theodicy

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Post Reply
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7106
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

theodicy

Post by iambiguous »

This post is as a result of an exchange between myself and FreeSpirit1983 here: https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=198062

Saint Thomas Aquinas and the Nature of Evil
From the Thomistic Philosophy website
Reality of evil

It is a sad fact of the world that it contains many instances – even a superabundance – of evil: injury, disfigurement, disease, disability, natural disasters: hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, fires, drought. In addition, there are man-made evils: injustice, violence, rape, torture, all manner of cruelty, murder, war, genocide. Disturbing examples of all this evil could be recounted indefinitely, to horrifying effect. In the face of all this pain and misery, it is obviously a challenge to believe that there is an all good, all powerful God who has loving care for his creation.
First, of course, in describing natural disasters as evil, we have to go back to the entity who created the planetary components that made them possible in the first place: God.

Then we can delve into the man-made rationalizations for why God might have done this. The first and the foremost being His "mysterious ways". All of these terrible, horrific, ghastly catastrophes -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... death_toll -- are somehow a part of a loving, just and merciful God's righteous plan. And what can we mere mortals possibly even begin to grasp about that?

On the other hand, there are those who do in fact think deeply about these "acts of God" and suggest an alternative explanation. That while God is indeed loving, just and merciful, He is not omnipotent. He set into motion all that He created -- including planet Earth -- but it all got out of hand. He is just as appalled by these disasters as we are. But for reasons even He does not understand, it's now "beyond His control".

Though even in regard to the "terrible, horrific, ghastly" events down through the ages that were clearly as a result of human involvement, an omnipotent God could have intervened and prevented them.
Indeed, the problem of evil is the major challenge to theistic belief in general, and Christian belief in particular. If anything could definitively prove there is no God, evil is the only reality that might. Indeed, what in philosophy is termed the “problem of evil” is just such an argument which purports to prove that the reality of evil is logically incompatible with the existence of an all-good, all-powerful God.
Yes, that's the conclusion I have come to myself. But even here it is necessary to first make the assumption that "a God, the God my God" does in fact exist. Which, aside from theodicy, brings into focus these factors:

1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of your God or religious/spiritual path
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths

Subjects for other threads.

https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=196522
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8481
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by Sculptor »

If we accept that the condition of the universe is the means by which we are able to make excuses for God's failures; if we then reject that God's has ultimate power over nature, we accept the condition of Theodicy..

In this case it is true that Nature is not adjusted to god's will; no God is, like any other element in the universe, also at the mercy of the forces of nature; God is adjusted by and constrained by nature

Be that a given I have to ask the question of Epicurus..
image_2022-07-06_171404043.png
image_2022-07-06_171404043.png (59.92 KiB) Viewed 2535 times
bobmax
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2022 7:38 am

Re: theodicy

Post by bobmax »

The consideration that the entity God cannot exist is the logical conclusion reached by the rational mind that does not want to deceive itself.

And it is really important to respect our logical thinking.

However, since God is understood as the Good, this logical conclusion places us before the abyss of the reality of evil.
Evil is in the world, evil is in me, I myself am evil!

It is the look of the Medusa that questions me.
And now?

I can escape by trying to convince myself that ultimately good and evil are just epiphenomena, nothing really real.
So goes the way.

But I can't escape forever.
The time will come when I will have to face the reality of evil.
Especially the evil that I am.

And when I face it, I can only condemn myself to hell.
Damned forever.

In the name of what do I condemn myself?
In the name of Good, in the name of God.

God has returned, beyond any logic that vanishes in the face of Ethics.

The logic is based on separation. But hell takes this separation to its extreme consequences.

There is me, and God.
Absolute separation, to which I condemn me because that is right.

It is impossible to get out of hell.

If not, perhaps, by dying to myself.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by Iwannaplato »

iambiguous wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 4:43 pm 2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
If a deity exists, then 3 can explain 2. And since some theisms do respect other paths, 2 need not be a veto, in part because of 3 as an explantion. If you have a real entity, even a person, different people, cultures, classes will experience even a person differently. Ascribe different personlity traits and so on. Further God might send teachings, messages, appear to people, be a presence, and be experience through the various cultures. Some theists rule out the possibility of others being right. Some do not. Some formally don't but informally do. But this also could be explained by cultural differences, urges to be dominant and so on. Also different paths might be necessary or better suited to different cultures. As far as one, what if the representative says, "participate...the proof is in the pudding."
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7106
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by iambiguous »

Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pm
iambiguous wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 4:43 pm 2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
If a deity exists, then 3 can explain 2.
No, my point is that given the many, many claims that a God, the God exists, to the extent that it can be demonstrated that in fact your God is the one that does exist then the part about dasein is moot. Another's own existential trajectory might have taken them to another God but now it has been demonstrated that it wasn't the right God.
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pmAnd since some theisms do respect other paths, 2 need not be a veto, in part because of 3 as an explantion.
Not sure what you are conveying here. Again, to the extent that a God, the God is demonstrated to exist, why would anyone respect the paths to those Gods that do not exist?
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pmIf you have a real entity, even a person, different people, cultures, classes will experience even a person differently. Ascribe different personlity traits and so on.
Not sure of your point here either. If a God, the God makes His presence known to the world, then, presumably, He is there to settle any discrepancies regarding how He is to be understood.
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pmFurther God might send teachings, messages, appear to people, be a presence, and be experience through the various cultures. Some theists rule out the possibility of others being right. Some do not. Some formally don't but informally do. But this also could be explained by cultural differences, urges to be dominant and so on. Also different paths might be necessary or better suited to different cultures. As far as one, what if the representative says, "participate...the proof is in the pudding."
Well, perhaps this "demonstrated to exist God" can then point to the Scripture attributed to Him and verse by verse make it absolutely clear how one is to understand it.

Or He can note that some verses are beyond the capacity of mere mortals to grasp and they will just have to accept that they are a part of His will.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by Iwannaplato »

iambiguous wrote: Sat Jul 09, 2022 10:56 pm 2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
If a deity exists, then 3 can explain 2.
No, my point is that given the many, many claims that a God, the God exists, to the extent that it can be demonstrated that in fact your God is the one that does exist then the part about dasein is moot. Another's own existential trajectory might have taken them to another God but now it has been demonstrated that it wasn't the right God.
I am not sure why you, a non-believer, would posit that only one can be correct? How would you know that? Yes, some theists say that, but others do not. Or that each religion is worshipping a different God and if God exists then only one of them is worshipping the real one. How would you know that? What is your response to the ideas I presented about different perceptions of the same entity or dasein affecting interpretations of the same entity?
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pmAnd since some theisms do respect other paths, 2 need not be a veto, in part because of 3 as an explantion.
Not sure what you are conveying here. Again, to the extent that a God, the God is demonstrated to exist, why would anyone respect the paths to those Gods that do not exist?
Again, you are assuming that there is only one path to God, that each religion is necessarily worshipping a different deity and only one can be right. There are theists and not a few who believe that there are a number of paths to God. IOW they are assuming their God and the God of other religions is the same God. This is true amongst many Abrahamists. Of course there are others who do not believe this. But I did go into this in my previous post. Hence different paths so that different people and cultures can reach the same deity. In any case, I am not sure why you are ruling it out. On what grounds do you rule it out?

Different people have different impressions of a person online. They have different ways of improving their connection with this person. They describe this person in different but also overlapping ways. Must they all be wrong, but one? Could they not have different strategies, with overlaps, of having better relations with that online person? Could many of them have, yes, distortions, but enough understanding to improve the relationship?
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pmIf you have a real entity, even a person, different people, cultures, classes will experience even a person differently. Ascribe different personlity traits and so on.
Not sure of your point here either. If a God, the God makes His presence known to the world, then, presumably, He is there to settle any discrepancies regarding how He is to be understood.
Right off the bat notice that you are shifting the subtopic from what I was saying to something else, though what you write is written as if it is a response to what I wrote. I am saying that different individuals (and classes, cultures, genders, etc.) will experience even a person differently. So, it is not that path A is wrong and path B is right. Sense of God A is right, sense of God B is wrong. Even with two friends, say a man and a woman, they may have very different ways of relating to and understanding friend 3. Both are in relation to friend 3. Each may have different strategies for improving their connection to friend 3 and these may be effective. They may also be flawed.

To this explanation for why there may be different paths but need not be wrong ones, you response is about a hypothetical event. God comes and would sort this all out. I was pointing out something about why different people in contact with the same entity might have differing descriptions. Your rebuttal, if that's what it is, is that should he come here, he would do certain things....that's a non'sequiteur.

And again some theists think that there is only one path, but others do not. What you as a non-believer presume about God and what could would, should, wouldn't do might not be relevant. Which doesn't mean it's not a good question, but you seem to present speculation about what God might do as what God would do if God existed.
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pmFurther God might send teachings, messages, appear to people, be a presence, and be experienced through the various cultures. Some theists rule out the possibility of others being right. Some do not. Some formally don't but informally do. But this also could be explained by cultural differences, urges to be dominant and so on. Also different paths might be necessary or better suited to different cultures. As far as one, what if the representative says, "participate...the proof is in the pudding."
Well, perhaps this "demonstrated to exist God" can then point to the Scripture attributed to Him and verse by verse make it absolutely clear how one is to understand it.
As you say, perhaps.
Or He can note that some verses are beyond the capacity of mere mortals to grasp and they will just have to accept that they are a part of His will.
'And there are other possibilities, at least from my limited perspective.
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7106
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by iambiguous »

Iwannaplato wrote: Sat Jul 09, 2022 11:09 pm
iambiguous wrote: Sat Jul 09, 2022 10:56 pm 2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
If a deity exists, then 3 can explain 2.
No, my point is that given the many, many claims that a God, the God exists, to the extent that it can be demonstrated that in fact your God is the one that does exist then the part about dasein is moot. Another's own existential trajectory might have taken them to another God but now it has been demonstrated that it wasn't the right God.


I am not sure why you, a non-believer, would posit that only one can be correct? How would you know that?

Yes, some theists say that, but others do not. Or that each religion is worshipping a different God and if God exists then only one of them is worshipping the real one. How would you know that? What is your response to the ideas I presented about different perceptions of the same entity or dasein affecting interpretations of the same entity?
No, here I am starting with the assumption that a God, the God has revealed Himself to the world. At last we know. God does exist. His will, His Judgment Day.

Though, sure, what if it turns out that more than one God exists. Like "the Gods" of old?

Well, damned if I know. That would be between them and us "mere mortals".

Maybe they would blame each other for all the terrible human suffering.
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pmAnd since some theisms do respect other paths, 2 need not be a veto, in part because of 3 as an explantion.
Not sure what you are conveying here. Again, to the extent that a God, the God is demonstrated to exist, why would anyone respect the paths to those Gods that do not exist?
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pmAgain, you are assuming that there is only one path to God, that each religion is necessarily worshipping a different deity and only one can be right. There are theists and not a few who believe that there are a number of paths to God.
And again, no, I was assuming that this God [maybe yours, maybe not] was in fact the one and the only God and that He manifested Himself to the world. All the other paths -- the No God paths like Buddhism for example -- are now the wrong paths.

If that's not the case and we are back to the way things are now, then I'm back to this:
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
In the words, the theodicy question is reserved for the God that has in fact been demonstrated to exist as "a God, the God". Then the part where maybe it's your God, maybe it's not. If it's not, aren't you likely to switch over to the real deal God? Again, with so much at stake on both sides of the grave?

So maybe we are talking about two different understandings of this...
1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of your God or religious/spiritual path
The most potent demonstration being God Himself revealing His own existence.

As for this...
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pm If you have a real entity, even a person, different people, cultures, classes will experience even a person differently. Ascribe different personlity traits and so on.
Not sure of your point here either. If a God, the God makes His presence known to the world, then, presumably, He is there to settle any discrepancies regarding how He is to be understood.
Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 10:01 pm Right off the bat notice that you are shifting the subtopic from what I was saying to something else, though what you write is written as if it is a response to what I wrote. I am saying that different individuals (and classes, cultures, genders, etc.) will experience even a person differently. So, it is not that path A is wrong and path B is right. Sense of God A is right, sense of God B is wrong. Even with two friends, say a man and a woman, they may have very different ways of relating to and understanding friend 3. Both are in relation to friend 3. Each may have different strategies for improving their connection to friend 3 and these may be effective. They may also be flawed.

To this explanation for why there may be different paths but need not be wrong ones, you response is about a hypothetical event. God comes and would sort this all out. I was pointing out something about why different people in contact with the same entity might have differing descriptions. Your rebuttal, if that's what it is, is that should he come here, he would do certain things....that's a non'sequiteur.

And again some theists think that there is only one path, but others do not. What you as a non-believer presume about God and what could would, should, wouldn't do might not be relevant. Which doesn't mean it's not a good question, but you seem to present speculation about what God might do as what God would do if God existed.
I don't really grasp what this assessment has to do with theodicy. There is all the suffering endured down through the ages by us "mere mortals" as a result of unending stream of "acts of God".

Obviously, given this...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_n ... death_toll

And given this...

https://thebestschools.org/magazine/wor ... -starters/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_r ... traditions

There are going to be many different explanations for human suffering.

And that is before we get to all the viruses and bacteria and medical afflictions and extinction events a God, the God brought into existence.

Perhaps you should take up your own interest here with others. I'm making the assumption that if a God, the God is demonstrated to exist, point 2 and 3 become largely moot. We go right to theodicy then.

Or, rather, I do.
Iwannaplato
Posts: 6591
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by Iwannaplato »

iambiguous wrote: Tue Jul 12, 2022 8:54 pm Perhaps you should take up your own interest here with others. I'm making the assumption that if a God, the God is demonstrated to exist, point 2 and 3 become largely moot. We go right to theodicy then.
This was at the end of a long post to me.
Let's look at my first post...
I quote ONLY the part about 2 and 3.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jul 06, 2022 4:43 pm
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
and then I directly make it clear that I am focusing on those two points in a short post.
If a deity exists, then 3 can explain 2.[etc]"
And after two long posts you say you are not interested in those points. (in fact I was working my way through the second one, responding as I went, when I saw you had no interest in the topic)
Well, good to know.
Save yourself time next time and mention this at the outset, that would have a side benefit for others (like me :D ).

There are a few reasons why looking at 2 and 3 have relevance to the topic of theodicy. But I'm not throwing good money after bad.
Last edited by Iwannaplato on Thu Jul 14, 2022 11:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8481
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by Sculptor »

bobmax wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 7:56 pm The consideration that the entity God cannot exist is the logical conclusion reached by the rational mind that does not want to deceive itself.

And it is really important to respect our logical thinking.

However, since God is understood as the Good, this logical conclusion places us before the abyss of the reality of evil.
Evil is in the world, evil is in me, I myself am evil!

It is the look of the Medusa that questions me.
And now?

I can escape by trying to convince myself that ultimately good and evil are just epiphenomena, nothing really real.
So goes the way.

But I can't escape forever.
The time will come when I will have to face the reality of evil.
Especially the evil that I am.
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Well I think you are very nice,, :roll:

And when I face it, I can only condemn myself to hell.
Damned forever.
Even if there were such a place, which there is not. Why do you think you had such power to do this?
No need to answer.

In the name of what do I condemn myself?
In the name of Good, in the name of God.

God has returned, beyond any logic that vanishes in the face of Ethics.

The logic is based on separation. But hell takes this separation to its extreme consequences.

There is me, and God.
Absolute separation, to which I condemn me because that is right.

It is impossible to get out of hell.

If not, perhaps, by dying to myself.
Lying to yourself is probably as good as dying to yourself
Why carry on at all?
bobmax
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2022 7:38 am

Re: theodicy

Post by bobmax »

Sculptor wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:57 pm
bobmax wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 7:56 pm And when I face it, I can only condemn myself to hell.
Damned forever.
Even if there were such a place, which there is not. Why do you think you had such power to do this?
No need to answer.

In the name of what do I condemn myself?
In the name of Good, in the name of God.

God has returned, beyond any logic that vanishes in the face of Ethics.

The logic is based on separation. But hell takes this separation to its extreme consequences.

There is me, and God.
Absolute separation, to which I condemn me because that is right.

It is impossible to get out of hell.

If not, perhaps, by dying to myself.
Lying to yourself is probably as good as dying to yourself
Why carry on at all?
From the way you speak I assume you've never been there.
But the time will come to go there.

Hell is a place of the soul.

And you don't need any power to go there.
Because it is enough to seek the Truth.

There comes a time when the Truth is worth more than anything else.
You can no longer lie to yourself.
So here's the hell!

You can't do anything about it.
Because you are the Truth.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8481
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by Sculptor »

bobmax wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:28 pm
Sculptor wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:57 pm
bobmax wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 7:56 pm And when I face it, I can only condemn myself to hell.
Damned forever.
Even if there were such a place, which there is not. Why do you think you had such power to do this?
No need to answer.

In the name of what do I condemn myself?
In the name of Good, in the name of God.

God has returned, beyond any logic that vanishes in the face of Ethics.

The logic is based on separation. But hell takes this separation to its extreme consequences.

There is me, and God.
Absolute separation, to which I condemn me because that is right.

It is impossible to get out of hell.

If not, perhaps, by dying to myself.
Lying to yourself is probably as good as dying to yourself
Why carry on at all?
From the way you speak I assume you've never been there.
But the time will come to go there.
Depends what you mean by "there".
I assume your assumption is false. It's an easy enough way to divert attention away from a problem to call your interlocutor ignorant but not very convincing to the interlocutor.

Hell is a place of the soul.
Going there is a choice. I chose not. I didn't like it. But then I grew up.

And you don't need any power to go there.
Because it is enough to seek the Truth.
Stop flagellating yourself and grow up too.
Why do you love the self immolation?

There comes a time when the Truth is worth more than anything else.
You can no longer lie to yourself.
So here's the hell!

You can't do anything about it.
Because you are the Truth.
Get a life.
You are a long time dead.
What is the matter with you that you feel you want to suffer?
Phil8659
Posts: 396
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2022 11:50 am
Contact:

Re: theodicy

Post by Phil8659 »

bobmax wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 4:28 pm
Sculptor wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 3:57 pm
bobmax wrote: Wed Jul 06, 2022 7:56 pm And when I face it, I can only condemn myself to hell.
Damned forever.
Even if there were such a place, which there is not. Why do you think you had such power to do this?
No need to answer.

In the name of what do I condemn myself?
In the name of Good, in the name of God.

God has returned, beyond any logic that vanishes in the face of Ethics.

The logic is based on separation. But hell takes this separation to its extreme consequences.

There is me, and God.
Absolute separation, to which I condemn me because that is right.

It is impossible to get out of hell.

If not, perhaps, by dying to myself.
Lying to yourself is probably as good as dying to yourself
Why carry on at all?
From the way you speak I assume you've never been there.
But the time will come to go there.

Hell is a place of the soul.

And you don't need any power to go there.
Because it is enough to seek the Truth.

There comes a time when the Truth is worth more than anything else.
You can no longer lie to yourself.
So here's the hell!

You can't do anything about it.
Because you are the Truth.
Damned! finally. I found a posting on this forum who shows real hope.
bobmax
Posts: 596
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2022 7:38 am

Re: theodicy

Post by bobmax »

Sculptor wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:00 pm Get a life.
You are a long time dead.
What is the matter with you that you feel you want to suffer?
There is no will to suffer.
How nice it would be to go back to when I was not aware ...
But now I am aware of good and evil.
And not quite, but enough to understand that I deserve hell.

It doesn't matter how much evil is committed.
That single evil that is embedded in it when it was committed, and that I can no longer erase, is enough.

From what I have learned, it is almost an obligatory road.
Well described by the myth of Adam and the fate of Cain.

However, I am also aware that until you go to hell (or heaven if you are really special) you are lost.

Because there are only two places where man is safe: one is Heaven, the other Hell.
Only there, in fact, is God certain.
User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 8481
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by Sculptor »

bobmax wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:41 pm
Sculptor wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 5:00 pm Get a life.
You are a long time dead.
What is the matter with you that you feel you want to suffer?
There is no will to suffer.
How nice it would be to go back to when I was not aware ...
But now I am aware of good and evil.
And not quite, but enough to understand that I deserve hell.

It doesn't matter how much evil is committed.
That single evil that is embedded in it when it was committed, and that I can no longer erase, is enough.

From what I have learned, it is almost an obligatory road.
Well described by the myth of Adam and the fate of Cain.

However, I am also aware that until you go to hell (or heaven if you are really special) you are lost.

Because there are only two places where man is safe: one is Heaven, the other Hell.
Only there, in fact, is God certain.
There is no talking to some people
User avatar
iambiguous
Posts: 7106
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2010 10:23 pm

Re: theodicy

Post by iambiguous »

Iwannaplato wrote: Wed Jul 13, 2022 2:29 pm
iambiguous wrote: Tue Jul 12, 2022 8:54 pm Perhaps you should take up your own interest here with others. I'm making the assumption that if a God, the God is demonstrated to exist, point 2 and 3 become largely moot. We go right to theodicy then.
This was at the end of a long post to me.
Let's look at my first post...
I quote ONLY the part about 2 and 3.
iambiguous wrote: ↑Wed Jul 06, 2022 4:43 pm
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths
and then I directly make it clear that I am focusing on those two points in a short post.
If a deity exists, then 3 can explain 2.[etc]"
And after two long posts you say you are not interested in those points. (in fact I was working my way through the second one, responding as I went, when I saw you had no interest in the topic)
Well, good to know.
Save yourself time next time and mention this at the outset, that would have a side benefit for others (like me :D ).

There are a few reasons why looking at 2 and 3 have relevance to the topic of theodicy. But I'm not throwing good money after bad.
Okay, fine. But this thread revolves around theodicy.

As noted in the OP:
1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of your God or religious/spiritual path
2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods and religious/spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?
3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods and religious/spiritual faiths

Subjects for other threads.
Here let's assume the first three parts are not relevant. Subjects for other threads. There is a God, the God and it's your God. How then is this God to be grappled with given the arguments that swirl around theodicy.
Post Reply