Problem of Evil

[Ghel]

True, but I know many of the things that as a child I *thought* were unfair, and would have called abuse if I'd known of such a thing, I can now see were just the opposite.

I still think that the analogy of the abusive parent explains how we can and should discuss the nature of God. But you're right, the analogy breaks down in many ways, mainly in that parents are neither all-knowing nor all-powerful, even if they are trying to be good.

...there was no *moral* good...

I don't see the distinction. Good and evil are labels that we place on events. A child dying is a horrible, though not necessarily evil, event. A person killing a child is certainly an evil event. A child being saved from dying, even by chance, is a good event.

I'd forgotten all about Bruce Almighty, but how did you get that out of it?

I don't want to get too far off track by discussing works of fiction, but from what I remember of the movie, God admitted to Bruce at least once that he was joking with him. God seemed to be trying to get Bruce to view things from the point of view of a human with god-like power. However, Bruce never gained any of God's knowledge, and so the power was squandered. God seemed to be setting Bruce up to fail.

[lordlundar]

I am not saying that we have to dismiss God as a factor in this discussion. In fact, God IS the discussion. What I was saying is that, since we can never know the mind of an omnipotent, omniscient being, the only way we can discuss this is from our own, admittedly limited point of view. And I don’t see that as being a problem.

The problem is what has been keeping this discussion going on for centuries. Yes, the only way we can discuss it is from our limited point of view, but because of that limit, we will never have an answer one way or another. All I'm saying is that while the discussion is fine, for several thousand years, there has not been a solid defined answer in support of anything apart from "no one knows".

On a parallel, think about the crusades. The crusaders invade the Muslim (Moorish) lands in the name of God. The Muslims (Moors) fight back in the name of Allah, their name for God. Now either side has scriptures saying that their is only one, benevolent God. Factoring all this in without allowing any changes to the info provided, answer me this:

How could a benevolent God, who abhors death, allow the slaughter of thousands of people on both sides in His name?

The question really is no different than the one you provided, and the answer is the same: We as mortals will never know the truth.

[Ghel]

Perhaps part of the difficulty with this discussion is that the first 3 premises are dependent on the presupposition that God exists. For the sake of argument, I have not challenged this presupposition, but perhaps now it's time.

You mention the crusades, with the Christians fighting the Muslims. There's something that I've said on multiple occassions that applies to the Gods described in both of those holy books: Even if the God described there existed, I wouldn't worship him. He is a tyrant, a despot, a dictator. He is unworthy of my adoration.

And again, I am not trying to deconvert you or anyone else. I just hope to inspire you to think about what you believe and why. I hope that each person can be consistent in his or her beliefs, and that those beliefs mesh with reality.

[Vagabond]

I hope that each person can be consistent in his or her beliefs, and that those beliefs mesh with reality.

People change. I used to believe in the death penalty - now, I'm more against it. (Granted, I believe I've found something worse than the death penalty, but that's another topic.)

Beliefs meshing with reality. Methinks, that is why it is a belief - something that you cannot prove. Or you may be able to prove it, just not yet because science hasn't advanced far enough to prove or disprove a theory.
I believe that I will be alive tomorrow. I have no proof; and I cannot prove it until tomorrow.