Why does God permit evil????

The point of this thread is to examine the accepted view of god. The accepted view of a benevolent god watching over us is in my opinion ,for what its worth,is totally redundant. This does not exclude every concept of god nor does it make every view of heaven impossible. Atheist, me included, choose their god to dismiss, the easy ones. As an agnostic , I can have imaginary gods or heavens that for me have potential to be logical. This narrow view of a particular god eventually restricts debate, its too easy.

Well, the point of this thread (I thought) was to ask why God permits evil. And here God, I thought, refers to what you call "the accepted view of God", but particularly to the view that God is all-powerful, and is all-good. Otherwise, there is no problem of why God permits evil in the first place. So, without this "narrow view" (I suppose you mean the accepted view) this thread is not about anything.

Exactly so, but how long does it take to recognise the fact that most activist on this thread are at cross purposes. We cant even decide what god we are actually debating. Even if he is all powerful that does not describe him as benevolent. If the question was, why does a benevolent god who is all powerful permit evil, then the question is redundant by its contradiction.

Exactly so, but how long does it take to recognise the fact that most activist on this thread are at cross purposes. We cant even decide what god we are actually debating. Even if he is all powerful that does not describe him as benevolent. If the question was, why does a benevolent god who is all powerful permit evil, then the question is redundant by its contradiction.

But that's exactly what the problem of evil is. It assumes God is all-powerful and all-good!

So you dont see a contradiction?

But that's exactly what the problem of evil is. It assumes God is all-powerful and all-good!

Why would you say that? Even if one abandons the assumption that god is all powerful and/or all good, whatever new conception of god or altered conception of god you formulate still must accomadate the problem of evil.

Evil is still a problem that must be accounted for in your religious thinking. You are just not as constrained by the platonic greek notions of perfection and medieval scholastic interpretations of diety. Why is changless perfection better than evolving adaptability? How was omniscience compatible with omnipotence in the first place anyway? Why would creation have to be ex nihilo and is that anything the Bible says anyway?

It just expands the scope of the discussion and the range of conceptions of diety. Evil remains a problem for theism it just is not the classical problem and new notion of divine attributes and divine action or divine justice come into play. A good thing I think. The typical notions of god are too small and too confined. The real goal in confining the discussion is to make god look rather incompetent, or as Woody Allen puts it an underacheiver.

So you dont see a contradiction?

There is no contradiction if we suppose that all evil is logically necessary evil, necessary for a good that could not exist without the evil, and which more than compensates for the evil. With that assumption, there is no contradiction. You are supposing that a world without any evil would be a better world than any world with some evil in it. And Leibniz showed that is not true.

Wait, what contradiction? I just think we should approach this problem as a logic problem, and not a religious problem. The problem of evil isn't some sort of religious proclamation stating that God is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, as described within the problem. But assuming he has these metaphysical qualities (all-powerful, all-good), there's a problem of evil. If you just choose not to interpret "God" in the manner described by the problem of evil, then, of course, you aren't responding to the problem at all - just sidestepping it.

But I am being logical, you cant describe a god of contradictions and then spend for ever saying it is a contradiction. This god can not exist, whose supporting the idea that he does? you:perplexed:

Why is evil a problem unless, for instance, we assume God is all-powerful? If God is not all powerful, then the existence of evil is not something God can help. And, unless we suppose that God is all-good, then the existence of evil is something He doesn't mind (or even actually is happy about).

Wait, what contradiction? I just think we should approach this problem as a logic problem, and not a religious problem. The problem of evil isn't some sort of religious proclamation stating that God is, beyond a shadow of a doubt, as described within the problem. But assuming he has these metaphysical qualities (all-powerful, all-good), there's a problem of evil. If you just choose not to interpret "God" in the manner described by the problem of evil, then, of course, you aren't responding to the problem at all - just sidestepping it.

Wait, again, where's the contradiction? I'm not following.

So you are saying he exists in principle?

So you are saying he exists in principle?

But, supposing that might be true, the next question is: is it true (or is it even plausible that it is true)? And that is no longer a logical issue, but an issue of evidence vs faith.

I'm saying that if we are to respond to the problem of evil, we should assume that God has those qualities.

If we assume that then we have a god that is a contradiction.A contradiction to our sense of morality. You cant allow evil and be good, or have you changed your mind?

That's the problem.

If we assume that then we have a god that is a contradiction.A contradiction to our sense of morality. You cant allow evil and be good, or have you changed your mind?

So is the description wrong or the concept? To advance any debate you have to invent a god that appears logical and then examine the description. Its no good looking at the normal accepted views of god, they are not logical. Apart from anything else its frustrating chasing this vague image of god that certain believers try to avoid.