Special Pleading and the PoE (Part 2)

[Trailblazer]

(I’m sorry if I sound like I’m repeating myself, I just want to be clear)
I suppose the way I think that’s challengeable is this.
God has provided a way to end all suffering, even childhood cancer. Personally, I think this is what the rapture of the Bible is. When we have become collectively moral, our conscious invoking of Heaven on Earth will result in its physical emanation on Earth, ending suffering. With and since the death of Jesus, it has been possible for humanity to do this.
All that is left is for humanity to consciously do this. Just as we consciously turned the world of no suffering into a world of suffering, with our immorality. I theorize it’s our purpose to do the reverse, consciously turn this world of suffering into one of no suffering.
The PoE says God let’s the kid suffer, but perhaps He has already provided a way to prevent the suffering. It is us, who needs to do our part.

And if God did everything for us what would there be left for us to do, just sit around enjoying ourselves, thinnking only of ourselves? I don't think that is what this life is for.

Matthew 16:24-26 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?

“Say: Deliver your souls, O people, from the bondage of self, and purify them from all attachment to anything besides Me. Remembrance of Me cleanseth all things from defilement, could ye but perceive it. Say: Were all created things to be entirely divested of the veil of worldly vanity and desire, the Hand of God would in this Day clothe them, one and all, with the robe “He doeth whatsoever He willeth in the kingdom of creation,” that thereby the sign of His sovereignty might be manifested in all things. Exalted then be He, the Sovereign Lord of all, the Almighty, the Supreme Protector, the All-Glorious, the Most Powerful.”
Gleanings, pp. 294-295

 

[Trailblazer]

This still doesn't register to me at least as very just. For instance if I had children and they were all suffering, and I could prevent that suffering, but I told them "sorry, you will all still suffer until your brother gets with the program," that isn't very just. That's still a problem with benevolence.

What about adults who are suffering? Don't they matter?

 

[an anarchist]

That's still a problem with benevolence.

my argument here will be decidedly more subjective in its reasoning.
Is it benevolent enough that Jesus died on the cross, blameless as He was? (As I believe) is it benevolent enough that God has given us the conscious power and means to end the suffering of all humanity for eternity? I believe so. This is a matter and result of my opinion and initial reasoning and beliefs.

 

[Meow Mix]

What about adults who are suffering? Don't they matter?

Of course adult suffering matters; it was just a digestible example to make a point.

 

[Meow Mix]

my argument here will be decidedly more subjective in its reasoning.
Is it benevolent enough that Jesus died on the cross, blameless as He was? (As I believe) is it benevolent enough that God has given us the conscious power and means to end the suffering of all humanity for eternity? I believe so. This is a matter and result of my opinion and initial reasoning and beliefs.

An omnipotent and omniscient being doesn't have to jump through hoops like this to accomplish goals, however. If there is still suffering and the being intends there not to be, that means the being intends there to be suffering (given omnipotence/omniscience).

 

[an anarchist]

An omnipotent and omniscient being doesn't have to jump through hoops like this to accomplish goals

I view it as God abiding by the natural law He created. (Karma) Just because it would be a lot more convenient for us if God snapped His fingers and made everything better, perhaps this is not possible. Then is He omnipotent? It is a good point.
Something I think can help illustrate a point is a prophecy from the final book of the Bible, Revelations, which deals primarily with eschatology.
So, according to the Bible, in the end, God is going to kick the antichrist into Hell and establish His 1000 year Messianic kingdom and all that good stuff. The Bible prophesies, that some people, who are in Heaven, after the end of the Antichrist and all that, during the 1000 year kingdom, will rebel. People, who are in Heaven on earth in perfect bodies and minds, they will rebel against God and doom themselves for eternal hellfire.
The Bible says that people in Heaven will still yet bring upon suffering from themselves. Is this perhaps something that is inescapable? Humanity sinned at the garden of Eden, then the Bible records that angels from Heaven sinned and fell down to Earth. Then it says people in future Heaven will do the same.
The sin always results in suffering, yet it seems to be something inescapable. If my God can not prevent this, is He not omnipotent? If He could prevent this, but does not, is He benevolent? Those are good points, you have moved me on the topic

 

[Meow Mix]

I view it as God abiding by the natural law He created. (Karma) Just because it would be a lot more convenient for us if God snapped His fingers and made everything better, perhaps this is not possible. Then is He omniscient? It is a good point.
Something I think can help illustrate a point is a prophecy from the final book of the Bible, Revelations, which deals primarily with eschatology.
So, according to the Bible, in the end, God is going to kick the antichrist into Hell and establish His 1000 year Messianic kingdom and all that good stuff. The Bible prophesies, that some people, who are in Heaven, after the end of the Antichrist and all that, during the 1000 year kingdom, will rebel. People, who are in Heaven on earth in perfect bodies and minds, they will rebel against God and doom themselves for eternal hellfire.
The Bible says that people in Heaven will still yet bring upon suffering from themselves. Is this perhaps something that is inescapable? Humanity sinned at the garden of Eden, then the Bible records that angels from Heaven sinned and fell down to Earth. Then it says people in future Heaven will do the same.
The sin always results in suffering, yet it seems to be something inescapable. If my God can not prevent this, is He not omniscient? If He could prevent this, but does not, is He benevolent? Those are good points, you have moved me on the topic

It does resolve the PoE to drop or amend the premises, so the PoE would no longer apply if they were even slightly different.

 

[blü 2]

This would just be abandoning omnibenevolence (which does resolve the PoE).

Actually, if we look at the record, God never says and never does, and the world behaves exactly as if [he] existed only as a concept or thing imagined in individual brains.

But as you say, that's outside the parameters of this thread.

 

[an anarchist]

omnipotent

I meant omnipotent, not omniscient, in my above post

 

[stvdv]

The Problem of Evil

This might be more of an Abrahamic problem. I believe in God, BUT I do not believe in an Omnibenevolent God (like you described),

hence

Problem of Evil does not exist,

 

[Meow Mix]

This might be more of an Abrahamic problem. I believe in God, BUT I do not believe in an Omnibenevolent God (like you described),

hence

Problem of Evil does not exist,

Yep, the PoE does not affect any gods that don't have the properties given in the premises. It is a very hyperspecific argument.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

So the Covid-19 vaccines have not prevented any suffering?
Maybe they should be taken off the shelf and see what happens.

In preventing suffering, vaccine researchers obviously robbed us of our "free will"... somehow.

That's why God didn't just stop COVID-19: it is necessary because of "free will."

... or at least it was necessary from late 2019 on. Preventing COVID-19 didn't violate anyone's "free will" before that. And at some point in the future - coincidentally, just as scientists and medical professionals eradicate the disease - God will decide that he can once again prevent further outbreaks without violating anyone's "free will."

But right now, stopping COVID-19 would violate our "free will." This is why God isn't doing it.

Makes perfect sense.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Well that's a quite jump in logic. You went from no one knows for sure either way to ... we are justified in saying God is malevolent but not in saying he's benevolent.

I think there is far more evidence for the latter actually.

I think @Meow Mix makes sense. If you're going to bring up the idea that hidden factors outside our knowledge might alter the morality of a purported act - or failure to act - on the part of God, then this goes both ways.

If we can't conclude that an apparently evil act is actually evil because hidden factors might make it good, then we also can't conclude that an apparently good act is actually good because hidden factors might make it evil.

This leaves us with no reason whatsoever to conclude that God is good unless you bring some other line of argument into the picture.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

You may have addressed it before, I didn't see Part 1. The easiest solution to the "Problem of Evil" is, plainly, that Abraham's god is not all-powerful or all-benevolent. Monotheism in all it's horrible construct lends a large hand as well, but it's a problem very easily solved with a simple shedding of pride.

 

[Meow Mix]

You may have addressed it before, I didn't see Part 1. The easiest solution to the "Problem of Evil" is, plainly, that Abraham's god is not all-powerful or all-benevolent. Monotheism in all it's horrible construct lends a large hand as well, but it's a problem very easily solved with a simple shedding of pride.

Yes, the PoE is premise based; dropping any of the premises drops the entire argument.

Of course other arguments can then be made, but what you say is correct.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You may have addressed it before, I didn't see Part 1. The easiest solution to the "Problem of Evil" is, plainly, that Abraham's god is not all-powerful or all-benevolent. Monotheism in all it's horrible construct lends a large hand as well, but it's a problem very easily solved with a simple shedding of pride.

That's not really solving the Problem of Evil; that's just arguing that a particular god isn't one to whom the PoE applies.

And meanwhile, the Abrahamic religions are diverse. Plenty of Abrahamics do maintain that their god is the omnimax sort of deity to which the PoE applies.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

That's not really solving the Problem of Evil

It does, because the Problem of Evil came about in 10,400 HE when the Church had to try and answer how evil could still exist when god was all-powerful and all-good. It's from that where we get the Christian notion of "Hell"; devils, demons, and "Satan"; and notions like "He works in mysterious ways." Without the claim of a perfect god, or the only god unvexed by more maligned deities, the "Problem of Evil" becomes more "Crap Happens".

I do know that plenty of Abrahamics maintain their omnibenevolent/potent/scient deity, but they also maintain the contradictions that come with it; namely The Plan being foiled by both "Satan" and the presence of "evil" acts and events.

 

[Meow Mix]

It does, because the Problem of Evil came about in 10,400 HE when the Church had to try and answer how evil could still exist when god was all-powerful and all-good. It's from that where we get the Christian notion of "Hell"; devils, demons, and "Satan"; and notions like "He works in mysterious ways." Without the claim of a perfect god, or the only god unvexed by more maligned deities, the "Problem of Evil" becomes more "Crap Happens".

I do know that plenty of Abrahamics maintain their omnibenevolent/potent/scient deity, but they also maintain the contradictions that come with it; namely The Plan being foiled by both "Satan" and the presence of "evil" acts and events.

The PoE goes all the way back to at least Epicurus

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

Is that really a "Problem of Evil" (I've always learned this was a Church thing), and more a statement against "all-powerful" gods? Monotheism wasn't really a big thing anymore and yet when Epicurus lived, so I'm not sure how accurate his quoted statements are referring to "God" (capitalized). Also I'm personally skeptical in that it's only attributed to Epicurus, but was a notion popularized by David Hume in the 1700's (Gregorian).

 

[Irate State]

The hundred-dollar question is why God should prevent human suffering. "Because God is omnipotent" is not an answer. Aside from the fact that "some people" don't like suffering is there any other reason God should eliminate suffering?

What in incredible myopic and insensitive line.
Another reason why god should end suffering could be for him to just quit being such an @$$hole. Those mysterious ways have appalling consequences outside internet forums.