Printable View
Well, he does have an ironclad plan . . . you know he's an idiot when he can't even say "against." And the crowd is even scarier, cheering and supporting him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Darnay
Still, I don't think even (a supposed) God can be held responsible for the idiocy of the world. Free will and all that. If I'd point to anything and say, "How can God let that go," it'd be kids with cancer, genetics disease, Michael Bay films, etc.
It's true that lots of suffering is caused by the minds of humans. Yet aren't humans made in God's image? Also, being benevolent and loving, why does God not intervene where these injustices occur.
Yet it's not the whole story. Many people suffer in situations where they have no control. What about virtuous people who live in difficult areas? What about natural disasters? If God is omnipotent, why isn't something done about it? Why do animals suffer so much? Why does social inequality continue? Why isn't God involved? If God made the world, why is evil so apparent?
Yes, Paul does state that he was a Pharisee; yes, he does agonize in Scripture over his persecution of Christians.Quote:
Originally Posted by togre
I don't recall Scripture stating emphatically that he supported himself as a tent maker. He indeed states he is a tent maker, as was the Corinthian couple (I forget their names off-hand), which is why he lodged w/ them. We may assume he supported himself as a tent maker, but there is no account of him actually doing so. I'd reckon he'd no time for tents w/ all that traveling & evangelizing; in fact, I don't recall an occasion when there's a definitive statement of who was subsidizing his travels. Someone paid for all those sea excursions.
Do not mix up God's Grand Plan with Evil. We humans are capable of doing Good and Bad things, and we're God's creation. So it will only be common that God is capable of both as well.
The whole world God created is perfect. And by perfect, I don't mean most ideal (though we, as His most favoured of His creation, can make it so,) but perfect as in whole and complete. Of course, that involves the Good and the Bad aspects of all matters. Someone was saying things like why God created natural disasters such as Tsunami, earthquakes and cancer in newly-born kids. But if I drop all those thing out, natural disasters, I mean, I can see no other mean for God to punish us in this life for something bad we have done. We as humans do not have the mind or the wisdom to comprehend and the Grand Plan that God has for all creation. Our little minds seem to (always) think that Death is the end of all creation. Well, it's not, but we tend to think it is because our limited measures in realizing things (in other words, Science) never reached that level yet. We still can't make heads from tails in most cases like the vast outer space or the reality behind ghost stories.
I don't know about other religions but we Muslims have a lot of stories in the holy Quran about how some incidents can appear very unfair and unjust in the human eye, but are actually 'effects' of other much earlier incidents. The story of the prophet Mosa (or Mozes in the bible) comes to mind, the one where he takes a trip and loses a whale to find a wise man who's much wiser than Mosa himself. The wise man does three things that appear to the prophet of God as harmful, unjust and completely wrong. But then discovers otherwise later before they part ways. Some could be familiar with this by recalling the word Karma (we Muslims call it Fate or God's well.)
Good or Bad, it has nothing to do with God. Our days living on Earth are but a lifetime test. We only get to see the results once our souls leave our bodies, so it will do us little good questioning it now.
Imagine a world with nothing Bad in it... you can't, can you?
You can fool yourself saying you 'can' but you can't. Human nature, some may call it. Look at the world now, look at Africa, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, Syria and others. Look at Palestine's 60 years of killing and suffering. Forget Japan and America's natural disasters, those are tests laid upon us humans from God to see how we will react. But what about the rest of the things? Why is Bill Gates and few others are the richest (when speaking about money) people in the world while many others sleep with the fear of not getting enouph to eat tomorrow? Why are there people who strive and kill for power while all that others want is to live in peace? Aren't those tragedies human-made? Don't say God allowed them so God is Evil. Sure, God created all things but WE are the ones who allowed those things to happen. We can easily set a universal plan across all nations to coexit and share Earth's materials, oil and supplies. Like on human race... but why don't we do so? Human nature. God created us, yes, but then Humans were the only of his creations that accepted to bear the burden of the Mind. Thus, God bestowed Humans with a Mind while giving the rest of his creation Instinct. We can think for ourselves and change bad things to good to better... but we never do.
Why?
Is God really the Evil one in this picture? God created life on Earth, it's up to us to shape that Earth into Eden or Hell.
Those kids who are born with cancer aren't any different than the kids before them who had a silly flu but died also... because, back then, even flu was dangerous. Medicine evolves with Science, but so is illness. In fact, most of our recent illnesses are caused by yours trully. We have thought of million ways to create pollution. World war one and two, factories, car, nuclear studies, you name it. I don't have it for Science, but we're so irresponsible in this time and age, you have to admit it.
So is God evil?
No, God created all things, Good and Evil. A pefect complete world. It is us humans who promoted Evil ever so strongly. It is us who became so selfish and self-centred that we started to blame God for the Evil we created.
- These are my own thoughts about the subject.
But if I drop all those thing out, natural disasters, I mean, I can see no other mean for God to punish us in this life for something bad we have done.
How is the death of thousands of men women and children in the big Tsunami justified? What wrong doing needs such a punishment, and why does it include children, animals etc? Saying our small minds can't comprehend God's plan is unsatisfactory in my opinion.
I also think the punishment idea is very wrong and leads to the conveniant adoption of attitudes apparently proven by God's wrath. It is far too easy to ascribe a conveniant cause for this punishment. For example, I saw a documentary shot after the Tsunami in Malaysia where the chap being interviewed ascribed the Tsunami to God's punishment for woment wearing western clothes. Ridiculous as this is, this young chap was adamant about this, and thus made himself a danger to anyone not conforming.
Our days living on Earth are but a lifetime test.
How can a child be tested if they die in a natural disaster?
Forget Japan and America's natural disasters, those are tests laid upon us humans from God to see how we will react.
How can a good God organise such a cruel test?
So is God evil?
No, God created all things, Good and Evil. A pefect complete world.
If God created the world and humans in his image, why did he need to introduce evil? The sufferings of humans and animals throughout history have often been cased by the very beings created by God as you said. Saying his purposes are hidden makes no sense, and there have been few good explanations of it.
I prefer the explanation that says this is not a perfect world and we are born, suffer and die within it because of the conditions we create for ourselves through Karma. This is played out over countless lives and explains why the innocent are often caught up in karma generated in the past by reincarnation.
In this model there is no God to either blame or rely on, but the reliance has to come from yourself to improve the conditions for yourself and, more importantly, others.
I am a deist now. God created the world and just let the thing spin on its own.
Paulclem, you're right in everything you have written if Life was all there is.
While me, I believe in the afterlife. I believe that Death isn't the end of the line, only a portal that our souls can pass through without our bodies. Thus, those we call dead aren't really dead.
Your whole arguement about my views on the subject seem to revolve around the death of children. I believe those children are also part of the Grand Plan set for humanity. If this one life was all there is to it, I think humanity has no purpose to exist.
I also think the punishment idea is very wrong and leads to the conveniant adoption of attitudes apparently proven by God's wrath
How else would we stop and think about our actions? God's wrath doesn't come without a valid explanation, it's there open our eyes on the world whenever we close them. Please, do not bring me examples of extremists and - pardon the use of the word - nutjobs. To put it generally, I believe that natural disasters are lessons sent to us by God, because I believe - again - that death isn't the end.
Saying his purposes are hidden makes no sense, and there have been few good explanations of it
It's called Belief, my friend. My personal thoughts about this world and what Life could mean led me to this belief. Of course, there are many good explanations for me to believe so.
And about how perfect this world is, you say it's not perfect. I'm with you on that point, it's not perfect... we humans ruined it. We made all the differences between one another, gathered the world's power and supplies to selected nations while others suffered the lack of it. We are this close to destroying the O-zone and get BBQed by the sunrays. It's not perfect, this world of ours, but it was created to be perfect. We were unjust, and are still unjust to this planet that hosted our lives for countless ages.
I didn't mean to start a discussion about the matter, I merely dropped my two cents. But since you replied, I only find it necessary to reply back. Thank you.
"And about how perfect this world is, you say it's not perfect. I'm with you on that point, it's not perfect... we humans ruined it."
In the light of what we now know about the age of the world, compared to the age of humanity, this view is simply not tenable. Humans are a mere blip in the history of the world. Maybe humans are important in God's eyes, or maybe, as has been said before, He is much more fond of beetles.
In any event, pain, disease and natural calamities have been around for millions of years before humans arrived and. no doubt, will continue for eons after the last human mutant provides a supper for cockroaches.
Does not make too much sense to me. At least in Christian theology God is the ultimate paragon of goodness - the good itself, the very opposite of evil. The problem with original sin is to begin with that God cannot tolerate any sin (=evil) and that's why he had to become the sacrificial lamb himself in order for the jews to get into paradise - later a pharisees called Saul of Tarsus gave pagans the same privilege. I don't know how this whole sin thing works in Islam though - presumably in a quite similar fashion since the God is the same one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monamy
He sure must be having fun with his lab rats. Quite a trickster this Yahweh.Quote:
Forget Japan and America's natural disasters, those are tests laid upon us humans from God to see how we will react.
Your whole arguement about my views on the subject seem to revolve around the death of children. I believe those children are also part of the Grand Plan set for humanity. If this one life was all there is to it, I think humanity has no purpose to exist.
I use children as the most emotive example, but there are countless other tragedies occurring every day around the world. I would agree that this life is not all there is. I disagree as to the purpose - but that's a difference in worldview.
How else would we stop and think about our actions? God's wrath doesn't come without a valid explanation, it's there open our eyes on the world whenever we close them.
I don't see the need for a God/ Creator God for this to be a necessity. Reflection upon your actions and lessons can be learned without reference to a God. I think the same goes for your valid explanation.
Please, do not bring me examples of extremists and - pardon the use of the word - nutjobs.
I know this isn't a representation of Islam, and I didn't intend it to be so. I put it merely as an example of that view can develop if God's intentions are second guessed. No offence was intended.
I didn't mean to start a discussion about the matter, I merely dropped my two cents. But since you replied, I only find it necessary to reply back. Thank you.
Fine. I can appreciate that we come from different worldviews, and we wouldn't agree on details. I don't have a problem with that. I hope you had your 2 cents back. :D
Whifflingpin, humans are indeed important. There's a reason why God favoured humans on most of his creation. When I said that line (or statement) I meant our current time and age. There are many things that can be fixed if we can just be like ants. We should be colonized and be one hand in dealing with our problems and situations like poverty, stopping war, support the needy, stop polution, that kind of thing. Thank you for participating.
Freudian Monkey, again, I could have sent the wrong image when I said God is capable of both. I didn't mean He can be Good and Evil, but in Islam, God is capable of anything. God can reward your goodbeing and can punish your wrongdoing. Bad things aren't always Evil, there's an Ayah in the holy book that translate to this: "You may hate something (to happen) but it's good for you; and you may like something (to happen) but it's bad for you." Remember the story about Mosa I shared in my first post? (I hope I didn't go off-topic.) Thank you for participating.
Dear LitNet friend Paulclem, you didn't offend me at all, I assure you. I too didn't mean it in that context. On the contrary, I was pleased with your reply. I agree, we're on two different parts of the world and so our universal points of view about things can vary widely. But that's what makes the issue all the more interesting.
LitNet is blessed with members such as you all. I like a light exchange of ideas and thoughts, and I very much enjoyed this one.
I hope you had your 2 cents back. :D
lol I knew I used the 'two cents' idiom wrong somehow, I should avoid using things I don't fully understand :P Thank you all.
But if the Islamic God is supposed to represent the Platonic ideals of everything good, beautiful and righteous (as the Christian God does), then he cannot be capable of doing everything - namely, he is unable to tolerate sin (=evil) or commit an evil act himself. If he could, he wouldn't be the embodiment of goodness anymore and the whole philosophical base of the religion would fall apart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monamy
I'm not trying to debate Islam or Christianity, but God is represented in his Holy book (at least in Quran, wouldn't know about the others) that He can do anything. I quote directly from the book these words which are repeated in many pages: إن الله على كل شيء قدير which translates exactly that He is capable of everything. God 'can' do anything and everything, the proof is the very existence of Satan and his challenge to God in misleading humanity towards Hell. Hell is yet another thing of God's vast creation, Hell is nothing but everlasting pain and torture, but that doesn't mean God likes pain and to torture.Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian Monkey
Sorry if I can't explain it any better than that, language barriers irritate me sometimes.
It seems that the existence of suffering is being used to try to disprove the existence of a good God. I don't think that's correct. More specifically, I don't think Monamy's religion, or most any other theistic religion, is in any way undermined by the existence of suffering. These religions provide a compassionate explanation for suffering assuming the universe is a good creation of a good God.
The existence of suffering allows two important things to happen in the universe. First, it allows freedom for creatures to make mistakes. Second, it allows for change to occur. The first allows for evil and the second allows for evolution to occur.
Although compassion would encourage one to reduce suffering, the existence of suffering itself is good. Without it there would be no freedom. Without it there would be no change.
The real problem of suffering is a challenge for the worldviews that do not think the universe is good. These worldviews in my limited experience are atheistic. They also view life as a blind accident that one must suffer stoically. Their ethics, to the extent they don't recommend discontinuing life itself in some way, is fixated on eliminating suffering which is an impossible task. They want to fix a universe they view as fundamentally flawed, which probably shouldn't have been created in the first place.
A nice presentation of this worldview is in the Lars von Trier movie Melancholia: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1527186/ In this movie the earth is swallowed up by some rogue planet called Melancholia that is about 4 times earth's diameter. All life is destroyed on earth when this occurs. The message is the following: Life is itself evil. It was a random accident and because of that life only exists on earth. Melancholia is now removing life from the universe cleaning up the accident.
EDIT: So an answer to the question why does a good God allow suffering is because suffering allows us to have freedom, allows change to occur and motivates our compassion. An atheistic position that finds suffering a problem is challenged to find a way to make sense out of suffering without leading to an ethical conclusion like that expressed in Melancholia. If it ever reached such a negative conclusion all the atheistic ethics would have done was provide a contradiction of its own worldview.
I understand your point, don't worry about it. We use different types of arguments: yours are theological and mine philosophical. Thank you for your answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Monamy
Wow, some great discussion going on here. The question of good and evil and suffering in relation to God will never be answered I don't think. You will always have believers and non-believers staring each other down from opposite sides of the philosophical fence. I myself am immensely conflicted on this issue. Right now I fancy myself a deist. I think God created everything and then just let creation go on ticking like a watch. I think He in fact can be blamed for suffering, but humans must bear much of the blame as well. Things like blame and good and evil all actually seem somewhat nonsensical to me. I suppose my thoughts on the matter have a somewhat Nietzschean flavour. Blaming God or blaming a person for evil seems to me to be as ridiculous as blaming a tree for being green. But we are human, imperfectly evolved/created things, and so we hate and blame and project upon nature things that really only exist in our own minds. We mythologize.
Anyway. Just my two cents on the matter.
Many good points. And if we are going to speak about evil in the context of creation, we cannot assume that it is only our exclusive doing. Death is guaranteed 100%. We cannot hide our suffering in the postulation of an afterlife. At most, that must remain a belief and it is not the foundation of faith at which we cannot arrive so easily. "Nobody comes to the Father except through me."Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
It is the postulation of a good, personal, omnipotent God who created the universe. If everything comes from God, then how does this resonate with the good and omnipotent? I've heard the argument that life is meant to develop a person, the heaviest load is given to those with the broadest shoulders etc etc, but these are idealistic suggestions. You don't have to look far to find people destroyed by their load, and who are born into such circumstances where all they know is suffering and they have nom opportiunity to develop and improve themselves. It just doesn't make sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
So an answer to the question why does a good God allow suffering is because suffering allows us to have freedom
Who has the most freedom to think, write, reflect, generate ideas? Not the people with the most extreme suffering that's for sure. I think that statement comes from a place where we have the luxury of a little suffering. Would you be able to say that to a person who is a famine victim, or who has lost their family in a war, or suffered through natural disasters or any of the many sufferings that afflict humans?
I agree. The purpose of suffering, if it is to be viewed as a production of God, cannot be freedom. Freedom is a human aspiration that can only be achieved by men in a relative sense. Of course a God may be viewed as allowing suffering. That has little to do with producing freedom. If a God does not allow suffering, there would be no moral considerations. Men wouldn't have any ability to judge their actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulclem
In moments of despair I am a deist. In moments of happiness or evenness I am theologically quite Catholic. I am the latter about 80 percent of the time. I believe in purgatory. I don't care if there is no biblical basis for it. It makes a lot of sense to me. Dante is as much a theologian as Augustine to me.
Usually, Dante is not as funny as Agustine, but it suffices. Another one that babblesup serious jokes is Aquinas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
Suffering is a means to cleanse the germs and the evil seed through of which our body is made. Even Christ chose suffering to cleanse the evil deeds of mankind. besides it remind us that there is a supreme force who is above us all, and thus leads us to live a disciplined life with respect for supreme being.
I think in its better meaning, suffering is a means of paying for being stupid and refusing to learn what each day brings aboutQuote:
Originally Posted by utopianchrist
Life is hard; it's harder if you're stupid. ~ John Wayne
Tomorrow hopes we have learned something from yesterday. ~ John Wayne
Tomorrow is the most important thing in life. Comes into us at midnight very clean. It's perfect when it arrives and it puts itself in our hands. It hopes we've learned something from yesterday. ~ John Wayne
From what I've learned from the Bible it's so that man might know his measure; and give due respect and reverence to God. Even in suffering we call God superfluous: how much more so might we in uninterrupted prosperity?
Suffering does not cleanse. That's a big romanticized mistake. Nietszche said famously, "What does not kill me makes me stronger." Actually, it can make you weaker. It would appear that God did not intend suffering. That is unless he intended Adam and Eve to disobey Him in Eden. In this sense suffering is a contingent fact of human life, not an essential one. Would we suggest that in its initial absence Adam and Eve were unable to respect God, having no basis to acquire a disciplined life, and that nor will this be possible in heaven when suffering is no more?Quote:
Originally Posted by utopianchrist
How do you know that God did not intend suffering and that it is not a good thing? By "God" I mean that superhuman agent who created the universe which we know, from 21st century science, had a beginning 13.73 billion years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by russellb
Adam and Eve are characters from Genesis. One aspect of their behavior in these stories is that they had free will. They could disobey. They could make mistakes. The resulting suffering is a very useful way to help those who make mistakes to not repeat those mistakes in the future.
I do not know that God did not intend suffering, but life has taught me it's not a good thing. Ask someone with 'locked in' syndrome. Call me a naive utilitarian but I would have thought that the 'good' was located in happiness rather than suffering. This Nietszchean 'no pain no gain' thing is all very well but there is so much suffering that implies no gain... only pain. What's to be gained from chronic depression? And by the way what on earth has such a thing got to do with not repeating mistakes as you say.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo
Well you know i was kind of assuming for the sake of theological discussion that Genesis can be taken seriously. I stand by what I say about suffering being contingent rather than essential. This is in fact premised on Adam and Eve having free will although nowhere in the bible is the term actually used. There is something of a paradox in the story of the fall. If Adam and Eve were created morally perfect... in the image of God... how would they have been capable of the sin of disobedience. Freewill or no. Its rather like saying God with His perfect nature is capable of sin which, of course, would be a heresy.
The importance of the Genesis myth for Christians I think is that it accounts for the origin of evil (and therefore suffering) without, at least apparently, making God responsible for that evil. If God did actually intend and create evil (and therefore suffering) I would say that this is difficult to reconcile with the idea of a morally perfect God
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid. ~ John Wayne
[QUOTE=cafolini;1162079]Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid. ~ John Wayne[/QUOT
It depends what you mean by stupid i suppose. Someone who lacks common sense or good judgement may make life tougher on themselves. But then maybe a simple village idiot can have a simple village life. My experience of schooling in the United kingdom teaches me in fact that stupidity has great advantages. Being racist misogynist and homophobic can be wonderful ways of winning friends and influencing people. Stupidity is adaptive in an environment of stupid people. But then is adaption not an indicator of... intelligence? perhaps someone invented a word without creating a strict definition... which leaves me feeling stupid thinking about it. But if i didn't feel stupid i d be arrogant? Which would make me stupid. Right?
Courage is being scared to death... and saddling up anyway.
John Wayne
Get off your butt and join the Marines!
John Wayne
Get off your horse and drink your milk.
John Wayne
I don't feel we did wrong in taking this great country away from them. There were great numbers of people who needed new land, and the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves.
John Wayne
If everything isn't black and white, I say, 'Why the hell not?'
John Wayne
If you've got them by the balls their hearts and minds will follow.
John Wayne
Life is hard; it's harder if you're stupid.
John Wayne
Life is tough, but it's tougher when you're stupid.
John Wayne
Talk low, talk slow and don't say too much.
John Wayne
Tomorrow hopes we have learned something from yesterday.
John Wayne
Answer to the OP: Because he's a dick.
For someone who said, 'dont say too much,' he seems to have had a lot to say for himself. The 'life is hard' one may be a variation on the 'life is tough' one which you didn't need to repeat. I assume he wasn't a lily livered liberalQuote:
Originally Posted by cafolini
going by what he said about the native Indians but then perhaps liberals don't make for great cowboys. I think what he says about courage is correct. With the absence of fear courage is redundant. Winning hearts and minds these days has probably got more to do with being telegenic but I can see how out on the wild frontier grabbing hold of someone's balls might have that effect. As for joining the army it's a tough school but then John Wayne was a tough talking tough guy. Unfortunately for my nephew, he was no John Wayne and he had to leave the army because he was being bullied. Still that's probably better than having his legs blown off in afghanistan, even if this might have meant he would appear in a 'help for heroes' film. Why isn't everything black and white? I think this is because otherwise if people were struggling in an argument they wouldn't be able to say 'everything isn't black and white you know.' I don't think i ve ever been on a horse but i seem to remember going on a donkey ride in spain once when i was a young boy. I hope it wasn't cruelly treated as one hears stories about. Finally John Wayne talks about learning. Well let me finish with some heartfelt, not such tough guy, wisdom
'learning how to love yourself is the greatest love of all' witney houston.
Will have to see what happens. There might be enough time for that.
To all those who think a good God wouldn't create suffering, may I ask a follow-up question?
Given that the ways in which we humans could intervene in nature are becoming more and more "god-like" with the growth of both knowledge and technology, shouldn't *we* (in the future, if feasible) try to do something against all the suffering in nature?
Personally, I think we definitely should if such a thing ever becomes possible. Unfortunately maybe it won't. Anyway, the reason I'm asking is because I noticed that a lot of people seem to have inconsistent views about this. If the context is arguing against theists, they readily accept that suffering is bad. Yet if the concept becomes ethics, they invent excuses for why "nature is nature" and why intervention is bad. Or they say the suffering in nature doesn't matter. So what is it?
Also interesting to not is that the Biblical paradise was free of suffering. So this question can be put to Christians as well. If there was a magic button that would change nature back into a paradise, without any serious side-effects, should we push it?
Science could never go beyond what it precisely is made to fix. Hence every time it is applied, it would be out of the scope of many other things needed by other people.
On the other hand, many people in particular need will never have enough of the actual science necessary to solve their issues.
This doessn't mean that whatever of science could be used will not be used.
I am always amazed by the number of people who believe in god.
I'm always amazed at the number of people who would like not to, but have no choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenLucky
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dodo25
I think this is a very good question. One which I won't exactly answer except to say...
1). Obviously there is no such "magic button." If there were a way to change nature (and I'd include human nature) back to its initial perfection, there would be no more important task, ever than to "push the button."
2). The Bible teaches that Jesus Christ is God's way of "pushing the button," that is, addressing and restoring the loss of paradise. It cost so much to do. It begins with addressing humans with forgiveness and from there the consequences bleed into the natural world (promise of a new heavens and new earth) but that follows the Bible's description of the loss of paradise being focused on human's losing perfection with the natural world being collateral damage, so to speak.
As I have tried to say before, the only way to acknowledge evil as evil and still acknowledge God as good, is to see how he has addressed suffering and provided salvation. He has done so on a far more important level than merely preventing a car crash or cure a case of cancer. He has addressed the core issue and, through forgiveness in Jesus Christ, addressed it completely and with eternal ramifications.
I see suffering partially as a feedback mechanism. If one is able, individual suffering should encourage the sufferer to make changes to remove the suffering. However, trying to eliminate the feedback mechanism itself doesn't make sense to me. The feedback mechanism itself is good. To be able to respond to a feedback mechanism implies the existence of freedom.Quote:
Originally Posted by russellb
Suffering is also necessary for change to occur.
The various theistic positions add particular details to this picture which ultimately affirm the universe as good, but the atheistic positions seem to me to add nothing positive. The universe itself is a problem for atheists that is unsolvable and suffering is central to that problem.
We are coming to a close.Quote:
Originally Posted by YesNo