cannot be illogical. God must be a purposeful being, who wishes to achieve something. Anyone, who strives to achieve something and has a rational mind would attempt to find the optimal way to get there. Isn’t that obvious?

But, don’t you see: the removal of choice would effect and affect all of us. That, anyway, is how I took your earlier statement, though I could have taken it wrongly.

The removal of choice for the devil would affect us (by Catholic belief) and that effect would be fully beneficial for all of us.

Why is that necessarily “absurd?” Almost every action we participate in, in life, is a “test” of some sort or other. Drink a cocktail, and it’s a “test” of our temperance. Chew and swallow a morsel, and it’s a “test” of our gluttony. Lift weights, and it’s a “test” of our vanity. Win an argument, and it’s a “test” of our vanity. Couch-potato too much and it’s a test of our slovenliness. So, why, again, is it absurd? Just because God is Omnipotent or, Omniscient?

Of course because of the omniscience. An omniscient being needs no testing to know.

True: if Hell were a “place.”

Sometimes even you throw me into desperation. Neither of us has the foggiest idea what hell (or heaven) “really is”. But we know perfectly well, that this existence, here and now is not hell, and it is not heaven either. You should know that the phrase I used: “banish to hell and keep him there” means: “keep the devil away from this place where we dwell, keep him from interfering with humans”. You said before: “God keeps the devil away from heaven” - which also implies a “place”. Why do you take exception when I use the same terminology?

“Logically necessary step…” for whom? For you, Spock?

For God and us both, of course. I am arguing from the Catholic perspective. The premise is that God loves us, wishes the best for us. I don’t think that any Catholic would dispute this. Figuratively speaking we are in the “same boat”. Whatever is good for us, is good for God.

He is not the “ultimate evil.” Being unable to see God’s face, when our time comes, is an even greater evil.

And now I despair again. Every time I see the phrase “evil is the privation of good”, I have this overwhelming desire to grab the person and rub his nose into his own … ahem, nonsense. Evil is malevolence, wickedness, a conscious effort to maim, to hurt, to drag something down.

I really wish we could establish a common dictionary, with precisely defined meanings, so we would not have to waste precious time on establishing the meaning of words. It is very frustrating to take side tracks (over and over again).

No, what you say is not “evil”. It may be the worst situation in the world, but that is not “evil”. The devil, on the other hand is supposed to be the ultimate evil, the embodiment of malevolence and wickedness, whose only desire is to hurt. It is also a Catholic doctrine that God cannot tolerate evil. So why does he “tolerate” the ultimate evil? Don’t you realize that the whole Catholic teaching is a huge, self-contradicting set of assertions?

 

[The_Exodus]

For God and us both, of course. I am arguing from the Catholic perspective. The premise is that God loves us, wishes the best for us. I don’t think that any Catholic would dispute this. Figuratively speaking we are in the “same boat”. Whatever is good for us, is good for God.

It may very well be that pain and suffering are in some sense good for us now, here below. Call it “medicinal.” Imagine a dog being taken to the vet. He doesn’t totally understand what’s going on, but, if he did, he would see that the shot he’s about to get is going to cure him from his illness. This makes faith important.

spock:

And now I despair again. Every time I see the phrase “evil is the privation of good”, I have this overwhelming desire to grab the person and rub his nose into his own … ahem, nonsense. Evil is malevolence, wickedness, a conscious effort to maim, to hurt, to drag something down.

"Evil’ is understood in the traditional Christian literature as a lack or privation of being. It doesn’t exist “on its own.” It is, rather, a corruption, like a cavity. This understanding is necessary in order to guard from Dualism.

spock:

The devil, on the other hand is supposed to be the ultimate evil, the embodiment of malevolence and wickedness, whose only desire is to hurt. It is also a Catholic doctrine that God cannot tolerate evil. So why does he “tolerate” the ultimate evil? Don’t you realize that the whole Catholic teaching is a huge, self-contradicting set of assertions?

Satan is not “ultimately evil,” else he wouldn’t exist, since pure evil is pure non being. Like all corrupt beings, he is a good thing gone wrong. Since he is a creature so close to God, his going bad is that much more disastrous, and he can use his powers for that much more evil, instead of good. The higher a creature is, the greater is it’s fall.

God certainly “tolerates” evil (though he does not wish it or indulge in it.) As a matter of fact, he became man in order to “tolerate” it as much as possible. He is not a deistic spectator. He is involved in the evil of his creation. He puts himself at its mercy.