Reply
Mon 6 Apr, 2015 01:33 pm
Does "a mere source of consolation that is compatible with the most desolating evil" mean "a mere source of consolation that coexists with the most destructive evil"? If so, whose evil?
Context:
Liberals and moderates, on the other hand, refuse to draw any conclusions whatsoever about God from his works. God remains an absolute mystery, a mere source of consolation that is compatible with the most desolating evil. In the wake of the Asian tsunami, liberals and moderates admonished one another to look for God "not in the power that moved the wave, but in the human response to the wave." I think we can probably agree that it is human benevolence on display!anot God's!awhenever e bloated bodies of the dead are dragged from the sea. On a day when over one hundred thousand children were simultaneously torn from their mothers' arms and casually drowned, liberal theology must stand revealed for what it is: the sheerest of mortal pretenses. The theology of wrath has far more intellectual merit. If God exists and takes an interest in the affairs of human beings, his will is not inscrutable.
@oristarA,
Quote:mean "a mere source of consolation that coexists with the most destructive evil"? If so, whose evil?
Yeah, that's what it seems to mean. They are talking about god, but I don't think they are attributing the "evil" to him, necessarily (because it is a "mystery"). The relevant part says:
Quote:God remains an absolute mystery, a mere source of consolation that is compatible with the most desolating evil
Some claim that the existence of evil proves that there is no god. Here the question is simply raised, without necessarily reaching that conclusion. The question is: If there is a god, then why is there so much evil? How can the two co-exist?
@oristarA,
Quote:Liberals and moderates, on the other hand, refuse to draw any conclusions whatsoever about God from his works...liberal theology must stand revealed for what it is: the sheerest of mortal pretenses
Not that it's relevant to your question, per se, but the author here seems to be of the opinion that the existence of evil does in fact disprove the existence of God, or at least one that "takes an interest in the affairs of human beings," and he is chastising those who don't share his opinion.
@layman,
I got it clearer, than you Layman, but the meaning is still not crystal clear to me.
It seems there is yet some nuance left there to be cracked.
@oristarA,
Mark: question not completely solved.
@oristarA,
Quote:Mark: question not completely solved
What remains to be "solved?" Actually you asked TWO questions. Which one (or is it both) have not been solved?
Quote:Does "a mere source of consolation that is compatible with the most desolating evil" mean "a mere source of consolation that coexists with the most destructive evil"? If so, whose evil?
As for your second question, the answer depends on who you ask, according to the author. If you ask what he calls "liberals" then it is a "mystery," i.e., there is no answer. If you ask the author, then the answer is very clear: It is god's evil.
@layman,
What does "desolating" mean?
@oristarA,
There are alternate meanings, but the author seems to be using it in all of these senses when talking about things like tsunamis and the resulting human misery:
Quote:Desolation:
: extreme sadness caused by loss or loneliness
: the condition of a place or thing that has been damaged in such a way that it is no longer suitable for people to live in : the state or condition of being desolate
: devastation, ruin <a scene of utter desolation
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/desolation
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace