The answer to the The Problem of Evil could just be that "god" has a totally different definition of evil.
Maybe god does prevent Evil and the Universe is totally just and fair. The problem is humans thinking their version of Evil is the correct one. Maybe.
Or God is also evil. Who says God needs to be nice?
Not that I believe one exists.
Certainly, that was the Gnostics viewpoint. It has as much merit as any other
I dont care whether 'evil' is prevented, I care whether undue suffering could be prevented.
If the bar is so high, that God's only obligation is preventing Cthulhu from fucking out butts, then he's just as much of a cunt as squid-daddy.
I'm suddenly both curious and terrified to go and check if there's any rule 42 of Squid Daddy.
That’s basically the Euthyphro dilemma.
I meant, of course everything depends on which version of what you consider. This reasoning also works if we have a different version of what God, or good or humans are.
Or a different definition of “problem”.
Common* christian theology posits that God is a perfect judge of law and fact, seeing as she has both infinite patience, infinite subjective time, and accurate knowledge of everyone's points of view.
"Why does evil persist on Earth then" comes down to either said evil being necessary for some unseen purpose, said evil being irrelevant to God's plans, or said evil being the consequence of some mortal privilege. Or some combination thereof.
There has been a lot of christian thought about why evil persists, and settling on an answer to it is essentially the base of all persistent ecumenical schisms. Other religions add even greater complexity, because once you examine perspectives off the abeahamic tree you quickly find that not even "Good" is consistently defined.
The moral and philosophical questions don't get much easier if you remove God from the equation, or even if you adopt a nihilistic "only the momentary physical now matters" perspective.
If you don't believe me, try coming up with an answer to "why is killing bad" that you can get agreement on. (Not just "is killing bad," but an actual casual why.)
*: and by "common" I mean "as I believe most Christians understand it.". I'm sure some don't, and that there's at least one sect that would call me funny names for saying anything.
I just wish we could collectively realize the whole enterprise is epistemologically bankrupt.
It is okay to stop trying to apply reason once you have encountered the first unreconcilable contradiction.
There are no such things as unreconcilable contradictions.
Maybe we are the freaking rogue demons
Evil and pain/suffering/discomfort are not the same. Evil has an intention behind it. Where is the evil in dying cause I slipped in the shower, or the evil in crushing your toes cause I'm heavy and inattentive and you're dainty and I accidentally stepped over your feet? At most you could say there's evil in natural disasters, but the world was going from A to B, we just didn't know our world enough and suffered because of it (and that's why now we have seismology!), for instance, but since when does nature have conscience? The world, compared to a garden with no danger no fear like Paradise, is evidently chaotic, but does that mean it's "flawed" or just the only way things could work the way God designed the universe? So, at most I'll accept some disagreement with the fact that God put us in a place that's chaotic, but haven't we risen to the task of understanding and using the universe to our whims? They put a man on the moon!
On the other hand, however, is everything that's man-made. All the evils, from starvation to genocide, from greed to rape, this is all the result of misguided free will. And God teaches us (by the pen, so read) on what we should do to control it/us. You can't possibly put that on God, unless you wanted us to be basically sims/robots...
That's certainly one definition of evil, yes
Of course if you believe "God" set all of this in motion and with foreknowledge then even those seemingly random events have god's intent behind them, yes?
Of course if you believe "God" set all of this in motion and with foreknowledge then even those seemingly random events have god's intent behind them, yes?
No, it means that you believe that "even those seemingly random events have god's intent behind them". A person's sincerely held belief is not necessarily objectively true.
"If you think the point in life is to be happy and live long I can see how you'd be confused"
Not sure where I heard it but I think of it often.
I'm a father and I think of god the same way I think of being a parent. I want my kids to learn things and I want them to return home and tell me about it.
There is no good and evil, just people trying to justify their decisions as rational. There is nothing else required, to fuck up the world, just people and their desires to "help" and "protect" everyone from everything.
Some gods are, by human standards, more evil than others.
There is no God.
I saw a post in atheism mostly about this. I decided not to post. I don't believe in forcing my views on other people who clearly didn't ask for them.
Well, we have a word for god so we must have a concept of god.
Even if there's no objective phenomenon which corresponds to the concept, the subjective experiences alone are worthy of attention and consideration
We also have a concept of Russell's Teapot, which is far more likely to exist. That doesn't mean that the possibility of the Teapot actually existing is worthy of attention or consideration.
It appears that your post is making an unfounded assumption as support for the conclusion that a deity exists and has certain qualities. That's not how that works. Starting with a desired conclusion, then building a set of "if this then that" premises may be logically valid, but it's not logically sound.