The Problem of Evil I’m referring to is Hume’s version of Epicurus’ original, although I used the SEP article earlier. They’re both aimed at the God of Abraham. That is claimed to be the creator of everything; the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good, and all-present God in the first five books of the Bible(the Pentateuch).
I’m not sure which god you’re referring to, but it seems like you’re talking about the same one. That said, there are a quite a few issues with what you’ve said here. I’ll focus on one…
If God is all knowing(omniscient) then God would already know everything that was going to happen, before it ever happened. Hence, if what you say here is true, then God is not all knowing, because there would be no need for God to wait and see what we will do, because God already knows what we will do. The same holds good for what we will invent.
I don’t see you’ve addressed the problem of evil that is at hand for those who believe in the God of Abraham.
Hume wrote
"Epicurus’s old questions are yet unanswered.
Is he willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?"
I don’t recall the God of Abraham saying that He is all knowing and all omnipotent. You’re talking about an ideal manufactured by others.
Just because God does not interfere does not mean God is malevolent or impotent. God does not have to be omniscient and omnipotent to be God. God also does not have to be the Creator.
There are a huge number of people that have had absolutely horrible and despicable things done to them all the while their prayers went unanswered. It’s hard for me to square those facts with any idea that an all-good and all-powerful God interacts.
If not when a little girl is getting repeatedly raped by s family member, then when? When exactly is the best time to interact? When someone prays for a better job? When someone prays that their loved ones have a safe trip?
For arguments sake, lets say God is all the things you suggest, then we have no Free Will and things are predetermined. Then why do I choose to stop now, or go then? Why do I work and think and grow? Was it determined that I come here, now to this very moment? And is God concerned about my suffering? God would be the unmoved mover then, and we are just living out a script written long ago, if one can stomach that they are so important to the workings of the Universe, then so be it. I personally choose to believe that things were set into motion, and that we have a limited number of options, but that as these limited options play out in the variety of Nature and humanity, I am faced with choices, and so I have a limited Free Will, and the outcome is yet to be determined.
The burden falls on you to first prove what’s asserted. No argument does that. The generic failure is that there is no valid and sound argument for God to actually go against in the first place.
That is why they invented Satan, to validate Evil. But then too, God would have invented and allowed Satan to rule, and so, God is not all Good.
I personally believe that God is free to wander and roam the Universe, and that God acts when God is moved to act, and when God see’s injustice or danger, God will act. Imagine how difficult it would be to know the thoughts and actions of 8 billion people all the time, and to know the outcome of their thoughts and actions? God is not then omniscient, perhaps by choice.
Well, you’re no longer talking about the God of Abraham, if you ever were. That’s not a personal judgment against you either way, I’m just noting that the God you’re now describing is not the God of Abraham.
Also, God is not known, for… where is God? Do you know Gods phone number? Does God speak to us all? There must be a reason.
It is less important to know God and the desires and powers of God, than the idea of God that is important; for in contemplating God, a Creator, a moral being, a builder, or source- one becomes more intelligent and aware, and can invent and improve our World.
From my experiences I can say that God does act, and can speak- though why and when is a mystery to me. I have settled my mind that God wants to see what we will do.
I personally believe that God is an invention of mankind as a means to explain many if not most or all of the things that people did not understand in millenia’s past.
Perhaps if one has a relatively good grasp on how the world works, and they do what they can to help things out, and they’re a little lucky on top of it all, good things will happen.
That’s where I’m at.
I just don’t see the need to posit a God. Even for the things that I do not understand, I’m perfectly okay with not knowing.
@180Proof Many people would agree with a suffering-focused ethics. So are you proposing utilitatrianism as an objective moral theory?
@Mijin1 The moral argument is a very old argument. Your questions - what is the difference between God and humans? What is objective morality? and so on - are too basic.
There is no objective human morality - we’re not reliable in re objectivity. However there is objective morality - we recognize that some things are objectively right and wrong. Hence God, as our source of objectivity.
It’s like someone who knows he can’t make pastry. There is pastry. Hence someone else made that pastry.
@creative I was going about my life, doing my Will, pursuing my philosophy about God and Love, until one day I was provoked by someone to question my knowledge of what was Good, and I reached up with my mind to question it, and decided what was Good was love, and then God took hold of my body, took up a pen that was nearby, and drew out a symbol. That symbol is on my post “A new axiom for a new beginning” on the list here.
Negative consequentialism (re: disutilitarianism). This “moral theory” is objective to the degree it is based on the natural facts – human facticity – of suffering (i.e. species-defects (vulnerability) to disutility/disvalue aka “harm”).
Again, re: (e.g.) Epicurus, Spinoza, J. Dewey, P Foot, et al …
