Scientific Morality and the Problem of Evil

[dianaiad]

In a very recent thread, the following was written by Divine Insight:

So the scientific morality is far more realistic. It doesn't even recognize that there are evil people. It simply recognized mental illness and that people who do bad things are simply driven to do them because of mental problems.

I was struck by it, a sort of 'throw away' comment in a post addressing something very different. Anything I wanted to say had absolutely nothing to do with the thread in which it was found.

So...new thread.

Subject to the definition of 'evil,' of course, which I define as any action done for selfish, immoral or unethical reasons, to deliberately cause harm, no matter how slight. Natural phenomena are not evil; they simply exist. Actions which may seem evil in the eyes of an observer may not be evil, depending on the knowledge of the actor, his motive and his ultimate purpose.

If someone disagrees with the above definition, please provide yours before engaging in this thread so that we will all know what we are talking about.

OK, definition given: here's the question.

The Problem of Evil is often considered to be a big obstacle to the Abrahamic idea of God; many consider it to be the one thing that disproves such a deity.

However, if DI is correct about 'scientific morality,' then there IS no evil. If there is none, how can it be a problem?

............is there really no evil?

Are all so-called evil acts the result of mental illness, so that the doers of evil cannot be blamed or held accountable?

[instantc]

without any evil in it might be causally impossible.

You've confused me again. I know what "causally" means, and I know what "impossible" means, but I don't know what "causally impossible" means.

I'm not a native speaker, so perhaps this was a poor choice of words on my part. Bear with me, what I mean is this. Suppose God exists and wants us to freely come to know him without applying any pressure or resorting to manipulation. In other words, he wants to have a world where everyone has freely chosen to come to know God. While such a world does not involve a logical contradiction per se, it might causally presuppose a previous world with some amount of evil in it. Evil could be necessary for people to freely choose to come to know God. He cannot simply create a world where people have already chosen to come to know God without first creating the world where the said choices take place. That's what I meant by 'causally impossible'. Such a world is not logically contradictory, but it is cannot be actualized without first creating a world with the necessary evil in it.

An omnipotent god can do anything that isn't logically impossible. So he wouldn't need evil to accomplish any goal other than evil itself.

While there is nothing contradictory in world B, creating world B (without first creating world A) could nevertheless be logically impossible, if world B causally presupposes world A. Therefore God couldn't, in this scenario, create world B without first creating world A.

To give a concrete example, suppose that world A is a world where Wiploc has won fifteen marathons and as a consequence has chosen to come to know God. This world cannot be actualized without first arranging fifteen marathons.

Similarly, if a world where a maximum amount of people have chosen to freely come to know God without pressure or manipulation causally presupposes a world with evil in it, then the evil in the world is a necessary mean to an end, even for God.

[arian]

An omnipotent god can do anything that isn't logically impossible. So he wouldn't need evil to accomplish any goal other than evil itself.

There was once a beautiful garden full of delicious fruit trees. Man could take and eat from any one of those trees, each with different texture, aroma, taste. God said to man; "See that tree in the middle of the garden? You are not to eat of it, not even to touch it, lest you die."

One day Eve came near that tree, and there was a serpent who could speak on that tree, .. and you know the rest of the story.

The fruit was not unpleasant to the eyes, it looked delicious. It was not poisoned, matter of fact after Eve tasted it, she said it was delicious, just as any other fruit in the Garden. Looked good, tasted good, so the fruit wasn't evil, right? Just like sin, by its action it looks and feels like any good that we do. We can use a knife to peel potatoes, clean fish or whatever to feed our family, and with the same motions use it to kill someone.

What was evil was disobeying God, who already knew what good and evil was. God knew what conflict was, He knew what He could create for enjoyment, for His pleasure, and He also knew what he could create that gave him discomfort, or that could ruin those good things that gave Him pleasure. So God knew good and evil, what makes him feel good and what works, and what makes him feel sick or what doesn't work, which is the same for every other creature God has created.

If any creature or created being goes against Gods already proven system (what is good for the individual and everyone else, and what isn't), God deals with it. He knows that doing things that oppose God, or that brings pain and suffering, or the potential for evil will eventually destroy all the good that God has created.

What I am saying is evident in our lives, especially today in these last days. This is not some New idea. Evil deeds ruin, and good deeds build up and increase enjoyment. So it wasn't the fruit from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil that was evil, but disobedience to the instruction to the One who already knows what works, and what doesn't.

So God said to His children created in His own image; "Fine. You want to know the difference between 'good and evil', then I will let thorns grow under your feet, and for you woman, I will multiply the pain when you give birth. Also, things will not go so well with you from now on, you will have to sweat and toil for the rest of your dying days to keep a garden, and then you will die."

Look, even Dahmer and Gacy enjoyed the good. They enjoyed that when they go to the store, anything they wanted or needed was right there in front of them, at a good price. They enjoyed the street signals working, enjoyed getting home safely every day, enjoyed the wine that didn't taste like vinegar, the beer that didn't taste like piss. But they used all that good and security that others worked so hard to provide for them for Evil.

So if the only way man can know the difference between good and evil is tasting it for themselves, then so it shall be. God has done it the right way. He has done no evil, man chose to take of the fruit. God even warned man not to test Gods wisdom or it will cause him his life.

What changed between the fall of man and the 6,000 years that followed? All the time that he has been experiencing pain, suffering and all sorts of evil?
Nothing.
Matter of fact as we can see today, man condones evil. He downplays it, ignores it, justifies it by fairytales like Evolution, and even denies it. What is even worse, he teaches it to his children, trains them in doing harm to themselves (drug abuse) and others, even if it's just through complex and realistic games.

God has prepared a special place for those that promote evil, there they will be able to spend eternity doing what they love. Only remember man, that all good things come from God, so hell will be void of the good that we still have here today. I don't think you will enjoy evil, or promoting evil in a place where all there is is 'evil.

[Zzyzx]

.

There was once a beautiful garden full of delicious fruit trees. Man could take and eat from any one of those trees, each with different texture, aroma, taste. God said to man; "See that tree in the middle of the garden? You are not to eat of it, not even to touch it, lest you die."

One day Eve came near that tree, and there was a serpent who could speak on that tree, .. and you know the rest of the story.

What an interesting tale -- complete with idealistic environment, "gods", a talking snake, and suitably naive (ignorant) humans.

Is there ANY evidence to indicate that it is more than imagination and wishful religious thinking?

[arian]

.

There was once a beautiful garden full of delicious fruit trees. Man could take and eat from any one of those trees, each with different texture, aroma, taste. God said to man; "See that tree in the middle of the garden? You are not to eat of it, not even to touch it, lest you die."

One day Eve came near that tree, and there was a serpent who could speak on that tree, .. and you know the rest of the story.

What an interesting tale -- complete with idealistic environment, "gods", a talking snake, and suitably naive (ignorant) humans.

Is there ANY evidence to indicate that it is more than imagination and wishful religious thinking?

No, it was just God. The snake is gone, since Lucifer was cast out of Heaven, he has limited power and can only tempt those that call upon him. He then uses the naïve ignorant humans to do favors for him like murder, robbery, deception, and then uses the other naïve humans to reward murder, robbery and deception.

I know this is evident in this world especially in these end-times more than any other time in history. Most of the people are openly serving Satan. Some admit it, some deny it in public, some deny it even to themselves, but you will know them by their fruits.

If this is evolution, then everything is part of evolution, including trains, planes and automobiles. Our conversation here then is only a reaction to our environment, area we lived in, parent influence, all by inbred instinct. By instinct we respond to certain words we hear or read without any logic or real thought behind it. Then we truly are just animals without having any real reason or plan for our action. Even DI will tell you this; there is no real evil or good, no right or wrong, just our body twitching in response to inside and outside influences.

When we dig for iron ore and melt it, hammer it out to form knives and swords we do it from involuntary natural instinct, no different than when the wildebeest are called and united cross the river to search out better pastures. Or the trees swaying in response to the wind.

We are then nothing but a weather board; a rope nailed to a piece of board and placed outside on the porch. When the rope is swaying, it's windy, when its wet it's raining, when it's ripped off the board, a tornado is about to rip through your house.