The "God" paradox

(This is more geared towards the Abrahmic notion of "God," please keep that in mind.)

I was thinking about this (thanks to my good ol' friend Epicurus) and would appreciate an explanation from the religious folk and/or discussion of any kind that has to do with "it."

Anyways.....

If god is benevolent (all loving), than he would want to stop evil no? So, is he willing but not able? If this is so, then he is not omnipotent (all powerful). If he is able but not willing, than he would clearly be malevolent (he can help to prevent evil, but does nothing). If he can both prevent evil and wants to prevent evil (benevolent) than why does evil exist? Perhaps he is neither able, nor willing to prevent it? However if so, than why would anyone refer to this being as "God" in the first place.

Basically the old God is antiquated spiel...

 

perhaps this malevolence, in that GOD doesn't intervene is a lesson, and inturn is loving by helping us to experience naturally. we can't learn when things aren't in our control. if we were puppets, would we think?

on another note this is simple, but without negatives in our life we can't experience goodness. the duality is crucial so that recognizing love is possible. perhaps (god?) knows this.

i suck at these convos though, but i thought id try

 

Omnipotent, benevolent, malevolent - too much conflict there man! Of course we're not puppets and learn by experience, how else can we progress in life? But it's our own mind that computes and reacts to experiences and helps us to grow and sort the wheat from the chaff. We don't need the imput of some supreme (and all of the aforementioned adjectives) being. Trust in yourself and you won't go far wrong.

 

Vibes your thoughts are always appreciated.

So, the bases of this "perhaps" is that God allows for "evil" to happen so that we may experience it and therefore be more aware of the "good" that happens. If so, then why is there so much evil? It really seems that the evil involved in the world of humans has outweighed that of the good....do we need so much of it in order to be aware. (Shitty) Example: If you had seen someone rape an individual or simply heard of it, would you need to see or hear of rape again another 10 times to know that it is evil and the opposite (treating that individual with respect) is good?

We wouldn't have to be puppets, if there were less evil...at the very least he could give us a better understanding of that which is good and bad, so as to make us more compassionate. Then again, I don't believe in "his" existence in the first place...this is more of a conversation to gather opinions as to why a practical, omnipotent and benevolent God would allow for such things.

Do you think that if God were to come down, and straight up say to people "This is bad, and this is good" that people would then be more inclined to do the good....it's still your choice, but now you've just got a reinforced point of view.

I don't believe in the Abrahamic notion of "God" anyways....I wanted to post this in either the Jewish, Islamic or Christian forums, but I thought that perhaps they'd take it as a snide like commentary regarding their beliefs.

 

Or perhaps we just misunderstand the notions of omnipotent and omniscient. on other threads,we've debated whether or not self-limitation by a deity in order to give humans free will is a compromise of omnipotence and omniscience. Hartshorne, in Omnipotence and Other Theological Mistakes argues that God conveys the equivalent of free will to the rest of Nature as well.

 

we are the ones who are supposed to put an end to evil... not him. And although I believe the universe and everything in it is God, let me say one thing to you.....HERETIC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Why is there so much evil? Well, perhaps it’s a part of the lesson. God, if there is one, again doesn’t intervene because our lives and the events committed create a lesson for us, whether or not as individuals or as a human race. Why do we need so many more good things to occur in order for the positive to be recognized? Humans, whether optimistic or not, are by nature vicarious, and thus we take note of negative things more quickly and are likely to reminisce on negatives longer than positive experiences or actions. It’s not necessarily that more bad things take place, but the good things frequently go unaccounted for. That is not up to God either, that is up to us, and how society arranges itself…why doesn’t God intervene? To help us evolve socially perhaps?

I’m not saying we’d be puppets if there was less evil, but if God intervened to eliminate any wrongful acts, then in a way we would all be puppets, because as a species, does perfection exist? Perfection meaning one who can not cause harm to anyone or anything, mentally, physically, or emotionally, does it exist? That’s the point, perfection doesn’t exist, people are not like puzzle pieces fitting to create a perfect picture. Instead, we feed off each other and react. Something one might consider a gift might bring another to tears. If god did intervene, removing any and all evil, that is when we would become puppets, in that someone would be controlling us, making sure we only did good things, and we wouldn’t have as much experience to go by…it just wouldn’t make sense.

 

there's no evil
durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

 

Vibes I love it! But I never said he needed to put an end to evil, simply that he could make it know what is evil and that we should not do it, by actually stating it himself rather than beating around the bush with a nearly 2,000 year old text.

Besides...I do not believe in this Gods existence anyways....the paradox that seems to beset him just makes no sense to me...and there's been nothing anyone has said yet to make me think otherwise. I'm not expecting not to be convinced, I was just hoping for explanations, so I appreciate your thoughts very much.

 

I liked C.S. Lewis' explanation of this issue best (keep in mind I am not a Christian). Lewis said that it was like a mother trying to get her kids to learn to clean up their room. When she sees the room, she's annoyed at the mess and wants to clean it herself. But she knows that if she does, they will never learn to clean it.

 

I like what he said....here's another metaphorical rendition of the current situation though:

If you tell your kids not to fight and one of them grabs a kitchen knife and attempts to kill the other, do you just sit back and allow them to learn?

 

Maybe God's just a really bad mother?

 

perhaps the notion of evil is there for you to look inward to find the balance within yourself...at that point realizing you yourself are god.

i tend to like that story.
"if you find me, and im you." ...somthing to that effect

 

Maybe it all just boils down to divine apathy?

@Archemetis
Yeah, "good" and "evil" may or may not truly exist and have predetermined inherent values, however the values we place upon acts as humans are predominantly on an individual bases. So, turning inwards is really our best bet when it comes to even attempting at maintaining a balance of any kind. In the end the only person you can really change is yourself anyhow. As far as us being a god, or part of god.....well I'm borderline pantheist/panentheist.

 

I agree.

 

I'll agree when epicurus says something that proves good/evil exists

 

Feel free to replace evil with suffering, IMO. The "suffering is a lesson" deal is such a cop out, since it's a lesson toward what?

Heaven? Unless there is a Heaven and an immortal soul who would (after learning its lessons) live in eternal bliss in individuated form, it would be immoral for God to allow us to suffer.

Problem is, individuation implies suffering and therefore the whole Abrahamic logic blows out of water.

 

Well, you would kind of have to explain what is wrong with suffering.
Yeah, everyone likes to avoid it and it doesn't feel nice, but don't we really learn a lot from suffering?
Besides, (trying not to get all new-agey) suffering and pleasure are meaningless without their opposites.

 

No. The burden of proof is on you, pal. What meaning? And like I said, learn what and for what?

 

What am I supposed to prove again?
And by meaning I meant that you can't have suffering without pleasure, and vice-verse.
Wishing for an existence that only has one or the other doesn't even make sense.
As for what you learn from suffering - I suppose you learn how to not suffer anymore.
But it's sort of like the old saying, you have to go through hell to get to heaven.
The question "for what" is basically asking "why" and that's completely unanswerable.