Sign In (New User? Sign Up)
 
 
DOES EVIL EXIST?
 
Oshun Auset offline
A1 · 7168 Forum Posts
 September 17, 2004 3:25 PM
DOES EVIL EXIST?

A university professor challenged his students with this question.
Did God create everything that exists? A student bravely replied, "Yes, He did!"
"God created everything?" the professor asked. "Yes, sir," the student replied.
The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists. And according to the principal that our works define who we are, then God is evil." The student became quiet before such an answer.
The professor was quite pleased with himself, and boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the faith in God is a myth.
Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question, professor?" "Of course," replied the professor. The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"
What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The students snickered at the young man's question.
The young man replied, "In fact, sir, cold does not exist.
According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is, in reality, the absence of heat. Everybody or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat. All matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat."
The student continued. "Professor, does darkness exist? The professor responded, "Of course it does."
The student replied, "Once again you are wrong, sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is, in reality, the absence of light. We can study light, but not darkness. In fact, we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wave lengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."
Finally, the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?"
Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course, as I have already said, "We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."
To this the student replied,"Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God, It is just like darkness and cold - a work that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not created evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down. The young student's name was -- Albert Einstein
 
Post Reply
Replies: 94
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 17, 2004 at 6:19 PM
quote:
Originally posted by Oshun Auset:
DOES EVIL EXIST?

A university professor challenged his students with this question.
Did God create everything that exists? A student bravely replied, "Yes, He did!"
"God created everything?" the professor asked. "Yes, sir," the student replied.
The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists. And according to the principal that our works define who we are, then God is evil." The student became quiet before such an answer.
The professor was quite pleased with himself, and boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the faith in God is a myth.
Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question, professor?" "Of course," replied the professor. The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"
What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The students snickered at the young man's question.
The young man replied, "In fact, sir, cold does not exist.
According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is, in reality, the absence of heat. Everybody or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat. All matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat."
The student continued. "Professor, does darkness exist? The professor responded, "Of course it does."
The student replied, "Once again you are wrong, sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is, in reality, the absence of light. We can study light, but not darkness. In fact, we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wave lengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."
Finally, the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?"
Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course, as I have already said, "We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."
To this the student replied,"Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God, It is just like darkness and cold - a work that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not created evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down. The young student's name was -- Albert Einstein

Ah yes, theodicy. This is the area in which I will probably do my dissertation. Not surprisingly, this has been an area of some serious reflection within black theology. My M.Div thesis was titled "The Problem of Evil and Suffering in Antebellum Slave Narratives."

I would recommend for those interested in this area, to take a look at William R. Jones classic text, Is God a White Racist. Also, my adviser, Anthony B. Pinn's text Why Lord: Suffering and Evil in Black Theology.

The classic argument, however, is not whether evil is a thing. Einstein, if this story is true, following a very traditional ontology. Being vs. non-being, good vs. evil. For example, in the 19th Century German dogmatics, evil was often referred to as "das nichtige" - "the nothing". The issue has been put by philosophers and religionists alike in terms of
1. God is understood to be omnipotent?
2. God is also supposed to be loving and compassionate.
3. Yet, there is evil and suffering in the world.

Thus, God is either impotent or malevolent. Or, to put it in existential understanding ala William Jones, God must be judged by the sum of God's acts in history. Thus, either there is no God, or God is racists, because black people continue to catch hell in this world.
 
Michael B. Moore offline
A1 · 14,197 Forum Posts
 September 17, 2004 at 6:26 PM
Some believe that everything is a blessing, but that we must search to discover the true nature of the blessing in some things more than others.
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 17, 2004 at 6:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
Some believe that everything is a blessing, but that we must search to discover the true nature of the blessing in some things more than others.

So is the suffering of the oppressed a blessing? There are those in the Christian tradition who speak about redemptive suffering ala King. But, the suffering of the innocent, for example, for the moral edification of others is quite troubling to me. To paraphrase James H. Cone, the 'Father of Black Theology', any God who is not actively engaged in the liberation of the poor and oppressed is a God that we need to kill or do away with.
 
AudioGuy offline
A1 · 3,392 Forum Posts
 September 17, 2004 at 6:47 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

So is the suffering of the oppressed a blessing? There are those in the Christian tradition who speak about redemptive suffering ala King. But, the suffering of the innocent, for example, for the moral edification of others is quite troubling to me. To paraphrase James H. Cone, the 'Father of Black Theology', any God who is not actively engaged in the liberation of the poor and oppressed is a God that we need to kill or do away with.


I am not sure where you stand... Do you consider yourself to be a christian?
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 18, 2004 at 9:43 AM
quote:
Originally posted by AudioGuy:
quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

So is the suffering of the oppressed a blessing? There are those in the Christian tradition who speak about redemptive suffering ala King. But, the suffering of the innocent, for example, for the moral edification of others is quite troubling to me. To paraphrase James H. Cone, the 'Father of Black Theology', any God who is not actively engaged in the liberation of the poor and oppressed is a God that we need to kill or do away with.


I am not sure where you stand... Do you consider yourself to be a christian?

Yes, I am a Christian. I have also been an ordained and practicing minister for 12 years. But I am not sure that this answer helps with what I may be reading as other underlying presuppositions in your asking? However, I may be wrong.
 
Michael B. Moore offline
A1 · 14,197 Forum Posts
 September 18, 2004 at 11:09 AM
quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

So is the suffering of the oppressed a blessing?


Some believe so. They believe that everything that happens in life is perfect for the person who is experiencing it. They believe that our souls are put here on this Earth to grow and evolve, and sometimes they can only do that by experiencing what we perceive to be not good. The argument suggests that through suffering and tragedy even, the soul can often acquire the experiences and lessons that it needs to continue on its path. Now, to the person experiencing the pain - it certainly feels like Hell. It is logical for them to ask, "how could God do this to me"? In reality, though, followers of this line of reasoning believe it to be a blessing and that their soul is richer for the experience.

I think this is similar to the way Buddhists think. I know that they say not to pity the homeless and afflicted, for in reality their souls are getting what they need to move closer to enlightenment.

So, bottom line, there are many who believe that there is no evil. They believe that the onus is on us to see the blessings in every experience.

Thoughts?
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 18, 2004 at 1:54 PM
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

So is the suffering of the oppressed a blessing?


Some believe so. They believe that everything that happens in life is perfect for the person who is experiencing it. They believe that our souls are put here on this Earth to grow and evolve, and sometimes they can only do that by experiencing what we perceive to be not good. The argument suggests that through suffering and tragedy even, the soul can often acquire the experiences and lessons that it needs to continue on its path. Now, to the person experiencing the pain - it certainly feels like Hell. It is logical for them to ask, "how could God do this to me"? In reality, though, followers of this line of reasoning believe it to be a blessing and that their soul is richer for the experience.

I think this is similar to the way Buddhists think. I know that they say not to pity the homeless and afflicted, for in reality their souls are getting what they need to move closer to enlightenment.

So, bottom line, there are many who believe that there is no evil. They believe that the onus is on us to see the blessings in every experience.

Thoughts?

I am not sure that my Chan monk friend would say that this is a Buddhist position, but there are various types of Buddhism.

Whatever the origin of this view, I am concerned that it would produce a sort of quietism. Is what is right or wrong simply what is? What is the understanding of morality and ethics in such an orientation? Is there such a thing as right and wrong here? What of justice?

As is the case of most religions, there is also the epistemological question. How do we know that such is to be the case? Both the existentialist and the empiricist would raise this issue. One observes the suffering of people in the here and now. One does not have access to a cosmological or eschatological perspective unless via some form transcendence. Yet suffering, pain, and oppression are immediately present to us. I am concerned not only about the "sweet bye and bye, but also the nasty now and now."

As articulated, it also seems rather narcissistic. Am I to be concerned only about my ultimate well-being or am I supposed to have compassion for others. Indeed, compassion (literally to feel with) would appear to be antithetical to such a faith orientation?
Finally, as an African American, I can not say that the enslavement, rape, torture, and murder of my ancestors is consistent with the will of the Divine or the cosmos, especially as a means of spiritual growth. Personally, I find such notion repugnant and inconsistent with the God of my experience as well as the God I believe revealed in the Christ event.

As a statement of faith, I believe that God is on the side of the poor, the oppressed, and the marginalized. As a Christian, I find confirmation of this in the biblical witness of the Hebrew prophets and the stories about the ministry of Jesus. It is also consistent with what I believe to be the best of the African American Christian tradition which includes the likes of David Walker, Denmark Vesey, Gabriel Prosser, Sojourner Truth, Anna Julia Cooper, Henry McNeal Turner, and Martin Luther King, Jr.
 
Michael B. Moore offline
A1 · 14,197 Forum Posts
 September 18, 2004 at 3:34 PM
I agree with everything you've said. For the sake of argument though, could it not be perceived to be extraordinarily arrogant to question the will of God? Do you see that it might be possible that God may create realities/events/situations that humans just might not be able to understand?

When I was a kid, I didn't understand why my parents made me do chores around the house and yard. I thought it "cruel and unusual punishment". While an extraordinarily superficial example, in a similar way could God give us experiences that we just can't appreciate the full value of for our lives?

Bottom line: if we believe in the omnipotence and perfection of God, how could we also believe that that perfection is sometimes and somehow suspended to allow things less than perfect to exist?

Taking your argument below:

quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

The issue has been put by philosophers and religionists alike in terms of
1. God is understood to be omnipotent?
2. God is also supposed to be loving and compassionate.
3. Yet, there is evil and suffering in the world.


Shouldn't this cause us to look more thoughtfully in the mirror to analyze our perceptions and thoughts about the world? If 1 and 2 are true, then by definition 3 must not be true. Maybe the problem is in our perceptions of God's omnipotence and love. Maybe some of the things we experience are a form of "tough love" from God?

Are you prepared to challenge points 1 and 2? If not, then what other rational choice do we have?
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 19, 2004 at 12:44 AM
,"Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God, It is just like darkness and cold - a work that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not created evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down. The young student's name was -- Albert Einstein

I was waiting for someone to mention 'good.'

And what about that comparison of light and heat "...that exist just as does faith and love". I think we will all agree that light and heat can be measured. I don't think such agreement can be reached on faith and love.

Then there is the devil. Lucifer. That angel that was cast out of heaven. Again, I think we can be brought to agree the devil is evil, but is evil the devil?

I think we are 'throwing around' nouns as adjectives.

I know of no method to measure either faith, or love. Faith is said to be the evidence of things unseen. But no measurement. Heat is unseen, but can be measure, precisely. No need to get into love.

Is the devil real? I think we can be brought to agreement, for those of us who believe, that God created the devil. Is the devil the personification of evil, or is evil simply a description of the devil, and a myriad of other things, and persons?

God and Einstein in the same thread. Heavy, heavy. Einstein's treatment of energy equates it to a multiplication of light. All of the parameters of that equation are measurable, and can be expressed in terms of each other in fact. Yet, we cannot touch two of the parameters and may not be able to see the other.

Maybe evil is simply a condition. Like good.

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 19, 2004 at 9:36 AM
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
Taking your argument below:

quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

The issue has been put by philosophers and religionists alike in terms of
1. God is understood to be omnipotent?
2. God is also supposed to be loving and compassionate.
3. Yet, there is evil and suffering in the world.


Shouldn't this cause us to look more thoughtfully in the mirror to analyze our perceptions and thoughts about the world? If 1 and 2 are true, then by definition 3 must not be true. Maybe the problem is in our perceptions of God's omnipotence and love. Maybe some of the things we experience are a form of "tough love" from God?

Are you prepared to challenge points 1 and 2? If not, then what other rational choice do we have?

I am absolutely ready to challenge 1 and 2. I simply put them out there to state the classic contention in theodicy. There are a number of ways of looking at both of these. For example, in process theology, God is understood as unfolding, in process. Ontologically the distinction is articulated as becoming (process) verses being (traditional). Thus God is not omniscient, omnipotent, immutable (unchanging or constant), in process as in orthodox Christian views.

With respect to the second category, there are other faith traditions, even certain African cosmologies where the Divine or the High God is not really concerned with the affairs of human beings. There are also, as William Jones and Anthony Pinn would suggest religious humanist position which eliminate the notion of God, god, or the divine all together. As a theist, however, I can't go quite so far.

Personally, I am very intrigued by process. In some respects, it has interesting resonances with the biblical tradition. The God of the Old Testament, for example, responds to human communiticaion, changes God's mind, repents for the destruction of the world in the flood, etc.

Maybe by the time I write my dissertation, I will have it all figured out. Big Grin Seriously, I think that the problem of evil remains one of the biggest challenges to any person of faith.
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 19, 2004 at 9:58 AM
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:
Then there is the devil. Lucifer. That angel that was cast out of heaven. Again, I think we can be brought to agree the devil is evil, but is evil the devil?

I think we are 'throwing around' nouns as adjectives.

Is the devil real? I think we can be brought to agreement, for those of us who believe, that God created the devil. Is the devil the personification of evil, or is evil simply a description of the devil, and a myriad of other things, and persons?
...
God and Einstein in the same thread. Heavy, heavy. Einstein's treatment of energy equates it to a multiplication of light. All of the parameters of that equation are measurable, and can be expressed in terms of each other in fact. Yet, we cannot touch two of the parameters and may not be able to see the other.


Your post raises a couple of questions for me.

1. Do you believe in a being traditionally refered to as the devil or is the devil symbolic, a metaphor, or as you also say, a personification of something such as evil.

2. When you say that God created the devil, what do you mean? Did God create the devil to be evil? Is God responsible for the devil and thus evil?

Finally, I do not get your last statement. Are you referring to the statement E=mc[squared]?
When you say that energy is related to a multiplication of light, this is confusing. The c is a constant in this equation which stands for the velocity of light. [It actually should be written as a vector quantity, but when squared it becomes scaler.] It is simply a measurement, a property of light, but not light itself.

The equation tells you how much energy would result if you have a certain mass converted all to energy.
 
Michael B. Moore offline
A1 · 14,197 Forum Posts
 September 19, 2004 at 10:04 AM
Kresge - could you please offer your perspective on the view that evil is really God misunderstood?
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 20, 2004 at 7:09 AM
Personally, I am very intrigued by process. In some respects, it has interesting resonances with the biblical tradition. The God of the Old Testament, for example, responds to human communication, changes God's mind, repents for the destruction of the world in the flood, etc.---kresge

This is shattering stuff to me. The concept of "The God of the Old Testament,.... changes God's mind; repents..." This is the first I've heard of God being repentant.

Can't touch that.

"in process theology, God is understood as unfolding, in process."---kresge

I am an absolute neophyte to theology. Process Theology that advances a changing God seems self-serving at a minimum. Ultimately the process theist is sure to have a 'God' he/she understands because that 'God' will be in the image of the theist.

This exemplifies most of my reasons for ending my participation in organized church. The ego of the theist is more than I can tolerate in my relationship with God.

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 20, 2004 at 7:45 AM
"1. Do you believe in a being traditionally refered to as the devil or is the devil symbolic, a metaphor, or as you also say, a personification of something such as evil."---kresge

In for a penny, in for a pound. I have to say yes. I don't think the devil is as real as God is real. It is the reality of Christianity. I don't believe, however, that God stands above all making real-time decisions on the happenings of the day. The same with the devil.

Geraldine knew the devil didn't make "her" do it. Geraldine did it.

"2. When you say that God created the devil, what do you mean? Did God create the devil to be evil? Is God responsible for the devil and thus evil?"---kresge

I am not sure to tell the truth. The devil I know is said to have been the next strongest entity to Jesus Christ. The number one angel. My logic says, and maybe the bible, 'Number One Angel' made choices that brought he/her into disfavor, and resulting banishment. I believe God is responsible for 'Number One Angel', and 'Number One Angel' is responsible for he/she became.

"Finally, I do not get your last statement. Are you referring to the statement E=mc[squared]?
When you say that energy is related to a multiplication of light, this is confusing. The c is a constant in this equation which stands for the velocity of light. [It actually should be written as a vector quantity, but when squared it becomes scaler.] It is simply a measurement, a property of light, but not light itself."---kresge

Not quite. While 'c' is constant, it is not 'a constant' in its mathematical relationship in the equation. If this were true, the value of 'c' would vary with the other parameters. As in Reynolds Number. The force (effect)of light is much more. It is such that the other (two)parameters much adjust themselves to assure the value of the speed of light remains the same.

While the speed, the velocity, of light is indeed a measurement of a property, let's not forget so is intensity, and other properties. AND that property (speed)is always the same. There is no need to measure it, but you can to evaluate the relationship E/m ratio. If that ration is not 'c-squared', something is wrong.

If direction is critical to vector is critical, but does nothing to add or detract from the relationship of the parameters, or their values for that matter.

The point of the example was tangibility.

Existence.

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
Oshun Auset offline
A1 · 7,168 Forum Posts
 September 20, 2004 at 9:31 AM
I see we have some major philosophers here....Just to add to the convo on this....Lets take into account the religious/spiritual perspective on Einsten himslef...born and ethnic Jew...later became an avid fan of the Egyptian mystery system...check this post for further detail on the subject...

http://africanamerica.org/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=60260642&f=27970854&m=1331062231&r=1331062231#1331062231

Does this effect the concepts he was arguing with the professor, and how we are theorizing about them on this thread? Concepts like "the devil" and such, when removed from a Judeo-Christian, or even just the Christian perspective, change quite a bit. They agree with what Einstein stated that evil is the absense of God...and also includes imbablance as a definition of evil...(I practiced the Kemetic system for a number of years)... Any thoughts?
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 20, 2004 at 1:08 PM
Does this effect the concepts he was arguing with the professor, and how we are theorizing about them on this thread? Concepts like "the devil" and such, when removed from a Judeo-Christian, or even just the Christian perspective, change quite a bit. They agree with what Einstein stated that evil is the absense of God...and also includes imbablance as a definition of evil...(I practiced the Kemetic system for a number of years)... Any thoughts?---Oshun Auset

As I always say, or intend to say, I approach religion with great trepidation. I think the primary ingredient in any discussion on religion is respect. Religion after all is based on belief, faith, conviction. There is no standard logic applying across the board.

Taking the devil out of Christianity for independent discussion is analogous to taking the air out of a pneumatic tire, and discussing the air. The question that begs to be asked is, "Compared to what?" Like Les McCann said.

Every religion should be, must be, discussed in its own context. I think that is even true for denominations within a given religion.

I am a Christian. I think Christianity is the only valid religion. If I didn't, I would not be Christian. Christianity teaches 'there is no other name under heaven can save you.' Doesn't that mean to believe there is another way is outside of Christianity?

I think, yes.

But it's not wise to go around telling those who are not Christian, "You are going to hell." Big deal if they don't believe in hell.

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
Oshun Auset offline
A1 · 7,168 Forum Posts
 September 20, 2004 at 1:40 PM
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:
Does this effect the concepts he was arguing with the professor, and how we are theorizing about them on this thread? Concepts like "the devil" and such, when removed from a Judeo-Christian, or even just the Christian perspective, change quite a bit. They agree with what Einstein stated that evil is the absense of God...and also includes imbablance as a definition of evil...(I practiced the Kemetic system for a number of years)... Any thoughts?---Oshun Auset

_As I always say, or intend to say, I approach religion with great trepidation. I think the primary ingredient in any discussion on religion is respect. Religion after all is based on belief, faith, conviction. There is no standard logic applying across the board.

Taking the devil out of Christianity for independent discussion is analogous to taking the air out of a pneumatic tire, and discussing the air. The question that begs to be asked is, "Compared to what?" Like Les McCann said.

Every religion should be, must be, discussed in its own context. I think that is even true for denominations within a given religion.

I am a Christian. I think Christianity is the only valid religion. If I didn't, I would not be Christian. Christianity teaches 'there is no other name under heaven can save you.' Doesn't that mean to believe there is another way is outside of Christianity?

I think, yes.

But it's not wise to go around telling those who are not Christian, "You are going to hell." Big deal if they don't believe in hell._

PEACE

Jim Chester


You completely missed my point.

Einstein was NOT raised a Christian, nor was he a Christian in later life. So, what I was asking was does that effect his argument with the professor and how we view it? He couldn't have been defending the Christian concept of the devil because he was not Christian....Hence how do the posters on the board feel about this. Or does Einsteins religious point of reference not matter when we are discussing his argument? Should only our religious persuassions matter? I thought everyones religious point of referance should be taken into consideration when they pose something....I'm not removing the devil from a Christian context...nor am I asking anyone else too....In this post...the devil wasn't discussed from a Christian context because Einstein isn't Christian....I hope this better explains what I meant.
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 20, 2004 at 6:32 PM
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:
Personally, I am very intrigued by process. In some respects, it has interesting resonances with the biblical tradition. The God of the Old Testament, for example, responds to human communication, changes God's mind, repents for the destruction of the world in the flood, etc.---kresge

_This is shattering stuff to me. The concept of "The God of the Old Testament,.... changes God's mind; repents..." This is the first I've heard of God being repentant.

Can't touch that.

"in process theology, God is understood as unfolding, in process."---kresge

I am an absolute neophyte to theology. Process Theology that advances a changing God seems self-serving at a minimum. Ultimately the process theist is sure to have a 'God' he/she understands because that 'God' will be in the image of the theist.

This exemplifies most of my reasons for ending my participation in organized church. The ego of the theist is more than I can tolerate in my relationship with God._

PEACE

Jim Chester

One might say that all theology is self serving. Big Grin

As to the nature of God in the OT, check this out.
Genesis 6:6
6 And the LORD was sorry that he had made humankind on the earth, and it grieved him to his heart. 7So the LORD said, ˜I will blot out from the earth the human beings I have created"”people together with animals and creeping things and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.

Exodus 4:24-26
At a lodging place on the way, the LORD met {Moses} and was about to kill him. But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son's foreskin and touched {Moses'} feet with it. "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me," she said. So the LORD let him alone. (At that time she said "bridegroom of blood," referring to circumcision.)

Exodus 32:7-14
7 The LORD said to Moses, ˜Go down at once! Your people, whom you brought up out of the land of Egypt, have acted perversely; 8they have been quick to turn aside from the way that I commanded them; they have cast for themselves an image of a calf, and have worshiped it and sacrificed to it, and said, "These are your gods, O Israel, who brought you up out of the land of Egypt!"˜ 9The LORD said to Moses, ˜I have seen this people, how stiff-necked they are. 10Now let me alone, so that my wrath may burn hot against them and I may consume them; and of you I will make a great nation.' 11But Moses implored the LORD his God, and said, ˜O LORD, why does your wrath burn hot against your people, whom you brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? 12Why should the Egyptians say, "It was with evil intent that he brought them out to kill them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth"? Turn from your fierce wrath; change your mind and do not bring disaster on your people. 13Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, your servants, how you swore to them by your own self, saying to them, "I will multiply your descendants like the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have promised I will give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it forever."˜ 14And the LORD changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people.
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 20, 2004 at 7:01 PM
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
Kresge - could you please offer your perspective on the view that evil is really God misunderstood?

I think that such a position is frought with difficulty. I think that the only out on this is an eschatological compensatory view, but as I have said before, such a position has its own problems.

The notion that "evil" is corrective, instructive, or punishment for example, are historic theodicies, yet in the end, they are all inadequate. As Albert Camus describes in "The Plague", what do you do in the face of the death of an innocent baby? What lesson, error, or sin in this instance is compensated by this suffering?

Another example might be the oppression of African peoples in the world. What sin can account for such a state of affairs? There is also the maldistribution of evil? In other words, what have African peoples done in comparison to Europeans in this country to justify the greater degree of their suffering.

Continuing, if evil is a misunderstanding of God, then should we even resist it or oppression, suffering... Shouldn't we welcome it, embrace it. Shouldn't we stop fighting for a more just world?

Also, if one were to say that God's plans are beyond our comprehension, then why do we presume to know that God's plans are good? Why do we presume to believe that God is for us? History? Experience? Do any of these really solve the problem? They are both multievidential,i.e., one can interpret most things in numerous ways. What is the truth?

These are some of the musings off the top of my head.
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 21, 2004 at 4:57 AM
Last Edited: September 21, 2004 at 7:05 AM
You completely missed my point.

Einstein was NOT raised a Christian, nor was he a Christian in later life. So, what I was asking was does that effect his argument with the professor and how we view it? He couldn't have been defending the Christian concept of the devil because he was not Christian....Hence how do the posters on the board feel about this. Or does Einsteins religious point of reference not matter when we are discussing his argument? Should only our religious persuasions matter? I thought everyones religious point of reference should be taken into consideration when they pose something....I'm not removing the devil from a Christian context...nor am I asking anyone else too....In this post...the devil wasn't discussed from a Christian context because Einstein isn't Christian....I hope this better explains what I meant.---Oshun Auset

This is part of the treachery of discussing religion. When talking about religion, it's not REALLY about religion. It's objective discussion.

There is nothing objective about religion. Trying to make it so is a useless task. To talk about Christianity outside of the precepts of Christianity is un-Christian. If it is un-Christian, it is irrelevant to Christianity.

The best such discussion can be is philosophy. Philosophy is personal opinion, sometimes gone amuck.

Each religion, every religion, must be discussed in its own context.

That is why I try to keep religion personal. And I'm not sure about myself.

Please don't think I am saying you can't talk in any manner you want.

But where is the reason, as in reasonableness?

There is no right, or wrong.

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 21, 2004 at 5:22 AM
Last Edited: September 21, 2004 at 7:04 AM
14And the LORD changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people---via kresge

[I]I am reeducated. God was/is repentent, and changes his mind.

I also challenged God working in 'real time.' That puts prayer in question as well. My intent was to say without petition (prayer) the occurrences of our life divinely influenced.

So, God is not the same now and forever. And maybe He's not the Way, The Truth, and The Light. Or maybe if He is it's only for now. Since He's also The Word, and that's now changeable as stated by Him, I am left in a real quandary.

Thanks for the reminder of the Old Testament truths. I am thinking these are reasons for the New Testament.

If God is a fabrication of man, as is argued, it was clearly time for restructuring.[I]

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 21, 2004 at 8:00 AM
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:
14And the LORD changed his mind about the disaster that he planned to bring on his people---via kresge

[I]I am reeducated. God was/is repentent, and changes his mind.

I also challenged God working in 'real time.' That puts prayer in question as well. My intent was to say without petition (prayer) the occurrences of our life divinely influenced.

So, God is not the same now and forever. And maybe He's not the Way, The Truth, and The Light. Or maybe if He is it's only for now. Since He's also The Word, and that's now changeable as stated by Him, I am left in a real quandary.

Thanks for the reminder of the Old Testament truths. I am thinking these are reasons for the New Testament.

If God is a fabrication of man, as is argued, it was clearly time for restructuring.[I]

PEACE

Jim Chester

Jim,
I hope that I am not the catalyst for a crisis of faith here. I was just pointing out some things that often are glossed over in the text.
 
Michael B. Moore offline
A1 · 14,197 Forum Posts
 September 21, 2004 at 8:44 AM
Last Edited: September 21, 2004 at 1:13 PM
Interesting post: a few thoughts -

quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

I think that such a position is frought with difficulty.


Respectfully, unless you are willing to redefine God as something less than omnipotent and loving, then what other choice do you have then to reconsider common interpretations of His works?

quote:
The notion that "evil" is corrective, instructive, or punishment for example, are historic theodicies, yet in the end, they are all inadequate.


I did not suggest that God is "corrective". I suggested that we see things and interpret them in the best way we know how. Sometimes, we're wrong in our interpretations, no?

quote:
As Albert Camus describes in "The Plague", what do you do in the face of the death of an innocent baby? What lesson, error, or sin in this instance is compensated by this suffering?


As suggested above, Buddhists have a very simple, logical, and clear response to this that addresses the evolution of the soul.

quote:
In other words, what have African peoples done in comparison to Europeans in this country to justify the greater degree of their suffering.


Aside from the argument you seem to be making, which infers a karma-like justification for God's works, aren't you considering this in a particularly narrow frame of reference? People have been around for millenia. Maybe if we're blessed, we'll live for 100 years. Since God has been around forever, what makes you think that if He acted in the way you suggest, that it would necessarily be in a manner that accommodates our perceiving it as "just" and "logical"? God's a busy God. Maybe it takes a thousand years or so to get to something. brosmile

quote:
Continuing, if evil is a misunderstanding of God, then should we even resist it or oppression, suffering... Shouldn't we welcome it, embrace it. Shouldn't we stop fighting for a more just world?


Again, Buddhists say that this superficial suffering leads to enlightenment. That said, I do not believe that God wants us to be passive and to submit to "fate". I'm no biblical scholar, but I'm sure there is plenty of evidence to support God's desire for us to "be the best we can be".

quote:
Also, if one were to say that God's plans are beyond our comprehension, then why do we presume to know that God's plans are good?


Well, again, unless you're prepared to challenge God's power and goodness, then how else can you digest the experience of life without looking more thoughtfully in the mirror?

quote:
Why do we presume to believe that God is for us? History? Experience? Do any of these really solve the problem? They are both multievidential,i.e., one can interpret most things in numerous ways. What is the truth?


You've probably already answered this a couple of times by now, but if God is all powerful and good, then our interpretation of that power and goodness must be the only answer.
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 21, 2004 at 1:12 PM
Jim,
I hope that I am not the catalyst for a crisis of faith here. I was just pointing out some things that often are glossed over in the text.--kresge

By no means. I did that more than 40 years ago.

I recognized the texts. And I have no problem with them.

However, I have long been disappointed in the substitution of personal opinion (philosophy) (objective discussion) for the rationale for precepts of a variety of religions.

I don't know how to do that.

In fact, I do know how to do that. I refuse to.
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 21, 2004 at 5:39 PM
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:

You've probably already answered this a couple of times by now, but if God is all powerful and good, then our interpretation of that power and goodness must be the only answer.

Let me try this. Why should I posit a God that is all powerful and good?

Also, aren't most versions of Buddhism non-theistic. Thus they do not need a theodicy sense they do not have a diety. Such a move is one way out of the dilemma of evil of at least a relationship between the divine and evil. Humanism and atheism are others. One then simply moves to theological and/or philosophical anthropology and ethics. As a theist, however, I still have to wrestle with the issue. It is for this reason, that I am attracted to process. It is also for this reason that I am interested in epistemology; i.e., how do we know what we know. This becomes especially tricky with respect to what we can know about God. Do we rely on history, revelation, feeling, intuition, faith, community...?
 
Michael B. Moore offline
A1 · 14,197 Forum Posts
 September 21, 2004 at 6:38 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

Let me try this. Why should I posit a God that is all powerful and good?


. . . because you're a Christian and those are two fundamental tenets of that religion? Confused You've got me quite intrigued now. Please tell me more about your thoughts here.

If He is not all powerful and all good, then it would seem that God is not God. Wouldn't the concept be something akin to "God-light"? Or maybe not even God but just some master organizer of the universe? In any event, the concept of God as it relates to good versus evil would be irrelevant then - since God could do both.

quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't most versions of Buddhism non-theistic and thus do not have the same issues as theistic religions.


The reference to Buddhism was in an effort to explain the perception of reality without evil. Buddhism is an example of a (rather large!) group of people who typically do not believe in "evil". Furthermore, don't all religions seek to answer the same questions - however they are constructed?
 
Oshun Auset offline
A1 · 7,168 Forum Posts
 September 22, 2004 at 7:47 AM
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:
You completely missed my point.

Einstein was NOT raised a Christian, nor was he a Christian in later life. So, what I was asking was does that effect his argument with the professor and how we view it? He couldn't have been defending the Christian concept of the devil because he was not Christian....Hence how do the posters on the board feel about this. Or does Einsteins religious point of reference not matter when we are discussing his argument? Should only our religious persuasions matter? I thought everyones religious point of reference should be taken into consideration when they pose something....I'm not removing the devil from a Christian context...nor am I asking anyone else too....In this post...the devil wasn't discussed from a Christian context because Einstein isn't Christian....I hope this better explains what I meant.---Oshun Auset

_This is part of the treachery of discussing religion. When talking about religion, it's not REALLY about religion. It's objective discussion.

There is nothing objective about religion. Trying to make it so is a useless task. To talk about Christianity outside of the precepts of Christianity is un-Christian. If it is un-Christian, it is irrelevant to Christianity.

The best such discussion can be is philosophy. Philosophy is personal opinion, sometimes gone amuck.

Each religion, every religion, must be discussed in its own context.

That is why I try to keep religion personal. And I'm not sure about myself.

Please don't think I am saying you can't talk in any manner you want.

But where is the reason, as in reasonableness?

There is no right, or wrong._

PEACE

Jim Chester


I was trying to discuss Einstein's perspective since he was the one who made the initial argument in the post about evil. Since he wasn't a Christian, I was wondering what people's thoughts on HIS perspective in the argument were. Or does his perspective not matter?
 
Diamond offline
A1 · 629 Forum Posts
 September 22, 2004 at 9:08 AM
Does evil exist?

This is an interesting topic for me, right HERE, right NOW. Someone I grew up with and respected has been accused of a heinous crime. When I say grew up with, I mean we went to elementary, junior high school and graduated from high school together. This person has always held a position in our(me and his) society whether high school(class president) or in the REAL world(school board president). Recently, this person pleaded guilty to rape, involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, indecent assault, indecent exposure and corrupting a minor. His victim was a 7 year old girl.
When ask how could he do such a thing his response was, the "spirit of Satan" had entered him. "Moral absolutism" holds that good and evil are fixed concepts established by God.
So, he is describing his inciters of these despicable acts as evil SPIRITS or DEMONS that he could not resist. One thing is for SURE, evil represents destructive behaviors that lead directly to a fruitless life and death. Those of us who knew him for many years are shocked that he could do such a terrible thing.

Since this event, I have pondered the question, "How well can we say we know anyone?" do we really know the evil that lurks in the heart?

Does evil exist? Yes, within those who are absent from GOD!
 
AudioGuy offline
A1 · 3,392 Forum Posts
 September 22, 2004 at 9:52 AM
quote:
Originally posted by Diamond:
Does evil exist?


...When ask(ed) how could he do such a thing his response was, the "spirit of Satan" had entered him...


How do you feel about his response? Does it put you at ease? Does it somehow justify his actions? If he repents, can he be forgiven and accepted back into the fold?


quote:
Since this event, I have pondered the question, "How well can we say we know anyone?" do we really know the evil that lurks in the heart?


They say you never really know someone until you live with them.

quote:
Does evil exist? Yes, within those who are absent from GOD!


Is it evil that exists or is it the absence of God in that person's life that led him to his actions?
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 23, 2004 at 4:51 AM
Diamond:

I am always at a loss in how to respond when this kind of thing happens. I believe we talk to 'the conventional wisdom' of our society. By that, I mean when we find ourselves on the wrong side of societal good, we blame our behavior on what society says are the overriding forces of our society, the 'forces of good and evil."

It seems we need an answer to "I don't know what made me do it."

We need an answer we can accept, or make us acceptable in the eyes of others.

I always admired 'Flip' Wilson for his insight into the social psyche with 'Geraldine.'

I don't know why I said that.

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 September 23, 2004 at 7:04 PM
quote:
Originally posted by MBM:
quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

Let me try this. Why should I posit a God that is all powerful and good?


. . . because you're a Christian and those are two fundamental tenets of that religion? Confused You've got me quite intrigued now. Please tell me more about your thoughts here.

If He is not all powerful and all good, then it would seem that God is not God. Wouldn't the concept be something akin to "God-light"? Or maybe not even God but just some master organizer of the universe? In any event, the concept of God as it relates to good versus evil would be irrelevant then - since God could do both.

quote:
Originally posted by kresge:

Correct me if I am wrong, but aren't most versions of Buddhism non-theistic and thus do not have the same issues as theistic religions.


The reference to Buddhism was in an effort to explain the perception of reality without evil. Buddhism is an example of a (rather large!) group of people who typically do not believe in "evil". Furthermore, don't all religions seek to answer the same questions - however they are constructed?

MBM,
Sorry for the delay in getting back to this. Yes, I am a Christian. I would say that I definitely believe in the tenet of the benevolence of God. I may be willing to negotiate on the understanding of omnipotence, at least as traditionally conceived. After all, the concept is extrabiblical (Greek) in origin. For me, I do give epistemological credence to experiences of faith, but this does not mean that I do so uncritically. I do believe that God is on the side of the poor and oppressed, and the God's good will will be eschatologically manifest.

I asked the question as I did in order to get your understanding of the nature of God.

As to whether all religions seek to answer the same questions, my personal opinion is no. As a "scholar in training", methodologically I am neutral on this. I would have to see the evidence in the context of a truly compelling argument. Different religions, as you note, do not believe the same about evil or good. Also, religions have different understandings of what we might describe as human nature.

Again, as a scholar, I am very skeptical of essential or totalizing arguments. They tend to be reductionistic and reject particularity and contradictions. Thus, I would tend to at least initially take each religion on its own terms.
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 24, 2004 at 5:11 AM
Thus, I would tend to at least initially take each religion on its own terms.---kresge

I use this as my guide to discussions on religion.

Concepts of knowledge and death revelation nothwithstanding.

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
Diamond offline
A1 · 629 Forum Posts
 September 24, 2004 at 11:10 AM
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:
Diamond:

I am always at a loss in how to respond when this kind of thing happens. I believe we talk to 'the conventional wisdom' of our society. By that, I mean when we find ourselves on the wrong side of societal good, we blame our behavior on what society says are the overriding forces of our society, the 'forces of good and evil."

It seems we need an answer to "I don't know what made me do it."

We need an answer we can accept, or make us acceptable in the eyes of others.


Jim Chester


You nailed it!! Its difficult to NOT have an acceptable answer. But, in reality NO answer would be GOOD for the crime. Its as thought, the community as a whole needs therapy. Because we all are shaking our heads in disbelief but those of us that are praticing Christians have the INSTRUCTIONS to "what do you do if" but its still not easy to swallow.
 
James Wesley Chester offline
A1 · 10,110 Forum Posts
 September 25, 2004 at 5:40 AM
but its still not easy to swallow---Diamond

I agree.

Still we know we must have a way to go on. We all have 'feet of clay.' Knowing this helps keep me humble in the eyes of my ego.

You may have noticed on the 'political' forum here on the board. I got so caught up in Camille Cosby sounding the call about the Voting Rights Act, I ignore the clear incompetance of the person was claiming she said it.

For me, in this instance, there was no excuse. The devil had nothing to do with it.

You will recovery from the shock of your experience.

Sometimes we can be only what we ar today.

PEACE

Jim Chester
 
Diamond offline
A1 · 629 Forum Posts
 September 27, 2004 at 9:51 AM
quote:
Originally posted by James Wesley Chester:

You will recovery from the shock of your experience.

Sometimes we can be only what we ar today._

PEACE

Jim Chester


THANKS! I needed to read those words.

And vent my pain.
 
kevin1122 offline
A3 · 331 Forum Posts
 August 4, 2009 at 8:17 PM
I know this thread ended long before I joined, but I was looking through the old fourms and I just had to comment on this one.

quote:
"DOES EVIL EXIST?

A university professor challenged his students with this question.
Did God create everything that exists? A student bravely replied, "Yes, He did!"
"God created everything?" the professor asked. "Yes, sir," the student replied.
The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists. And according to the principal that our works define who we are, then God is evil." The student became quiet before such an answer.
The professor was quite pleased with himself, and boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the faith in God is a myth.
Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question, professor?" "Of course," replied the professor. The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"
What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The students snickered at the young man's question.
The young man replied, "In fact, sir, cold does not exist.
According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is, in reality, the absence of heat. Everybody or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat. All matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat."
The student continued. "Professor, does darkness exist? The professor responded, "Of course it does."
The student replied, "Once again you are wrong, sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is, in reality, the absence of light. We can study light, but not darkness. In fact, we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wave lengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."
Finally, the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?"
Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course, as I have already said, "We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."
To this the student replied,"Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God, It is just like darkness and cold - a work that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not created evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down. The young student's name was -- Albert Einstein"

I think there is sooo much wrong with this story, it can't be true.
First of all, Heat, and Light are nouns; (a person, place, or thing) they have a physical existence.
Evil on the other hand is an "adjective" it mearly defines the noun; does not exist by itself. I would suspect a University Professor would know this.

Second of all, according to the Bible, one of the attributes of God is "Omnipresence" (along with omniscience, omnipotence, & omnibenevolence) Omnipresence meaning present everywhere.
If evil is where God is not, that would contridict Jereimiah 23:23-24 which suggests God is everywhere at all times. I would suspect if Einstein were a student of the bible he would know this.

K
 
kresge offline
A1 · 4,391 Forum Posts
 August 4, 2009 at 9:42 PM
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
I know this thread ended long before I joined, but I was looking through the old fourms and I just had to comment on this one.

quote:
"DOES EVIL EXIST?

A university professor challenged his students with this question.
Did God create everything that exists? A student bravely replied, "Yes, He did!"
"God created everything?" the professor asked. "Yes, sir," the student replied.
The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists. And according to the principal that our works define who we are, then God is evil." The student became quiet before such an answer.
The professor was quite pleased with himself, and boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the faith in God is a myth.
Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question, professor?" "Of course," replied the professor. The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"
What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The students snickered at the young man's question.
The young man replied, "In fact, sir, cold does not exist.
According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is, in reality, the absence of heat. Everybody or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat. All matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat."
The student continued. "Professor, does darkness exist? The professor responded, "Of course it does."
The student replied, "Once again you are wrong, sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is, in reality, the absence of light. We can study light, but not darkness. In fact, we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wave lengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."
Finally, the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?"
Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course, as I have already said, "We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."
To this the student replied,"Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God, It is just like darkness and cold - a work that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not created evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down. The young student's name was -- Albert Einstein"

I think there is sooo much wrong with this story, it can't be true.
First of all, Heat, and Light are nouns; (a person, place, or thing) they have a physical existence.
Evil on the other hand is an "adjective" it mearly defines the noun; does not exist by itself. I would suspect a University Professor would know this.

Second of all, according to the Bible, one of the attributes of God is "Omnipresence" (along with omniscience, omnipotence, & omnibenevolence) Omnipresence meaning present everywhere.
If evil is where God is not, that would contridict Jereimiah 23:23-24 which suggests God is everywhere at all times. I would suspect if Einstein were a student of the bible he would know this.

K

Whether the story is factual or not, I would guess not.

I disagree, however, with the assertion that evil is just an adjective. I am wondering whether this is the reason that you put it quotes. The word evil with respect to its use in the language is as both an adjective as well as a noun. That it does not exist by itself, I find to be an odd criterion for dismissing it as a noun, given that most things that exist depend on something else; i.e., are contingent. For example, red, as in the color is used in the language as an adjective as well as a noun. However, red - as with all colors - is contingent. Colors do not exist independent of something.

With respect to the Bible's characterization of God, the terms omnipresence, omnipotence, ... do not occur. The use of the terms arise in theological discourse extrabiblically centuries after the canon is closed. Further, there has never been consensus within Christendom as to accepting this terms. I also think that it is a stretch to interpret Jeremiah 23:23-24 as advocating or asserting omnipresence. The proximity of God is one of the things that the exilic Hebrews are wrestling with. It is not assumed. This is a culture that not until the destruction of the temple in the first century understands that to be God's dwelling place, hence it being a place of pilgrimage.
 
kevin1122 offline
A3 · 331 Forum Posts
 August 4, 2009 at 10:15 PM
Kresege makes some excellent points

quote:
"I disagree, however, with the assertion that evil is just an adjective. I am wondering whether this is the reason that you put it quotes. The word evil with respect to its use in the language is as both an adjective as well as a noun."

True! The word evil can be used as a noun such as when it is used as a lable for a person, place, or thing; example:

"I voted for politician "A" rather than politician "B" because I considered him the lesser of the two evils"

In that example the word evil is used as a noun because I am labling the people as evil; but in the story posted by the OP, the word evil wasn't being used that way. In the origional story of the professor vs the student, the word "evil" was used as an adjective, and the words Light and Heat were used as nouns.

quote:
"With respect to the Bible's characterization of God, the terms omnipresence, omnipotence, ... do not occur. The use of the terms arise in theological discourse extrabiblically centuries after the canon is closed.......I also think that it is a stretch to interpret Jeremiah 23:23-24 as advocating or asserting omnipresence."

Jeremiah 23:23-24 reads as follows:

"Am I a God at hand, saith the Lord, and not a God afar off? Can any hide himself in secret places that I shall not see him? saith the Lord. Do not I fill heaven and earth? saith the Lord."

Sounds to me like the lord is saying there is nowhere that he is not. I am sure you will disagree, but that's okay. thanks for the reply

Kevin
 
Vox offline
A1 · 4,870 Forum Posts
 September 9, 2009 at 9:28 AM
quote:
Originally posted by kevin1122:
I know this thread ended long before I joined, but I was looking through the old fourms and I just had to comment on this one.

quote:
"DOES EVIL EXIST?

A university professor challenged his students with this question.
Did God create everything that exists? A student bravely replied, "Yes, He did!"
"God created everything?" the professor asked. "Yes, sir," the student replied.
The professor answered, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists. And according to the principal that our works define who we are, then God is evil." The student became quiet before such an answer.
The professor was quite pleased with himself, and boasted to the students that he had proven once more that the faith in God is a myth.
Another student raised his hand and said, "Can I ask you a question, professor?" "Of course," replied the professor. The student stood up and asked, "Professor, does cold exist?"
What kind of question is this? Of course it exists. Have you never been cold?" The students snickered at the young man's question.
The young man replied, "In fact, sir, cold does not exist.
According to the laws of physics, what we consider cold is, in reality, the absence of heat. Everybody or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy. Absolute zero (-460 degrees F) is the total absence of heat. All matter becomes inert and incapable of reaction at that temperature. Cold does not exist. We have created this word to describe how we feel if we have no heat."
The student continued. "Professor, does darkness exist? The professor responded, "Of course it does."
The student replied, "Once again you are wrong, sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is, in reality, the absence of light. We can study light, but not darkness. In fact, we can use Newton's prism to break white light into many colors and study the various wave lengths of each color. You cannot measure darkness. A simple ray of light can break into a world of darkness and illuminate it. How can you know how dark a certain space is? You measure the amount of light present. Isn't this correct? Darkness is a term used by man to describe what happens when there is no light present."
Finally, the young man asked the professor, "Sir, does evil exist?"
Now uncertain, the professor responded, "Of course, as I have already said, "We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."
To this the student replied,"Evil does not exist, sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God, It is just like darkness and cold - a work that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not created evil. Evil is not like faith, or love, that exist just as does light and heat. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light."
The professor sat down. The young student's name was -- Albert Einstein"

I think there is sooo much wrong with this story, it can't be true.
First of all, Heat, and Light are nouns; (a person, place, or thing) they have a physical existence.
Evil on the other hand is an "adjective" it mearly defines the noun; does not exist by itself. I would suspect a University Professor would know this.

Second of all, according to the Bible, one of the attributes of God is "Omnipresence" (along with omniscience, omnipotence, & omnibenevolence) Omnipresence meaning present everywhere.
If evil is where God is not, that would contridict Jereimiah 23:23-24 which suggests God is everywhere at all times. I would suspect if Einstein were a student of the bible he would know this.

K
Wow, I don't remember any of this thread.

I agree that this story isn't true. But that doesn't mean I agree that evil doesn't exist.

I would also disagree that evil is not a noun. Merriam Webster.com defines "noun" as a WORD that "typically can be combined with determiners to serve as the subject of a verb, can be interpreted as singular or plural, can be replaced with a pronoun, and refer to an entity, quality, state, action, or concept." In English, one word in the same form can serve as a noun, verb, adjective, and so on. But from the above definition, there is no doubt that evil is a noun.

Schoolhouse Rock blazed that old "person, place or thing" definition in our brains as children, but it doesn't really do us much good philosophically. 19

Under my philosophy (if u can call it that), evil is a human quality that flows from the improper application of our God-given free will. God gave us free will, and he made us imperfect. Therefore we are capable of misusing our free will. The malevolent misuse of free will constitutes evil. Evil exists as a human trait.

To suggest that "evil exists where god does not" suggests that somehow God forces us to do the right thing. God does not do that. What he does is make available to us the understanding of his natural morality, and he also enables us to choose what to do with our free will. Good is the choice to align our actions and thoughts with natural morality; evil is the choice to act in opposition to it. It exists, but not in the way that story's fake Einstein suggests.
 
kevin1122 offline
A3 · 331 Forum Posts
 September 10, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Vox:

quote:
“I would also disagree that evil is not a noun. Merriam Webster.com defines "noun" as a WORD that "typically can be combined with determiners to serve as the subject of a verb, can be interpreted as singular or plural, can be replaced with a pronoun, and refer to an entity, quality, state, action, or concept." In English, one word in the same form can serve as a noun, verb, adjective, and so on. But from the above definition, there is no doubt that evil is a noun.”


Weather or not “evil” is a noun or not is not the point; the point is, evil does not have a physical existence. It is mearly a word used do describe something (a person, place, or thing) that has such an existence. The same can’t be said for temperature and light.

quote:
“Under my philosophy (if u can call it that), evil is a human quality that flows from the improper application of our God-given free will. God gave us free will, and he made us imperfect. Therefore we are capable of misusing our free will. The malevolent misuse of free will constitutes evil. Evil exists as a human trait.

To suggest that "evil exists where god does not" suggests that somehow God forces us to do the right thing. God does not do that.”.

I guess that would all depend upon which concept of God one believes in. The concepts I am familiar with; such as the ones described in the Koran, Bible, or the Torah, this God does use force.
If depending upon your actions while living, punishment or reward awaits you upon death, by definition; that is not free will.

K
 
 
 
Post Reply
Tags
You can edit the tags associated with this topic.

None