[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 27 KB, 460x460, 182965_10200996272167560_1273849892_n.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171402 No.4171402 [Reply] [Original]

/lit/

if god is all powerful, all knowing, and all good

then why is there evil on earth?

>> No.4171403

Because we ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil and lost our innocence.

>> No.4171404

There is?

>> No.4171405

/lit/

if history has no grand narratives and everything is relative

then why study history?

>> No.4171407

>>4171405
Maybe you enjoy it.

>> No.4171409

He wants us to have our free will.

>> No.4171410
File: 181 KB, 600x312, happy-christians.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171410

if god doesnt exists then how come for you smell and don't have any friends?

>> No.4171412

>>4171409
>He wants us to have our free will.

so in heaven there is no free will? or is heaven full of evil too

>> No.4171417

>>4171410
>>4171405
>>4171402
>Because you touch yourself at night.

>> No.4171421

>>4171409
"While this approach has some initial plausibility, it falls far short of solving the problem of evil.
We are asked to believe that God created man with the power of choice in the hope that man would
voluntarily pursue the good, but that man thwarts this desire of God through sin and thus brings evil
upon himself. But, to begin with, to speak of frustrating or acting contrary to the wishes of an
omnipotent being makes no sense whatsoever. There can be no barriers to divine omnipotence, no
obstacles to thwart his desires, so we must assume that the present state of the world is precisely as
God desires it to be. If God wished things to be other than they are, nothing could possibly prevent
them from being other than they are, man’s free will notwithstanding. In addition, we have seen
that free will is incompatible with the foreknowledge possessed by an omniscient being, so the
appeal to free will fails in this respect as well. In any case, God created man with full knowledge of
the widespread suffering that would ensue, and, given his ability to prevent this situation, we must
presume that God desired and willed these immoral atrocities to occur."

>> No.4171434

I imagined Epicurius trying to talk to /lit/. It was funnier than a donkey eating figs.

>> No.4171525
File: 57 KB, 396x400, euphoric.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171525

>> No.4171534

>>4171434
Actually laughed

>> No.4171540

"god"? who?
no no, we are past that... move on

>> No.4171550

>>4171402
He knows everything, not you OP. If you think there is unnecessary evil in God's plan it's because your tiny intellect misinterprets it. All you need to know is he's got his shit together, now be a good boy and enjoy the ride where you can.

>> No.4171552

Because if I was only able to do good, like a thought slave, then my good deeds would have less meaning because I did not choose it.

>> No.4171553

Because God doesn't exist.

>> No.4171565

>>4171402
good lord i would pay money to drink green chartreuse whilst slapping my dick between those oiled up titties bumping throw some d's on that bitch in a mid range hotel room

>> No.4171571

>>4171552
So... The greater good would be to have the freedom to do good, even though the temptation of evil is present?

>> No.4171572

>>4171565
Dude I don't judge people for liking niggers or anything but you like UGLY niggers

>> No.4171583

>>4171571
Exactly!!
As a child they teach about heaven and hell and use it as a motivator to do good, but this is a simple way of viewing spirituality.
God loves us so much, that he gave us the opportunity for our spirits to mature. This opportunity is in the freedom to choose between doing good and feeling His love, or doing evil and rejecting His love.

>> No.4171584

>>4171572
Pretty bitches are shit. A homely girl will suck your dick dry and say thank you before a pretty bitch even gets her shoes off.

>> No.4171595

>>4171583
Oh wow! Thank you for that insight. I've always rejected Christianity because I couldn't get over the use of fear tactics to manipulate people to do good and because I couldn't understand why there is suffering. I found security in secular humanism, but that still left me feeling empty and have me a shaky moral foundation.
Thank you so much for bringing me back to the fold.

>> No.4171596

>>4171402
By what standard do you judge that there is evil on earth?

>> No.4171603

>>4171596
by the christian standard of course, that's the one that creates contradiction in the basic premise.

>> No.4171643

>>4171421
But... This isn't a good argument at all...

>> No.4171650

>>4171402

Because god is incompetent

Unintelligent design

>> No.4171651

>>4171412
Well if you get in heaven, it's pretty much assumed that your spirit has matured enough that you will only do good.
Didn't lucifer choose evil?!

>> No.4171663

>>4171402
Because the jews.

>> No.4171675

>>4171650
>The stupid design theory
I like your perspective.

>> No.4171686

>>4171421
> But, to begin with, to speak of frustrating or acting contrary to the wishes of an
omnipotent being makes no sense whatsoever
This is shit logic and shows that the author has a poor understanding of the free will argument because they do not understand free will.
By granting humans free will, god is willfully releasing some of his omnipotence so that we may better understand the dynamics of good and evil.

>> No.4171709

>>4171540
Well the more obvious answer is that there is an all powerful god and that what he wants is for one of us to confront him on equal ground, and for the winner to get dibs on next universe. Sorta Neo and the Merovingian style but there would still be room for a heaven and hell, they would be pseudo permanent holding tanks for those without real motivation, while someone wishing to take the big test would probably involve a willfully evil act like the movie 9th gate; "this path leads to equality with god" which damns you eternally unless you prove yourself more deserving than the current god.

>> No.4171754
File: 82 KB, 780x490, 1298712779549.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4171754

>> No.4171760

Has anyone ever noticed that there's never been any decent treatise on theodicy?

>> No.4171792

Because our God, the being who was named "King of Awful" by Mozart, and most people who believe are known as "God-fearing", is a furious and jealous God. He could wipe us all out with a bat of his eye, but he loves us. From time to time, we are tempted with delicious sin to turn away from him, and he loves his children, so things are said in order to keep people on his side instead of falling for the allure of evil.

Evil still persists today because he isn't all powerful and while he cannot snap his fingers and make evil disappear, he can still kill us all in terrible ways if we don't love him.

>> No.4171850

>>4171686
Omnipotence, at least as I see it, doesn't necessarily equate to complete moral goodness. Your response is incorrect because, assuming that God is omnipotent and wished to allow evil, He would not be "releasing" any sort of omnipotence.

As far as I can tell, omnipotence is more of a complicated concept than most grant it. Particularly, some argue over the relation between God's omnipotence and its relation to the laws of logic(i.e could God create square circles?)

I think if the problem of evil is to be defeated it's going to be with a modification of what omnipotence means, and not a theodicy, though some aren't that bad, honestly. The free will theodicy that you are employing isn't as powerful as you seem to think it is. For one, could God not create men with free will who always do the right thing? I mean, if he's omnipotent, as in that there is literally nothing that can oppose any will that He could have, then why couldn't he? It must be, then, that there is something about EVIL that is necessary to God's plan, rather than that His plan is to give us the gift of free will and as a result we have evil as a nasty by-product.

>> No.4171890

math

>> No.4171899

>>4171850

Though, it could be said that assuming that God and an after-life do exist, then, in relation, any sort of suffering in this life seems trivial. The problem with this idea, though, is that there is another stipulation; after all of the suffering, if one hasn't adhered to God's tenets they one is going to be annihilated. But, other than that, do you guys still believe that evil in this world is a problem? What's the big deal if I were to be raped, or if I had to witness a Mexican cartel slaughter my whole family in front of my own eyes if, after I have passed away, I receive a life in Heaven? An eternal life in Heaven, I might add. In the grand scheme of things, the amount of time spent in this finite life is insignificant compared to the amount of time that is contained in the rest of eternity, but it seems wrong that humans should go through such suffering and then be denied an after-life, especially if one were to have never even know the moral parameters that God has established.

>> No.4171938 [DELETED] 

>>4171534

That was actually Chrysippus, but fair enough.

>> No.4171943

>>4171434

That was actually Chrysippus, but fair enough.

>> No.4172000
File: 54 KB, 324x289, argue.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172000

>>4171402
to provide a contrast to those fine bitches

>> No.4172011

because there is no God

>> No.4172021

>>4172011
*tips fedora*

>> No.4172029
File: 34 KB, 396x400, euphorik.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172029

>>4172011

>> No.4172043

>Being a God no one worships or knows about
>"THEY THINK I'M ALL GOOD, LOL."

>> No.4172044

Good doesn't necessitate stopping or preventing evil.

>> No.4172060

If there were any more good it would lead to to overall more evil. The balance of good and evil that we have is a necessary one and this is the ideal world.
That's leibnits' answer

>> No.4172068

>>4172060
But why would he make a system where too much good makes evil? Why not make a system that works?

>> No.4172087
File: 73 KB, 556x480, 1380943538881.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172087

>>4172000
this is the second time I've seen someone on /lit/ express their love for black chicks. Is this a literature nerd thing? Me personally, I am unreasonably attracted to black girls

>> No.4172123
File: 2.68 MB, 249x250, smdh.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172123

>>4172087
>sees something twice on 4chan
>thinks it's a 'literature nerd thing'

>> No.4172128

>>4171402
We don't know, but that's not reason enough to not believe.

>> No.4172139

>>4172060
That's how it works in this universe, but shouldn't God theoretically be able to make that different?

>> No.4172142

>>4172139
Yes.

>> No.4172155

>>4171402
Because struggle makes us stronger and wiser when it's through.

If everything was good, then we would take advantage of that and just become elitist lazy assholes. But, everything is good right? That shouldn't happen? That defies human nature... we as humans try to find ways to make our lives more exciting, more eventful. So we stir shit up. If everything was good we would become tired and bored. So what contradicts good? Bad, of course. Even if God intended everything to be good, things would get bad.
That's a bit confusing but I hope you get what I'm saying.

>> No.4172157

>>4172128
Yes it is you fucking idiot.

>> No.4172166

see: Leibniz's Theodicy

>> No.4172168

>>4172157
It isn't. All you need to do is show that the existence of God is preferable to the nonexistence of God.
And it certainly is.

>> No.4172173

>>4172168
How?

>> No.4172177

>>4172155
Why didn't he make it so when everything is good things didn't get bad, people didn't become elitist lazy assholes, people didn't get bored?

>> No.4172178

>>4172173
Without God, nothing matters?

>> No.4172179

>>4172178
What a childish notion.

>> No.4172188
File: 338 KB, 960x480, nietzsche1[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172188

>>4172179
the fuck you just say

>> No.4172194

>>4172188
What about gods existence gives meaning? Elaborate.

>> No.4172207

>>4172194
Once upon a time, in some out of the way corner of that universe which is dispersed into numberless twinkling solar systems, there was a star upon which clever beasts invented knowing. That was the most arrogant and mendacious minute of "world history," but nevertheless, it was only a minute. After nature had drawn a few breaths, the star cooled and congealed, and the clever beasts had to die. One might invent such a fable, and yet he still would not have adequately illustrated how miserable, how shadowy and transient, how aimless and arbitrary the human intellect looks within nature. There were eternities during which it did not exist. And when it is all over with the human intellect, nothing will have happened.

>> No.4172213

>>4171651
>Well if you get in heaven, it's pretty much assumed that your spirit has matured enough that you will only do good.

so there's no free-will in heaven?
so there's a type of free-will that only does good?

why not just make mature souls in the first place.

>> No.4172247

>>4172194
Protip: If you're challenging a statement that many great philosophers hold true, you're probably wrong. How do you not see that God's existence gives meaning? If life is an effect of God, then there is a purpose. It doesn't matter what fucking arbitrary purpose it is, the fucking God of the universe prescribed it. Doesn't the weight of his character alone prescribe meaning?

>> No.4172249

>>4172247
Well maybe you could point me at some literature. But it seems like an old fashioned concept. Why couldn't I make an arbitrary meaning for myself? It might hold the same value in my mind.

>> No.4172269

but evil does not exist without god, then it's all about the existence of God.

>> No.4172293

God is not good. God transcends morality.

/thread

>> No.4172301

>>4172293
i'm ok with that. the concept of an indiferent god is pretty logic...and cool.

>> No.4172302

>>4172293
>God is not good. God transcends morality.

how do you have such knowledge?

>> No.4172311

>>4172302
Bible. Aquinas. Leibniz. Kant. Augustine. Jonathan Edwards.

also just basically morality is a human creation. the natural world is not moral. God is by definition transcendent.

>> No.4172312

>>4172302

can we say that we have knowledge when we're talking about god?

>> No.4172314

>>4172311
>by definition

don't take this literally, you know what i mean. inherently. inextricably. fundamentally.

>> No.4172324

>>4172311
>God is by definition transcendent.

by whose definition? By my definition he doesn't exist

>> No.4172329

God: noun, referring to the semi-conscious, ignorant, impotent transcendent creator of our universe who fucked everything up from day 1 and then decided to ignore his creation completely.

>> No.4172330

According to a lot of near death experiencers the reason we suffer is to learn love and compassion.

>> No.4172331

>>4171402
Discrepancy between human good and godly good.

>> No.4172332
File: 83 KB, 600x800, atheist.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172332

>>4172011

>> No.4172335

>>4172324
>god is a dude with a beard in the sky xD dumb relgious people atheism means im smart what is metaphysics

>> No.4172344

>>4172324
lol God cannot "not exist"

>> No.4172346

Awesome, /lit/.

Several untouched, great posts in this thread and yet it devolved into irrelevant, irreverent run-of-the-mill trolling antics.

Only this board could have so many great things to say, but always fails to construct a thorough, engaging discussion.

>> No.4172347

>>4172335
>implaying all atheist = fedora

datstrawman.jpg

>> No.4172351

>>4172346
Fuc yu nigger

>> No.4172360
File: 1.74 MB, 400x225, 1379297847406.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172360

>>4172346

>> No.4172364
File: 1022 KB, 500x332, 1380618829576.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172364

>>4172344
>lol God cannot "not exist"

actually by the nature of infinity, God can neither exist nor not-exist, since he transcends the category of existence itself.

>> No.4172373

>>4171402
Because Elohim is neither one nor the other. Lrn2 Jewish mythology, phag.

>> No.4172399

>>4171402
Because he is ineffable.

>> No.4172428

>>4171402
I think the issue is that "good" and "evil" are creations of man, and not of God, for God created us in his image and thus we have the power to create and grow our own concepts and beliefs.

>> No.4172432

>>4171402

God is just a hypothetical assumption. A 'best guess' approach to explaining how things work and where we came from.

It's ancient ideology and it's time we gave up on this fairy tale and moved on.

>> No.4172455
File: 33 KB, 897x550, karma.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4172455

>>4171402

Good and Evil are two extremes of morality, which itself is an invention of our perception.

Perception is formed in early childhood, through parental techniques and other religious and media influences.

It is from our perception that a conscience is formed, based on what we were taught was right and wrong.

It also depends on your mental situation as well. Obviously, people with mental problems and disorders could have comparatively distorted views on morality.

I'm definitely not saying god/s don't exist or a belief in their existence isn't justified, but quite likely, strongly opinionated people applied their moral ideologies to religious texts and thus their content may not reflect exact truths. Explaining many religious text's slightly twisted views on morality.

That's what i think, not that it matters because most of you won't listen to me anyway.

>> No.4172578

>>4172207
I don't understand why people always fall back to this quote. It always sounds like the rantings of a nihilistic teenager (I suppose that's not too far from the truth). To phrase it so plainly, so inelegantly, with a clear lack of scientific knowledge misses the point.

>>4172247
God's existence gives meaning, but it isn't the only way for their to be meaning. I think you two are arguing different points.

>> No.4172635

the rain falls indiscriminantly

>> No.4172669

What the fuck does omnipotent even mean?
Wouldn't god be both infinitely good and infinitely evil simultaneously? Wouldn't he be infinite in every possible virtue, vice, and miscellaneous quality, each of which would cancel out the opposite, therefore rendering him null?

>> No.4172995

>>4171402
Do atheists really honestly think that this beats religion? This problem is so old it even has its own name.

http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodicy

>> No.4173003

>>>/pol/21568410

/thread

>> No.4173033

You, as a human, are not able to judge aything as objectively good or evil. The problem leads straight to calling God evil, which makes no sense. Good is, by definition (assuming you accept a christian framework), anything that God judges to be good. so god himself can't be evil.

>> No.4173061

>>4172995
>it problem has been named therefore it has a solution

The solutions are 'attempts' and like with most philosophical to answer the most difficult and most pertinent questions, the attempts are specious but compelling in different ways to different people depending on your intellectual background.

Also, don't try posting the link as if you're the first one in the thread to discover theodicy.

>> No.4173062

>>4173003
That guy has zero knowledge on early christianity. This is The Holy Blood And The Holy Grail all over again

>> No.4173082

>>4173062
Plus the discussion on theodicy, and indeed any political, philosophical and hell even scientific discussion, shows that there are incredibly numerous ways to rationalise our ideas and truths. for the answer to any of our questions and problems, what proves ultimately compelling to a society comes not from argumentation, delivery or anything specific to the points made. If there's still a churches and mosques with people milling around them and monarchs and statesmen and your family and friends still refer to God then no library of polemics could stagnate the current

>> No.4173437

>>4171402
"As Augustine says (Enchiridion xi): "Since God is the highest good, He would not allow any evil to exist in His works, unless His omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil." This is part of the infinite goodness of God, that He should allow evil to exist, and out of it produce good. " -Thomas "MotherFucking" Aquinas

While it is not the most emotional satisfying answer out there, it does seem to answer the basic question of natural evil (earthquakes and the like) while answers half of moral evil, leaving the other half to free will.

>> No.4173452

>>4173437
On the practical side: "Sorrow can be alleviated by good sleep, a bath and a glass of wine."

Thomas had his shit together.

>> No.4173456

>>4173452
Indeed. One could say that he was celibate because "He didn't give a fuck".

Chase that prostitute out, carve cross on door.
Like a boss.

Am I speaking to another Thomist?

>> No.4173458

>>4173452
>>4173437

Me love me some Tommy A

>> No.4173459

>>4173437
it's just spin

Better off just pondering the question and not trying to answer it as under close examination you'll still be wondering.

>> No.4173463

>>4173456
>betas

>> No.4173465

>>4173459
Like I said, it leaves one answering the "Why" still, but it does answer the formal argument of the existence of evil and an all powerful and all good God.

>> No.4173474

>>4171402

whatisfreewill.jpeg

>> No.4173481

>>4173465
it answers with an indescribable, inconceivable justice. useful in the abstract but then again sophistry can find ways to counter and refute everything.
It doesn't help me understand how 46 year old father can stalk and murder another child.
We could argue the philosophy grounds our morality for responding to crimes like that but I could also say that we could have any and all theodicy justifications and our response to crimes like that would be the same.

>> No.4173787

>>4173481
I don't quite understand the last sentence you posted, but you seem to have ignored what I said regarding the purpose of the argument. This IS an abstraction. The only purpose of it is to give an answer to (natural) evil without compromising God's goodness or his omnipotence. Just because you cannot conceive of it does not mean it is not true. It is simply the refutation of the argument posted, not a positive doctrine to cling to when "bad" things are going on.

>> No.4173791

Because Earth is our planet.
>We're gardeners not slaves.
>>We're doing a terrible job, we just can't get fired.

>> No.4174145

>>4173456
Nope, I'm edgy and euphoric as fuck, I just recognise good stuff when I see it even though I don't agree.

>> No.4175950

>>4171402
>>4171421
>>4171686
>>4171792
>>4171850
>>4171899
>>4172311
>>4172455
IMO the basic problem humans have with the existence of G_D is that we assume many elements of his/her existence or transcendence as fact instead of myth, or that we ascribe characteristics to his/her persona by way of default. For instance, why do we assume that god doesn't make evil happen all the while he/she is "good" him/herself?
Also, why do we always assume that our definition of logic is the same as the divine definition of logic? Even at a human level, autistic people challenge that notion and bring about rather genius aspects of mental capacity to debunk the understanding that they are crazy.
The biggest question should, then, probably not be, why is there evil, or why does G_D allow evil, but rather what does he/she plan with it, and how come we weren't brought in to this knowledge.
Free will doesn't really get us far down the whole "love Him/her" route, simply because omnipotence to fix what humans break doesn't answer the question of omniscience, and if god knew what was about to happen, why would he/she allow it to happen.

>> No.4176368

>>4171402
You are implying he would give a shit about imperfect mortal beings.

>> No.4176387

>>4171402
dude, the world is /beyond/ good and evil, simple as that.