What is Leo’s best argument against the problem of evil?

[Jaccobtw]

If God is ALL good then why does suffering and devilry exist? For example, why would God allow a child to have bone cancer?

[Monster Energy]

It’s not evil because existence doesn’t care about survival. You only see these things as evil because you think survival is the most important thing, but the reality is that it is not, and suffering is beautiful. And this comes from a guy who suffers right now and has lost so much hope because I’m stuck in a deep loop. You have to understand that if a person dies with cancer, that’s not evil, that’s life. You need to stop comparing it so that if a person survives cancer, that is somehow better than if they didn’t. If we are only talking from the ego’s perspective, then of course it is better that someone survives, but in the bigger picture there is no good or bad.

 

[Ziran]

32 minutes ago, Jaccobtw said:

If God is ALL good then why does suffering and devilry exist? For example, why would God allow a child to have bone cancer?

1)  Tragedy brings people together.  it forces distinction and focus on what matters most.
2)  Lacking ANY bad would not be a "good" outcome either.  Ask yourself?  Would it be "good" if there was no possibility for harming another?  People would be punching each other into a bloody mess lacking any harm to themselves or each other?  That's bizarre, not good.
3)  The question presumes that the sum of a child's choices are null at birth and the child's essence / being / existence terminate when their physical body ceases.  There is no good reason to assume this to be true with any significant certainty.

Edited 11 hours ago by Ziran

[Someone here]

The problem of evil says that if there is an all knowing ..all benevolent..and all powerful God then He would not create anything evil. But since evil exists ..at least one of these three attributes must be false. This means that either God is not all knowing or not all good or not all powerful. If any of these are true then He would not be considered God in the first place .

I am not sure whether there is a creator God with such attributes who created the world as it is portrayed in Islam and Christianity. I tend to lean more toward the Buddhist perspective. The Buddha taught that there is no creator God with such qualities and that life is dukkha orsuffering. Pleasure is kinda overhyped ..exaggerated.. temporary and fleeting .. whereas suffering appears to be more constant and dominant. I mean We are literally born crying while our mothers endure intense pain and screaming. So what does that signify? After that we continue to suffer and even if we become millionaires we die and death hurts like hell .

So Buddha will just deny his own human hood to exit this suffering completely through total indifference towards the world . He said the root of all suffering is desire or craving and we can add attachments and expectations. Apparently even Buddha himself didn’t slay the suffering bitch because he is a child with bone cancer somewhere .

 

[zurew]

23 minutes ago, Jaccobtw said:

If God is ALL good then why does suffering and devilry exist? For example, why would God allow a child to have bone cancer?

You only have problem of evil, if there is a stipulation that God could prevent things from happening and or God could have made this world in a different way.

Given that we exclude the mentioned agential aspects from God, then we dont have any problem of evil anymore but its also becomes the case, that the term "all good" becomes mostly a non-normative worldplay, because given this conception of God anything that happens, happens not because God has any choice about it ( so its not like God can get any credit for any of the good stuff , just like he doesnt get blamed for the bad stuff).

If the agential aspects apply to God, then you have a big problem of evil and all the responses that this forum gave (that Ive seen so far) are very trash.

[Ziran]

35 minutes ago, Jaccobtw said:

is ALL good

ALL good, omnibenevolence = "for the sake of goodness"

ALL good, omnibenevolence =/= "lacking all bad"

[Monster Energy]

1 minute ago, zurew said:

If the agential aspects apply to God, then you have a big problem of evil and all the responses that this forum gave (that Ive seen so far) are very trash.

If you really think that, then you’re either an idiot or someone with a big ego. What you’re saying isn’t anything higher-level than what anyone else has said in this forum. Your attitude and your arguments are just as bad as your personality. You’re like a pick-me girl, except no one actually wants to give you much attention because you’re a tragic mess.

 

[gettoefl]

Suffering via legion bearers of evil is coming to get you. Maybe bad maybe slight. You can't forestall or forego. It may come the day you are born or in a 100 years. That's alas random or at best out of your hands. So all you can do is make sure you and your kids wake up on day dot. Or as soon as possible thereafter. That's your only task.

Welcome to planet suffering. You stand in the crosshairs today. Wake tf up my lovely. Put in the time. You will awaken one day so why not now.

Edited 11 hours ago by gettoefl

[Ziran]

48 minutes ago, Jaccobtw said:

If God is ALL good then why does suffering and devilry exist? For example, why would God allow a child to have bone cancer?

Here's another one.  Have you heard the pickpocket analogy?  .

Which is more skillful?  A thug or a pickpocket?  
 

Just as the pickpocket is more skillful than a thug, an imperfect creation which is forever improving is far more impressive than a perfect creation held in stasis.

 

Edited 11 hours ago by Ziran

[zurew]

13 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

If you really think that, then you’re either an idiot or someone with a big ego. What you’re saying isn’t anything higher-level than what anyone else has said in this forum. Your attitude and your arguments are just as bad as your personality. You’re like a pick-me girl, except no one actually wants to give you much attention because you’re a tragic mess.

Given that passionate (definitely not triggered answer), you surely have good arguments and answers to my questions.

Given that you go with an agential God , based on what set of values does God make his choices (for instance create the world and potentially prevent things from happening and or allow things to happen) and what does "all-good" mean under your conception of God?

Edited 10 hours ago by zurew

[Monster Energy]

3 minutes ago, zurew said:

Given that passionate (definitely not triggered answer), you surely have good arguments and answers to my questions.

Given that you go with an agential God , based on what set of values does God make his choices (for instance create the world and potentially prevent things from happening and or allow things to happen) and what does "all-good" mean under your conception of God?

I never said I accept the premise of an agential God. My point was more about the usefulness of moral labels like ‘all-good’ in general.

 

 

 

[zurew]

6 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

I never said I accept the premise of an agential God

Then what was the issue with what I said?

The "trash" response was a criticism to people who were writing their comments in the context of an agential God.

6 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

My point was more about the usefulness of moral labels like ‘all-good’ in general.

Then we literally agree, because I take it that that phrase is almost entirely useless and vacous in the context of a non-agential God.

Edited 10 hours ago by zurew

[Monster Energy]

2 minutes ago, zurew said:

Then what was the issue with what I said?

The "trash" response was a criticism to people who were writing their comments in the context of an agential God.

Then we literally agree, because I take it that that phrase is almost entirely useless and vacous in the context of a non-agential God.

Sorry, I read your comment too quickly and assumed you were also talking about me. I apologize for my behavior. I was very triggered by someone else as well and was a bit too harsh towards him too.

But then I agree with you that the others who talk about a God who can make conscious choices don’t have strong arguments. I would actually say it’s impossible to have strong arguments in that kind of position because there are too many flaws for it to be salvaged.

 

[zurew]

8 minutes ago, Monster Energy said:

Sorry, I read your comment too quickly and assumed you were also talking about me. I apologize for my behavior. I was very triggered by someone else as well and was a bit too harsh towards him too.

Its fine , you are good, no need to apologize.

[Someone here]

I would like to add that as Buddha taught we should not even waste time by discussing suffering or evil in relation to a perfect god because what’s the point ? The Buddha dismissed the topic of god completely and erased him from the equation. What matters is there is suffering in this world which everyone must go through one way or another. So Buddhas main concern with how to put an end to this suffering if possible instead of speculating about why would a perfect god make me suffer . And I agree .
it is unproductive to spend time debating suffering or evil in relation to god . set the concept of a creator god aside entirely. His central concern was the reality that suffering exists and is an unavoidable part of human life. Instead of engaging in metaphysical debates let’s understand the nature of suffering and more importantly if there is an end that we as humans can put to it . 

[Oppositionless]

The way I see it is, God is Good because God is Infinite. God is, first and foremost, Infinite, containing every possibility, and secondarily Good. But Goodness is a larger infinity than suffering .

Edited 6 hours ago by Oppositionless