The problem of evil

[William]

Q: Is the statement "Then there is "The problem of evil"" one of fact or conjecture? [science or opinion] In realty, does such a problem actually exist?

The problem of evil refers to the challenge of reconciling belief in an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God, with the existence of evil and suffering in the world. eta:{SOURCE}

[TRANSPONDER]

(trans wrote) "I don't believe in a tangible existing 'evil' and I don't think that Jesus did, all his references to 'evil' in G-Mark were about the sinful things that folks could do.... Sin was simply a word to describe people braking the laws, and Sin led to sickness, weakness, varying kinds of failure. I sometimes wonder about any agendas amongst the translators."

Anyway, I don't know a Christian who really really takes notice of what Jesus said about it........ In G-Matthew Jesus made a very clear point when he said '{5:37} But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.'........ and then they swear on bibles, swear before god, swear on their brother's baby........ no simple yes and no for Christians.

Evil? Meh......... the idea of badness in any given community or at any particular time.

In relation to the bible GOD, how does the above matter? If evil doesn't really exist except in the way the human animal might do his business and thus coming from a misinterpretation of nature -I think that this would vindicate any GOD creator.

No, because nature is not evil other than in the human viewpoint, which is taking human well being as a basic of what is good and what is evil. We know the instinctive reaction to a natural killing or what we'd consider unethical or atrocious. There are plenty of examples of that in nature and of course does not indicate a god, but evolution coming up with survival methods that look appalling to us. The whole social evolution process of empathy (instinctively we don't like something done to us, and we have reason enough to put ourselves in the position of others) and this extension of human well being to caring about the well -being of others leads to the basic of human ethics globally - Reciprocity and the golden rule. None of this indicates a god, let alone the god of any religion.

Re your sometimes wondering about any agendas amongst the translators.

Do you think it possible that the storytellers were translating their subjective experience were also misinterpreting nature?

I don't know the context or relevance of that, so I'll leave that to others.

[William]

I read your statement of opinion. Very enlightening.

I am interested in hearing what Old Badger One Kenobi has to say in answer to my questions.

[oldbadger]

i don't believe in a tangible existing Evil either, just a set of human conventions, and like such varying from culture to culture and getting regular revisions (with the religions fighting against them and then getting into line and pretending it was all their idea). And I don't think any of the Gospels are a valid or reliable guide to what Jesus may have thought or indeed said; but some will probably disagree with me.

Fair enough..... if a person doesn't accept anything that Jesus said as reported in gospels then that's it.... there's nothing left about J to report.

I take notice of those short and sweet comments that could have been remembered, whereas the long winded speeches (teachings! ) have got to be waffle, imo. But it really doesn't matter to me, it's a bit like somebody telling me that marmalade sandwiches are unhealthy rubbish....I'm just going to make one anyway....

[oldbadger]

And that friends is what we in the Trade call "A Flounce".

The above was sent to another....
That's twice that I have read about 'flounces', and I don't think I've ever done one.
I've put it on my bucket list...... I just need an excuse now.

[oldbadger]

In relation to the bible GOD, how does the above matter? If evil doesn't really exist except in the way the human animal might do his business and thus coming from a misinterpretation of nature -I think that this would vindicate any GOD creator.

I suppose it would, William, or at least it would vindicate the people who produced those laws.
I don't understand your 'misinterpretation of nature' comment, but when humans legislated the 613 these were just a blueprint for the production of a strong, safe, secure, coalesced, healthy and successful people, and busting the 613 was SIN which could lead to weakness, insecurity, unsafe, broken, sick unsuccessful folks. Sin leads to Sickness.
Evil? Meh...!

Re your sometimes wondering about any agendas amongst the translators.

Do you think it possible that the storytellers were translating their subjective experience were also misinterpreting nature?

I think that translators have a real problem in transferring communications from one language to another, but I don't understand your comment about 'misinterpreting nature'. The Israelites were just a part of nature, as are we.... now we get nature wrong all the time and nature keeps on smacking us in the mouth, but you would need to explain to me how 'getting nature wrong vindicates God'. I don't even believe in an aware, interested, involved God..... so I need your help, about your question.

[oldbadger]

I read your statement of opinion. Very enlightening.

I am interested in hearing what Old Badger One Kenobi has to say in answer to my questions.

What?....... the bloke with the light sabre?
Oh.....yes!
Now if I had one of those........... yes!

[William]

[Replying to oldbadger in post #155]

I think that translators have a real problem in transferring communications from one language to another, but I don't understand your comment about 'misinterpreting nature'. The Israelites were just a part of nature, as are we.... now we get nature wrong all the time and nature keeps on smacking us in the mouth, but you would need to explain to me how 'getting nature wrong vindicates God'. I don't even believe in an aware, interested, involved God..... so I need your help, about your question.

Thanks for your answer OB.

My comment has to do with your own shared ideas re "Nature being The boss".

I can agree with that because it is obviously true.

Since I suspect that Nature is mindful - not just that human beings were some happy accident of nature which produced mindfulness - and I think it is possible that the planet itself may well be a mindful entity, so regard the existence of Earth to being evidence of mindful creativity, when I see statements about nature which confer boss-hood and when I compare such to theistic notions of gods - I can't help but wonder if the two are - not only related - but actually speaking about the same thing in different ways, and this is what I am referring to when I asked if you think it possible that the theist storytellers were translating their subjective experience, were also misinterpreting nature.

In relation to the bible GOD, how does the above matter? If evil doesn't really exist except in the way the human animal might do his business and thus evil-doing is coming from a misinterpretation of nature - in that little to no thought is given to consequences of said business - I think that this would vindicate any GOD creator even if the god-creator was the Earth itself.

For what about nature [Earth/The Boss] can we point to and say "evil"?

So the misinterpretation said another way, is the human animal projecting their own evil-doing onto nature - essentially blaming nature for having to exist within nature and having to resort to evil-doing for the sake of whatever business is being supported by such activity.

If one accepts for the sake of argument that the planet is sentient, is it acceptable to blame a planet for giving one the ability/opportunity to behave with ill intent [evil] i, and if not, then why is it acceptable to blame any god-idea for the evil that humans do?

Asked another way;

Does the problem of evil go away if the idea of a creator-god also goes away?

[TRANSPONDER]

And that friends is what we in the Trade call "A Flounce".

The above was sent to another....
That's twice that I have read about 'flounces', and I don't think I've ever done one.
I've put it on my bucket list...... I just need an excuse now.

Theists do flounces... you've seen it "No point in talking to the closed -minded...", "Atheists will never accept any evidence for God" and of course, "Atheists are so WUDE", The point is to find an excuse to run away when they are about to get beat.

An alternative (1) is apologetics of the 3rd kind - cheek and snark. It enables them to think they are holding up the debate while they are trying to wear out the atheist (see the Gish Gallop or information overload), get the Last Word or start a fight which gives them the excuse to stalk off ("I could have won this, but this debate is beneath my dignity.") Now you know what a Flounce is.

(1) and also the Deep Dive - they vanish from the debate and then reappear a fortnight or month later, making the same arguments.

[Replying to oldbadger in post #155]

I think that translators have a real problem in transferring communications from one language to another, but I don't understand your comment about 'misinterpreting nature'. The Israelites were just a part of nature, as are we.... now we get nature wrong all the time and nature keeps on smacking us in the mouth, but you would need to explain to me how 'getting nature wrong vindicates God'. I don't even believe in an aware, interested, involved God..... so I need your help, about your question.

Thanks for your answer OB.

My comment has to do with your own shared ideas re "Nature being The boss".

I can agree with that because it is obviously true.

Since I suspect that Nature is mindful - not just that human beings were some happy accident of nature which produced mindfulness - and I think it is possible that the planet itself may well be a mindful entity, so regard the existence of Earth to being evidence of mindful creativity, when I see statements about nature which confer boss-hood and when I compare such to theistic notions of gods - I can't help but wonder if the two are - not only related - but actually speaking about the same thing in different ways, and this is what I am referring to when I asked if you think it possible that the theist storytellers were translating their subjective experience, were also misinterpreting nature.

In relation to the bible GOD, how does the above matter? If evil doesn't really exist except in the way the human animal might do his business and thus evil-doing is coming from a misinterpretation of nature - in that little to no thought is given to consequences of said business - I think that this would vindicate any GOD creator even if the god-creator was the Earth itself.

For what about nature [Earth/The Boss] can we point to and say "evil"?

So the misinterpretation said another way, is the human animal projecting their own evil-doing onto nature - essentially blaming nature for having to exist within nature and having to resort to evil-doing for the sake of whatever business is being supported by such activity.

If one accepts for the sake of argument that the planet is sentient, is it acceptable to blame a planet for giving one the ability/opportunity to behave with ill intent [evil] i, and if not, then why is it acceptable to blame any god-idea for the evil that humans do?

Asked another way;

Does the problem of evil go away if the idea of a creator-god also goes away?

I'll leave this to the Badger, but it's a simple one: Of course not, because it is a human thing based on evolutionary instincts. And yes, the evils in nature are entirely humans projecting their own values on nature which does not do Morals, only survival, however it needs to. Since no Creator -god was needed for it the lack of one doesn't affect it.

You're welcome ol' Badger, you can take the rest of the day off.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #146]

2 Corinthians 6:15 Context

Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.

I believe the context supports my point, William. They have no part with one another.

[Replying to tam in post #121]

"Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour." 1Peter 5:8

Words attributed to YHWH: [aka "The Lord Almighty."]

I will be unto them as a lion: as a leopard by the way will I observe them:

I will meet them as a bear that is bereaved of her whelps, and will rend the caul of their heart, and there will I devour them like a lion: the wild beast shall tear them. [Hosea
Chapter 13]

Please explain the obvious similarities.

A metaphor describing an activity.

What do you THINK it means?

The Problem of Evil exists due to dubious acts attributed to YHWH.
Since Christians insist that YHWH is the Father Jesus was referring to, then the problem hasn't gone away.

Christ was referring to the Most Holy One of Israel (YHWH).

The "problem" has not gone away because there is confusion and misunderstanding; and of course because suffering is very much a part of this world. Much of that suffering is caused by man to his fellow man; some of it is the Adversary (such as in the case of Job), and then there is the sin/error in the flesh that causes illness/disease/death - that goes all the way back to Adam and the choices he made for this world and the life in it (including his own offspring).

In what way do you believe that the Jesus character exemplifies the nature of YHWH?

I do not know a "Jesus character".

But Christ, the Holy One of God (also known as the Truth), reveals His Father as His Father truly is... and what His Father truly desires. His mercy, the work that He continues to do that we might have life, His love, etc.

Also please hear this video as it relates to how the Hebrews differ in perspective from what you are saying as a Christian.

I know how some Jewish perspectives differ on the subject of "Satan".

But you said you based your idea off the BIBLE. The bible includes the NT (various authors and books), including Revelation, and including things that Christ said about the Adversary (the one called Satan, the dragon, the ancient serpent, the devil). So our conversation includes all of that evidence, as well as stuff in the OT.



Peace again.

[William]

[Replying to tam in post #159]

I do not know a "Jesus character".

Does it confuse you when folk use the Biblical name?

Are you speaking of someone else perhaps?

I know how some Jewish perspectives differ on the subject of "Satan".

But you said you based your idea off the BIBLE. The bible includes the NT (various authors and books), including Revelation, and including things that Christ said about the Adversary (the one called Satan, the dragon, the ancient serpent, the devil). So our conversation includes all of that evidence, as well as stuff in the OT.

To remain in truth one has to consider the possibility that Christianity and the NT are appropriations of the Hebrew idea of YHWH by the Greek/Roman cultures and in that, a misrepresentation of YHWH [and Satan] has occurred. Certainly many Jewish folk think that is the case.

Also to note;

GM: It is what it is
[RTS =8:55]

William: FTL;

This all plays into GODs Plan to bring about the ultimate harmonization and realization of the spreading of truth to the entire world

{SOURCE}

The above is from a recent conversation and the Rabbi in the video is commenting on why YHWH allowed the rise of Christianity and Islam to happen.

[Replying to tam in post #121]

"Be alert and of sober mind. Your enemy the devil prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour." 1Peter 5:8

Words attributed to YHWH: [aka "The Lord Almighty."]

I will be unto them as a lion: as a leopard by the way will I observe them:

I will meet them as a bear that is bereaved of her whelps, and will rend the caul of their heart, and there will I devour them like a lion: the wild beast shall tear them. [Hosea
Chapter 13]

Please explain the obvious similarities.

A metaphor describing an activity.

It is obviously metaphor. You were asked to explain the similarities.

The "problem" has not gone away because there is confusion and misunderstanding; and of course because suffering is very much a part of this world. Much of that suffering is caused by man to his fellow man; some of it is the Adversary (such as in the case of Job), and then there is the sin/error in the flesh that causes illness/disease/death - that goes all the way back to Adam and the choices he made for this world and the life in it (including his own offspring).

Also, please explain why YHWH had no doubts about Job and was confident the accuser would not sway Job, but did have doubts with Adam and was not confident Adam could not be swayed...since that is what we are told happened - Adam was swayed - and we can assume that YHWH knew Adam would fail as surely as YHWH knew Job would not.