The "right" to... whatever!

[Bradski]

You have not said what you would tell a 10 yr old when he asks why his little cousin died of cancer.

I think that zyzz’s original answer was that ‘stuff like this happens’. Try as we might, we sometimes can’t prevent it. There is no explanation other than that (apart from obvious medical ones). As you said:

“And we don’t really have an explanation for why things like this do happen”.

That’s pretty much paraphrasing zyzz. Except that you need to invoke God’s will in there somewhere. That God was responsible.

Forget for the moment about there being an ultimate good result -a child is not going to be able to follow any logic in that at all, especially when you tell him that you have no idea what that is likely to be. I don’t know many theological adept children (notwithstanding that it surely cannot be a good thing to tell a child that God in some mysterious way considers his friend’s death to be a good thing).

PR: These things happen, but I believe that he’s now in heaven.
Child: But Bradski doesn’t believe that.
PR: No.
Child: What should I believe?
PR: Well, maybe you could read what Bradski said about this earlier…

 

[Aloysium]

. . . If to be with God is so wonderful, then why doesn’t God call ME to be with him? I could pray for all my little friends to be called to be with God… and then we all would be happy. Looks like God does not love me.

Be careful with children. They can see through the “bovine waste-product” types of arguments.

You’re here aren’t you? So, maybe you are being called. You can bring the bovine to water, but they’ve gotta drink. And, not poop in the pool.

You could pray; that would definitely be a step in the right direction, getting to know Him.
Other aspects of the relationship one has with God include: contemplation of the teachings of the church, revealed by God, partaking of the body and blood of Jesus, participation in the mass and doing good works.

I suppose the dean could have given you a doctorate and, with a stroke of a pen, made you a math prof. given it is in his power. Why did you have to work at it, prove your worth? Maybe he doesn’t care, or maybe you’ve oversimplified what existence is all about. I know I am oversimplifying it, but it’s something along those lines.

 

[PRmerger]

I think that zyzz’s original answer was that ‘stuff like this happens’. Try as we might, we sometimes can’t prevent it. There is no explanation other than that (apart from obvious medical ones).

#woefullyinadequate

That’s pretty much paraphrasing zyzz.

Yeah–that was my taking the atheistic position.

Except that you need to invoke God’s will in there somewhere. That God was responsible.

Yes. There’s an answer but we can’t understand it all.

Like explaining to a 5 yr old why he needs all those vaccinations.

The atheistic father says, “You just do. Stuff happens, son.”

The believing father says, “Son, it helps you not get sick, but I know that answer doesn’t satisfy you, but when you’re older we will go over how your body develops antipolysaccharide immunoglobulins in response to exposure of polysaccharides of the capsular antigens of S. pneumoniae and all the other microorganisms you are now immunized against”.

 

[zyzz]

You’re here aren’t you? So, maybe you are being called.

You misunderstood the whole point. It is not about “me”, it is about the kid whose friend has died.

The child, who is told how lucky his friend is to have died, because now he is in heaven asks why did God NOT take him, too. Because he is a smart kid, and wants to know why one kid is “taken”, and the other one is not. Moreover, he also asks, why did his little friend have to go through all that pain and suffering? The doctors tried to cure him, so he had to suffer all that treatment, which were very painful, and ultimately ineffective. If God wanted to take him, he could have done it quickly and painlessly.

These are the actual questions which come up when you wish to discuss the “problem of evil”. And there are no answers.

But if you want to play, I will “emulate” that little kid, and you can try to answer the questions above.

 

[frangiuliano115]

So when the child asks about a young friends death. We have two answers.

One, from the atheist, which has been discounted, is: ‘We’re all sorry, but things like this do happen, despite everything we could to prevent it’.

Two, from the Christian, is: ‘We’re all sorry, but it was God’s will, despite everything we caould do to prevent it’.

Both answers are correct.

There’s one little problem. Understanding God’s Will. It’s called God’s Providence - nothing happens unless God permits it.

How could it be otherwise if we’re to say that God is omnipotent.

Brings up the whole problem of: If God is a good God and God is omnipotent, then why does evil exist?

If anyone out there can explain why God allows evil and where evil comes from, please post immediately - I’ll be here waiting with baited breath. I won’t be holding it however…

Bradski, there is no answer. We don’t know the answer. If you’re going to accept God, you’re going to have to accept Him on His terms. Many are not willing to do this - you may be one. So disappointed that everything is not perfect. It’s kind of like why many Jews just couldn’t accept Jesus as the Messiah. He didn’t fit the bill. Better to just ignore Him.

Have I said this before?: There’s something going on we cannot quite understand.
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against principalities…
Ephesians 6:12

This is kind of scary to me. Not the hell, fire and brimstone kind of scary (that I might actually end up there) but the fact that there seem to be two forces at work. A good one (God) and a bad one (satan). Can anyone deny good and evil? Just watch any movie or read any book, or watch life go by.

So here we are with these two forces.
Choose this day whom you will serve…
Joshua 24:15
Also Deuteronomy, also Acts.

Seems like we have a choice to be made. I choose to go with the good.
I’m willing to accept that I cannot understand everything, but I place my trust in Jesus who died to tell me to be on the “good” side of whatever is going on.

Fran

 

[zyzz]

Brings up the whole problem of: If God is a good God and God is omnipotent, then why does evil exist?

If anyone out there can explain why God allows evil and where evil comes from, please post immediately - I’ll be here waiting with baited breath. I won’t be holding it however…

Your post was well conceived and written. There are only two problems.

One is: “from the fact that there are both good and evil people and actions in the world it does NOT follow that there are personifications of good and evil” (God and Satan).

The other one is much more serious. If you suppose that there is God (the personification of good) and Satan (the personification of evil) and that God is all-powerful (while Satan is not) then you run into the problem of “why would God allow Satan to run free and corrupt the world”? It is not simply illogical and irrational, it is downright nonsensical. If you would have a an evil psychopath roaming in your neighborhood, whose only desire is to corrupt and destroy the good, then you would immediately destroy that evil psychopath.

That is why the whole Christianity must be discarded as irrational. This problem cannot be explained away.

 

[zyzz]

#woefullyinadequate

Since you declined to declare what is “adequate”, this statement is void of meaning. One liner, ex-cathedra proclamations are junk.

The atheistic father says, “You just do. Stuff happens, son.”

Your ignorance of what an atheist father would say is appalling.

Like explaining to a 5 yr old why he needs all those vaccinations.

This is one of those “#woefullyinadequate” analogies. Let God come down and explain the reasons for his non-interference. Or you can try to present your explanation. Either one would be considered.

 

[zyzz]

When you say that there could be bravery without any bad thing in the world, it seems incoherent to me.

That is your problem, not mine.

This…this…I can’t even address.

Again, your problem.

I am sorry, zy, but I think I am going to have to bow out of discussions with you after reading this.

I can only hope that this is an honest pronouncement. Please don’t make it an “empty promise”.

 

[frangiuliano115]

Your post was well conceived and written. There are only two problems.

One is: “from the fact that there are both good and evil people and actions in the world it does NOT follow that there are personifications of good and evil” (God and Satan).

The other one is much more serious. If you suppose that there is God (the personification of good) and Satan (the personification of evil) and that God is all-powerful (while Satan is not) then you run into the problem of “why would God allow Satan to run free and corrupt the world”? It is not simply illogical and irrational, it is downright nonsensical. If you would have a an evil psychopath roaming in your neighborhood, whose only desire is to corrupt and destroy the good, then you would immediately destroy that evil psychopath.

That is why the whole Christianity must be discarded as irrational. This problem cannot be explained away.

Hi Zyzz

I think most of us here used to be atheist - in one understanding or another.

Christianity answered many questions for me. Not all.

How would YOU explain the problem of good and evil? Where do they come from? Is this just how the universe works? Why does an apple fall down all the time? At the moment of the Big Bang, why didn’t everything just implode, like it was supposed to?
What’s keeping everything going? How does your heart beat once every second? Where does that energy come from?

I don’t know why God allows evil to run around and destroy the good. No one does no matter how much it’s debated. Maybe both gods have equal power? (I think that’s heretical!).

I’m not even saying you could personify good and evil. I’m saying it’s a power and of that I’m certain.

I’m saying I want to be on the side of the good power.

To you Christianity is nonsensical. I understand how you think that. To me it’s just as nonsensical to wander through life with no attempt at getting an answer and just accepting things as they are. They’re too precise, there are too many laws (natural laws) there’s too much here that requires an explanation. It cannot just “be”.

You know what’s a big mystery to me? How one intelligent person could come to believe and another intelligent person cannot. How one ignorant person (one not having facts) could come to believe and another ignorant person cannot. God calls all. Why is it difficult for some to answer??

Fran

 

[inocente]

I don’t think you’ve really thought out your answer, zy.

What does compassion look like in the face of no suffering, no illness, no pain?

And bravery–how would that work in your world without adversity?

Give me scenarios for this, please.

Scenario #1: Every minute of every day, a child below the age of five dies of diarrhea. You appear to be arguing that’s valuable so that we can feel a warm glow of compassion.

Scenario #2: In Syria, Daesh has slaughtered older women and kept younger women as sex slaves, along with many other outrages. Are you arguing that’s valuable since otherwise those they slaughter wouldn’t get to feel brave as they are slaughtered?

I’m not interested in scoring any points here, just in understanding your argument. There is no diarrhea or Daesh in either the Garden or in the Kingdom of God, so neither is in any moral sense necessary. Therefore the responses to them, mercy and courage, are morally necessary only as long as there is adversary. The presence of evil justifies courage and mercy, not as you seem to be arguing, that they justify the existence of evil. Surely?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

How would YOU explain the problem of good and evil?

I ever heard of the “problem of evil,” but what is the “problem of good and evil?”

 

[frangiuliano115]

I ever heard of the “problem of evil,” but what is the “problem of good and evil?”

I’m sorry ThinkingSapien.

Of course I meant the problem of evil - good isn’t a problem!

ZZ and I were discussing how to resolve the “problem” of there being both good and evil in the world. Not a good choice of words.

BTW, where were you when we needed a software programmer down at the Christian bookstore??

Fran

 

[zyzz]

Therefore the responses to them, mercy and courage, are morally necessary only as long as there is adversary.

You are right, but the question was: “are these attributes even possible without the evil”? And the answer is “yes”. Both compassion and courage are the “willingness” to be helpful and protective even if there is no opportunity to practice it.

The presence of evil justifies courage and mercy, not as you seem to be arguing, that they justify the existence of evil. Surely?

That is what it sounds like. And the strange thing is that the advocates of pain, suffering and misery (so that people could practice their compassion and courage) will never volunteer their own children for the role of the victims. They insinuate: “yes, we need evil, but let other people suffer”. But they will never put their money where there mouth is. And that is hypocrisy.

 

[zyzz]

How would YOU explain the problem of good and evil?

That is one heavy-duty question. Let’s limit it to the existence of “morally good and evil”. Morally good actions come from the fact that we are both individuals and herd-animals. Most people understand that these two sides must be balanced in order to have a successful life. To be overly selfish or too unselfish are both counter-productive.

As such most of us are willing to forego momentary advantage for ourselves and work for the good of others. People realize that they might need such charity themselves, and they live according to the principle of “what goes around, comes around”. Most people practice this. Not all. There are a few individuals who are too selfish, who are twisted and sick and they enjoy the misery of others. It seems likely that these people are physically sick. There is some deformity in their brain.

To me it’s just as nonsensical to wander through life with no attempt at getting an answer and just accepting things as they are.

I don’t think that there are such people except the seriously retarded. As a species, we are most curious and inquisitive; we want to understand HOW the world works. But the explanations cannot go to infinity. There are “brute facts”, for which there is no explanation, and there can be no explanation.

I’m saying I want to be on the side of the good power.

That is sensible.

They’re too precise, there are too many laws (natural laws) there’s too much here that requires an explanation. It cannot just “be”.

Sure it can. Observe that the virtual size of the Sun and the Moon are almost exactly the same, which makes the solar eclipse possible. It is a nonsensical question to ask: “why are they the same size”? They just are.

You know what’s a big mystery to me? How one intelligent person could come to believe and another intelligent person cannot. How one ignorant person (one not having facts) could come to believe and another ignorant person cannot.

That is a tough question, and I don’t think that anyone has an answer.

God calls all. Why is it difficult for some to answer??

Because God does not use a language we can understand. Next to the problem of “why does God allow evil to exist” is the other one: “why is God silent”? For the atheists the answer is simple: “because there is no God”. These questions are the perennial thorn in the side of Christianity.

 

[PRmerger]

Scenario #1: Every minute of every day, a child below the age of five dies of diarrhea. You appear to be arguing that’s valuable so that we can feel a warm glow of compassion.

If you look back at the conversation, inocente, you will see that it was proposed that there is NOTHING good which requires pain and suffering.

I gave 2 examples.

(And even 1 would have proven zy wrong)

Scenario #2: In Syria, Daesh has slaughtered older women and kept younger women as sex slaves, along with many other outrages. Are you arguing that’s valuable since otherwise those they slaughter wouldn’t get to feel brave as they are slaughtered?

I’m not interested in scoring any points here, just in understanding your argument. There is no diarrhea or Daesh in either the Garden or in the Kingdom of God, so neither is in any moral sense necessary. Therefore the responses to them, mercy and courage, are morally necessary only as long as there is adversary. The presence of evil justifies courage and mercy, not as you seem to be arguing, that they justify the existence of evil. Surely?

Fair enough.

What is your answer, then, to why these things occur and God doesn’t intervene?

 

[frangiuliano115]

You are right, but the question was: “are these attributes even possible without the evil”? And the answer is “yes”. Both compassion and courage are the “willingness” to be helpful and protective even if there is no opportunity to practice it.

That is what it sounds like. And the strange thing is that the advocates of pain, suffering and misery (so that people could practice their compassion and courage) will never volunteer their own children for the role of the victims. They insinuate: “yes, we need evil, but let other people suffer”. But they will never put their money where there mouth is. And that is hypocrisy.

There are advocates of pain, suffering and misery???

Can this be??

Uffa.

Fran

 

[PRmerger]

There are advocates of pain, suffering and misery???

I think that might be a reference to me, Fran.

And let me be quite clear: I never advocate pain, suffering and misery.

But I do have an answer to it.

Atheists have none except, “I don’t know why. Stuff happens, you know?”

 

[zyzz]

There are advocates of pain, suffering and misery???

Sure. Everyone who argues for unbridled free will, everyone who argues for natural disasters IMPLICITLY advocates and endorses their corollaries. Of course they will never openly admit it… it is even possible that they don’t even realize what they are “voting for”. Though it is hard to imagine.

When someone says that God should interfere with the “free will” of rapists and murderers, the answer is, that such interference would rob the rapist of his free will, and that free will is the greatest good. They sometimes add that the rape and murder are the price WE must pay for the free will. Observe, they say “WE must pay”. Of course the victims of such acts are the ones who must pay the price. But, what the heck? If the price is paid by others… no problem.

When someone advocates that God should prevent the tornadoes and tsunamis, they have a “pat” answer. They say: but if there would be no natural disasters, how could people practice charity and compassion? The courage and compassion are so important that the price “WE pay” (as they like to put it) is worth to have the superior “good” of compassion. Again, it is NEVER the victims who say that. It is always those others, who do not have a skin in the game. You know, it is easy to endure someone else’s misfortune.

 

[zyzz]

I think that might be a reference to me, Fran.

I wish that it would only be you. There are too many others.

And let me be quite clear: I never advocate pain, suffering and misery.

Not openly. Maybe you are not even aware what you doing.

But I do have an answer to it.

Awesome. You are the first one who ever claimed that has the answer for the “problem of evil”. None of the greatest philosophers and theologians had the audacity to claim that they solved the “greatest mystery” of Christianity.

 

[Aloysium]

. . . Awesome. You are the first one who ever claimed that has the answer for the “problem of evil”. None of the greatest philosophers and theologians had the audacity to claim that they solved the “greatest mystery” of Christianity.

Leave it to a mathematician to think of existence as a problem to be solved.
But hey, you’re in good company; this is a philosophy subforum.
I don’t mean to troll.

Trouble is that I cannot answer your question,
not only because it is ill-conceived
in having no answer,
but also in that the motivation is bad
(a simple word which gets the point across fairly well, I believe).

There is no problem;
there is reality which includes
an all-loving omnipotent God and
the fact that we suffer.
We suffer because we have worth,
because we love and are loved,
because we are relational beings in the image of God;
it could not happen otherwise.
Supernovas do not suffer

The second issue has to do with the intent of your question.
In mathematics, I don’t recall intent as being inherent in the problem. So, you may have to ponder this.
It can be clarified perhaps by the story of what happened when the angel foretold Zechariah and Mary of the coming of their respective children.
If you do not know these stories, you reveal only your arrogance and ignorance, commenting on the beliefs of people who do.
Whatever.
They basically asked the same question, “How can this be?”
Zechariah was struck dumb, while Mary received her reply.
Zechariah doubted,
Mary simply wanted to know how it happened.

It is clear you are coming from a closed heart and mind.
No answer can penetrate the wall you have created.

You may find that people will just mess with you because it ends up being a joke.
That said, the suffering that I believe is at the root of your presence here, is no joke.