- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
One of the things about which I have no doubt OR uncertainty is that God has intervened directly in my life on a few occasions. I have NO clue whatsoever why he did that for me in very recognizable ways and doesn’t do that for some in likewise recognizable ways. No idea at all. I just know he did for me – in ways I simply can’t dispute. He “proved” himself to me, and I’m just left to wonder why. (I used “he” in the generic sense. There was nothing about any of my experiences that would prompt the literal use of that word.) Tom Haws wrote:Call me blind and foolish, but the problem of evil just doesn’t wash with me.
Given: We entered this world freely
Given: We knew it was full of rapes, murders, and hurricanes
Therefore: What’s the problem? Surely on the way out the door we said, “…Be back soon; wish me luck.” We all signed the disclaimer that no matter what happened we would not cry foul. We are all complicit.
Answer: The problem with evil is that it hurts. The reason that seems to be a problem is we forget a) it’s supposed to hurt and b) we signed the disclaimer.
We KNOW there is an enormous amount of evil in this world; we don’t know that we “signed up for it”. Did little, starving kids in Africa sign up for for tiny life spans of suffering? The World Health Organization estimates that between 10 and 15 million children die from starvation and thirst every year. The idea that they signed up for that doesn’t work for me. If God is real, and he did create this earth, with a plan for all of us, evil should have a purpose. I don’t think that evil is just something inadvertantly thrown in on the side if God did create us, and if that’s the case, what is the purpose of all the useless suffering? Yeah, I’m not buying the idea that its as easy as a contract being signed. The most logical answer is that God isn’t omnipotent or he isn’t omnibenevolent, or that he doesn’t exist; ultimately we can’t know.
ws, there is another equally plausible option if God does exist – some sort of multiple opportunities for “mortal” experiences. We know SO little from an eternal perspective, but there are fascinating snippets in some of our scriptures and the temple that make me wonder – and our own eternal progression model is MUCH closer to reincarnation than to its Protestant “one shot” counterpart. I understand from a motivational / psychological perspective why the Church leadership can’t talk about or encourage such ideas formally, but I personally lean toward that belief.
Old-Timer wrote:ws, there is another equally plausible option if God does exist – some sort of multiple opportunities for “mortal” experiences.
We know SO little from an eternal perspective, but there are fascinating snippets in some of our scriptures and the temple that make me wonder – and our own eternal progression model is MUCH closer to reincarnation than to its Protestant “one shot” philosphy. I understand from a motivational / psychological perspective why the Church leadership can’t talk about or encourage such ideas formally, but I personally lean toward that belief.
Ray, you make an interesting point; I hope you’re right. I seem to notice suffering children a lot more now that I have my own kids; if those that suffer the most get another shot at mortality in some way, that would make the suffering I see easier to swallow.
ws, I qualified “mortal” experiences with the quoatation marks, but it might have been a more accurate reflection of my own current leaning to say something like “growth” experiences. “Mortal” is such a narrow word in this context. I tend to think in life stages, and, while each current stage is the most important, I like to believe in multiple stages. Maybe we all have only one “mortal” stage; maybe we have more than one; I like to think we have multiple stages, whatever their “form”. Old-Timer wrote:ws, I qualified “mortal” experiences with the quoatation marks, but it might have been a more accurate reflection of my own current leaning to say something like “growth” experiences. “Mortal” is such a narrow word in this context. I tend to think in life stages, and, while each current stage is the most important, I like to believe in multiple stages. Maybe we all have only one “mortal” stage; maybe we have more than one; I like to think we have multiple stages, whatever their “form”.
I think your views actually tie into mainstream Mormonism well. Correct me if I’m wrong, but haven’t Church leaders taught that children who die get the chance to be raised by their parents in heaven–maybe it was McConkie. Even if that isn’t right, the Church certainly teaches that we can grow and progress–in essence, another “form” of life–in heaven until we become God-like. Ultimately, whether its reincarnation, or Church teachings about heaven, I remain skeptical, and I still can’t reconcile all the suffering/evil with a loving, benevolent, powerful God, but I hope I’m wrong.
Full Disclosure: 1. Yes, God, Heaven, and pre-existence is real to me, as is my being here typing. I do understand that is a mystery and a subjective reality. But, for my purposes, it is quite plain and obvious that little children did sign up for a short, tough life with an abusive devil for a parent in Provo.
2. Yes, I do sort of assume multiple mortal opportunities may be part of the deal.
Just trying to give you all the pieces necessary to understand how and why I can say there is no problem of evil. Or maybe I’m just crazy.
Tom
wordsleuth23 wrote:I remain skeptical, and I still can’t reconcile all the suffering/evil with a loving, benevolent, powerful God, but I hope I’m wrong.
The idea that we are all complicit, every one of us, in the “beautiful mess” doesn’t click with you?
Have you read many near death stories? If you want to read some, be sure you read at least 2 dozen (not books, just the web version of the stories such as at
http://www.near-death.com orhttp://www.iands.org/nde_archives/experiencer_accounts/ )Tom Haws wrote:wordsleuth23 wrote:I remain skeptical, and I still can’t reconcile all the suffering/evil with a loving, benevolent, powerful God, but I hope I’m wrong.
The idea that we are all complicit, every one of us, in the “beautiful mess” doesn’t click with you?
Have you read many near death stories? If you want to read some, be sure you read at least 2 dozen (not books, just the web version of the stories such as at
http://www.near-death.com orhttp://www.iands.org/nde_archives/experiencer_accounts/ )Tom, I understand your point of view, and respect it, but I don’t believe it. Regardless of the issue, one can choose a supernatural explanation, or a natural one; to me, the natural ones make more sense and usually have more evidence. Near death experiences are actually explained quite well by science now. Scientists have created a special helmet that can induce near death experiences by stimulating the brain in a certain way; surgeons can induce them by stimulating certain areas of the brain during brain surgery. I believe that is all that is happening when someone has a NDE, but to some, they are proof of an afterlife. I can understand that, but the scientific explanation makes more sense, and it has more evidence.
wordsleuth23 wrote:I believe that is all that is happening when someone has a NDE, but to some, they are proof of an afterlife.
No. Your reality is your reality. See my post above with my disclosures. You aren’t feeble-minded; I’m not feeble-minded. I’m OK; you’re OK. Philosophers can’t prove I’m not a brain in a vat, so we simply accept our reality as an explicit assumption. I’m real because I am real. Likewise they can’t prove there is any transcendent reality. If it’s real to me, it’s just real to me. There’s no proving it, as there’s no proving I’m not a brain in a vat. For Bill, God and Heaven aren’t real. For Jim, they are. Why argue? In all likelihood, it’s simply a problem of understanding, language, and trust.
If God isn’t real to you, then there is still no problem of evil. Right? You wouldn’t worry about a problem that doesn’t really exist, would you? Am I misunderstanding? Can you restate the problem in terms that don’t refer to God?
Since I believe in being honest, here is what I really believe “the problem of evil” is. It is a projection of disbelief onto a concept that is believed to be unreal. It is those for whom God is unreal trying to be experts on that which they believe not to exist. Set up a God who can’t exist and prove it doesn’t exist. Would it be accurate to call that “straw man” reasoning? I believe that may be what is happening around the concept of “problem of evil”.
In my reality, as (I assume) in yours, there is no such problem because there is no such God.
Tom Haws wrote:wordsleuth23 wrote:If God isn’t real to you, then there is still no problem of evil. Right? You wouldn’t worry about a problem that doesn’t really exist, would you? Am I misunderstanding? Can you restate the problem in terms that don’t refer to God?
Since I believe in being honest, here is what I really believe “the problem of evil” is. It is a projection of disbelief onto a concept that is believed to be unreal. It is those for whom God is unreal trying to be experts on that which they believe not to exist. Set up a God who can’t exist and prove it doesn’t exist. Would it be accurate to call that “straw man” reasoning? I believe that may be what is happening around the concept of “problem of evil”.
In my reality, as (I assume) in yours, there is no such problem because there is no such God.
Tom, the reason it’s called the “problem of evil” is because it creates a problem for the kind of God mainstream religion believes in. It doesn’t mean their can’t be a higher power, it just means that the current most common definition of God is lacking. It doesn’t even mean their isn’t a Mormon God if faith is placed above reason, which works well for lots of people. No, it isn’t a straw man argument since it is based off of the common description of God, given by Christians, Jews, and Muslims. Am I wrong there? I know I’ve heard the description–omnipotent/omniscient–from primary to gospel doctrine. Once again, it doesn’t mean there is no God, just not one like the latter religions–themselves–have described.
The amount of evil in the world is one reason some people don’t believe in God, or don’t believe in a God that is involved with humanity, hence the problem. The debate is humans, attempting to explain God through reason, which is the best option we have for “proving” anything, since we don’t have evidence, and all problems get rerouted back to faith by religious organizations. It makes perfect sense for people to try and reason/explain how God can exist, and what “it” would be like. This kind of debate gets really interesting when you get into the Philosophy of Language–which is one of the few tenets of philosophy that is quite applicable to everyone.
Tom, at the end of the day, the amount of evil in this world gives me–personally–real doubts about God. It isn’t a superficial argument to me; it may be to you. I’m not attempting to degrade your beliefs, you strike me as a humble, open-minded person, that doesn’t condemn people for believing differently, and I respect you for that. I’ve enjoyed reading peoples responses to this question, since I had only discussed it in non-religious forums before this. I’m not looking for concrete “answers” to my doubts, just interesting responses, and you’ve provided that. Thanks.
I apologize for lacking love in me so that I see and describe the problem of evil as an insincere academic issue. As Ray said, there are no academic issues. Everything is emotional for somebody. If I understand right, you are saying you would like to believe in God, but it seems problematic to you. I like what you said here: “Tom, at the end of the day, the amount of evil in this world gives me–personally–real doubts about God.” I don’t think you should doubt your instinct. Why “try” to believe in God? If you sense problems about God, perhaps you should just toss the whole thing. Why keep trying to make something work that isn’t right for you? Maybe you believe in Love. Maybe you believe in a global brotherhood. Maybe you believe in Joy, or Coolness, or Freedom. I say, just believe in what is real to you. Let go of the rest. Because maybe the rest is wrong. Maybe this God you have doubts about is a fantasy.
Let’s keep believing. Always keep believing.
And as part of that, believe in others. Believe they are intelligent. Believe they are good. Believe they are like yourself, doing the best they can with their unique background and resources.
Let’s see if I can articulate this idea at all. My view of God is a little more like a neglectful parent than the helicopter parent you hear about at church. Let’s assume that God is, as I think, someone who set up a system to be self-sustaining and then walked away, to check in periodically. Here’s how that system would be designed: – create innate feelings that draw parents and children closer together and provide a protective instinct from parents to children and a desire for approval from children to parents.
– in cases where these innate feelings fail and abuse results instead, create mechanisms that will result in those individuals being less desirable as mates
– over generations, have genetic factors passed from parents to children, continuing to reinforce that desirable behaviors (nurturing children, having good social skills/controlling temper) make someone an attractive mate and undesirable behaviors (abusiveness, hostility, etc.) cause one to become less attractive as a mate.
– allow natural selection to work, knowing that as in all genetic factors there will be anomalies (e.g. charming, attractive sociopaths). Allow your children to figure that out for themselves.
Obviously that’s an oversimplification, but it seems that God set it up, but doesn’t manage it regularly.
Love Hawkgrrl’s list, I agree completely. The list reminds me of what happens when that process gets really messed up: the movie ‘Idiocracy”; it’s a stupid movie (ok, it’s funny) and they used almost your exact premise but with different outcomes.
😆 @wordsleuth:
Are you saying that you just don’t get how someone can believe in an omnipotent, hands-on God while all this evil exists? It’s an interesting thought-game, but you may be preaching to the choir.
hawkgrrrl wrote:Obviously that’s an oversimplification, but it seems that God set it up, but doesn’t manage it regularly.
I actually do like this too…but I have a question for you, or anybody interested in commenting. Why do we need to make God a perfected human? I know scripture pretty much states this, but suppose “scripture” is wrong; do you see the possibility that “God” is simply a unifying, creative energy in the universe?
(okay mods…should I start a new thread?)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.