|
Post by linsi on Feb 22, 2010 3:28:49 GMT 10
With regard to the nature of evil, it should be observed that evil is of three kinds
let's examine it-------
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Feb 22, 2010 3:37:39 GMT 10
Evil is associated with sufferings-
why do bad things happen to good people?-
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Feb 22, 2010 3:39:24 GMT 10
why God choose to create anything at all.
First, it is asked why God, foreseeing that his creatures would use the gift of free will for their own injury, did not either abstain from creating them, or in some way safeguard their free will from misuse,
|
|
|
Post by Always on Feb 22, 2010 7:24:13 GMT 10
I only know of Moral and Natural evil. Moral evil is typically caused by intentional act or an inaction of a vessel; whereas, Natural evil is a bad event occurs without any intervention of a vessel.
BUT there are times that Moral evil can be mis-interpreted as Natural evil.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Feb 23, 2010 4:18:09 GMT 10
I only know of Moral and Natural evil. Moral evil is typically caused by intentional act or an inaction of a vessel; whereas, Natural evil is a bad event occurs without any intervention of a vessel.
BUT there are times that Moral evil can be mis-interpreted as Natural evil.
How about this?
physical, moral, and metaphysical ?
|
|
|
Post by Always on Mar 1, 2010 13:44:15 GMT 10
- Physical
can be made by both Moral and Natural Evil
- Moral
of course can be made solely by Moral Evil
- Metaphysical
before I can give you the answer to this, let me define the term in its simplest form. It relates to a reality beyond to what is perceptible to our senses. But ... fault lines such as the San Andreas fault in California or the Marikina fault line in the Philippines are of Physical and Natural form; and when a quake happens to either one of them, it seems to be in a metaphysical form. Why? In the olden days, the people of the ancient time would think that when the land rumbles, it was an act of god. Or in simple sense, it is of supernatural doing. Thus, Metaphysical connotes also to that of supernatural departing from what is ususal or normal especially so as to appear to transcend to the laws of nature. This is the reason why until now even with today's latest technology, we still cannot detect or predict when or where an earthquake bound to strike.
In conclusion, earthquake can be sometimes attributed to an invisible agent thus making it to be metaphysical and natural at the same time.
But why do I say sometimes ? The answer to that is because earthquake can be aggressively manipulated by humans too in their own physicality. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Mar 1, 2010 22:53:39 GMT 10
- In the olden days, the people of the ancient time would think that when the land rumbles, it was an act of god. Or in simple sense, it is of supernatural doing. Thus, Metaphysical connotes also to that of supernatural departing from what is ususal or normal especially so as to appear to transcend to the laws of nature. This is the reason why until now even with today's latest technology, we still cannot detect or predict when or where an earthquake bound to strike.
tama, in ancient times- as i quote from the writings quoted from various philosophers in google search
it has often been supposed that animal suffering, together with many of the imperfections of inanimate nature, was due to the fall of man, with whose welfare, as the chief part of creation, were bound up the fortunes of the rest .
like the great famine as was written in the old testament- were parents ate their children 2 Kings 6:24-33
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Mar 1, 2010 22:56:31 GMT 10
2 Kings 6:24-33 (New International Version)
Famine in Besieged Samaria
"This woman said to me, 'Give up your son so we may eat him today, and tomorrow we'll eat my son.'
29 So we cooked my son and ate him. The next day I said to her, 'Give up your son so we may eat him,' but she had hidden him.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Mar 1, 2010 23:10:29 GMT 10
In conclusion, earthquake can be sometimes attributed to an invisible agent thus making it to be metaphysical and natural at the same time.
But why do I say sometimes ? The answer to that is because earthquake can be aggressively manipulated by humans too in their own physicality. [/color] [/quote] if earthquakes are sometimes attributed to metaphysical and natural, how can we distinguish it as pure metaphysical in the 21st century? Is pessimism considered actually a metaphysical system, which is the product of our modern times?
|
|
|
Post by Always on Mar 9, 2010 17:12:53 GMT 10
- if earthquakes are sometimes attributed to metaphysical and natural, how can we distinguish it as pure metaphysical in the 21st century?
Is pessimism considered actually a metaphysical system, which is the product of our modern times?
MINE: Before I answer your querry, let me emphasize more of what I have previously posted. As I earlier presented, I admonished to the fact that there are two kinds of evil which are Moral and Natural evil. With that in mind, just as there are standing conviction of such statement based on the examination of evidence if thoroughly researched upon, there are also two aspects to the problem of evil.- 1. Philosophical / apologetic problem
- 2. religious / personal problem
[/li][/ul]Philosophical and Apologetic derives from the provocative interest of skeptics who question the probability of an existing God but why would He allow suffering. Whereas, Religious and Personal stems from the test of faith that a person experiences in suffering. It is also significant to detail that there are also two(2) aspects of philosophical/apologetic problem of evil: [/b]We will deal first with the logical problem of evil but before that let me give a simple emphasis on your question about pessimism. The term itself is an inclination to emphasize adverse aspects and to expect the worst possible outcome. Hence adjudicated to be on a psychological side which pertains to moral valuation; and if it is pertaining to the doctrine that reality is essentially evil, perhaps it is on it metaphysical side BUT be that as it may, the doctrine itself is of moral turpitude as an inherent baseness. [/color]
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Mar 11, 2010 4:41:44 GMT 10
If earthquakes are sometimes attributed to metaphysical and natural, how can we distinguish it a pure metaphysical in the 21st century?
the metaphysical problem is specifically ‘what is evil’ and secondarily, regardless whether it is a thing or not, ‘what is the cause of evil?
Bill King: on Thomas Aquinas (metaphysical problem of evil)
mine: Do you think evil is a thing? a spirit? for whatever it is,--- is it necessary?
If it 's necessary then why and how?
this goes back to the previous question-
it is asked why God, foreseeing that his creatures would use the gift of free will for their own injury, did not either abstain from creating them, or in some way safeguard their free will from misuse.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Mar 11, 2010 8:52:41 GMT 10
- If earthquakes are sometimes attributed to metaphysical and natural, how can we distinguish it a pure metaphysical in the 21st century?
the metaphysical problem is specifically ‘what is evil’ and secondarily, regardless whether it is a thing or not, ‘what is the cause of evil?
Bill King: on Thomas Aquinas (metaphysical problem of evil)
mine: Do you think evil is a thing? a spirit? for whatever it is,--- is it necessary?
If it 's necessary then why and how?
this goes back to the previous question-
it is asked why God, foreseeing that his creatures would use the gift of free will for their own injury, did not either abstain from creating them, or in some way safeguard their free will from misuse.
MINE: Before I answer your interest about "earthquakes," let me point out to you that there are only two kinds of evil and not three as you pointed out from Bill King's project. His research denotes the metaphysical problem of evil and not as a 3rd kind of evil. What I am trying to say is, metaphysical is only part of the aspects to the problem of evil[/u]. It is either one of the two or both logical/evidential aspects to the Philosophical/apologetic problem of evil. After all it all started from the tenet as to - How can a Good
and an All-Powerful GOD alllow evil? The logical confusion to this is that it is impossible to believe both in the existence of evil and of a good and an all-powerful God because if such a God truly exists, evil would not exist. But if evil exists and it is truly does, God cannot possibly exist for He would certainly destroy evil. Therefore, the logical problem of evil asserts that it is irrational and impossible to believe to such premise. BUT there is a resolve in the Holy Bible to this logical problem. - Matthew 19:26
- Titus 1:2
- II Timothy 2:13
- James 1:13
What I am trying to imply from above verses is to accept that when we say God is "Good and All-Powerful" we are not saying that He can do anything. Yes, through the Holly Bible in the Book of Matthew, "with God all things are possible"; But it also tells us in the Book of Titus that there are some things God cannot do such as "God cannot lie". ... Because in 2nd Timothy, He cannot deny Himself or fail to keep His words NOR can God even be tempted to sin NEITHER can God tempt others to sin as stated in the Book of James. Thus, there are obvious exceptions that we must understand that a Good and an All-Powerful GOD cannot obviously do anything in contrast of His "righteous character". Can a rationale GOD make what is false TRUE? NEXT: The FreeWill Defense [/color]
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Mar 11, 2010 23:15:42 GMT 10
MINE: Before I answer your interest about "earthquakes," let me point out to you that there are only two kinds of evil and not three as you pointed out from Bill King's project. His research denotes the metaphysical problem of evil and not as a 3rd kind of evil. What I am trying to say is, metaphysical is only part of the aspects to the problem of evil[/u]. It is either one of the two or both logical/evidential aspects to the Philosophical/apologetic problem of evil. After all it all started from the tenet as to - How can a Good
and an All-Powerful GOD alllow evil? [/color][/quote]
I can agree to that- well- agreed.
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Mar 12, 2010 0:18:32 GMT 10
This is where the skeptics come into the picture
God cannot do anything in contrast to his righteous character... that would also mean He cannot do everything where skeptics point that God has limits-
Do you really think he cannot do anything in contrast to his will and righteousness or he can but will never do it?
wait don't go to the freewill defense yet- tell us about earthquakes which can be metaphysical in the 21st century
|
|
|
Post by Always on Mar 15, 2010 7:23:57 GMT 10
Do you really think he cannot do anything in contrast to his will and righteousness or he can but will never do it?
Let me put it this way, The VICAR of CHRIST amongst our Catholic brethrens must be righteous in every way, BUT, when you do a historical research about him, you will be able to find out that the Pope did the most atrocious crimes in human history basing from the authority given to spiritually. nd with that pessimism is relative to such historicity. Of course, Catholic defenders will reason out that who ever held the position of the Pope and made such mistakes, he was only human.
THAT IS VERY CORRECT, the Pope is is only human BUT NOT THE OFFICE and can make mistakes from time to timea and his self-serving authority seems limitless and the congregation tries to make him metaphysical in essence. In simpler sense, a human trying to be more than God.
GOD is not human, he is a holy spirit of the highest sense who is not bound by any kinds of limit but rather a GOD who conveys morality based from absolute truth.
|
|
|
Post by Always on Mar 15, 2010 7:47:22 GMT 10
wait don't go to the freewill defense yet- tell us about earthquakes which can be metaphysical in the 21st century If an earthquake is marked by unconventional imagery, yes, it can be in a metaphysical sense because it can be an abstract, abstruse or a threat which can inflict evil, injury or damage to one's safekeeping based from political philosophy on natural law that derives from nature rather than from the rules of society.
In a way, an earhtquake is a reality that is beyond what is perceptible to our senses.
|
|
|
Post by leanne. on Mar 16, 2010 22:51:01 GMT 10
Let me put it this way, The VICAR of CHRIST amongst our GOD is not human, he is a holy spirit of the highest sense who is not bound by any kinds of limit but rather a GOD who conveys morality based from absolute truth. Ang lalim yata ng mga usapin dito hindi ko maarok Ano yung absolute truth at pwede bang pakiulit na medyo simplehan? Iniisip ko rin yung tanong ni ate linsi, hindi ba talagang kayang gumawa ng Diyos ng masama pero hindi lang niya gagawin dahil siya ay righteous? Kung wala siyang kakayahang gumawa ng masama e di yung masasama lang ang may kayang gumawa nun? Saan galing yung masama o evil?
|
|
|
Post by leanne. on Mar 16, 2010 22:52:57 GMT 10
In a way, an earhtquake is a reality that is beyond what is perceptible to our senses. Pag beyond what is perceptible to our senses e di metaphysical na nga
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Mar 20, 2010 11:00:49 GMT 10
Ang lalim yata ng mga usapin dito hindi ko maarok Iniisip ko rin yung tanong ni ate linsi, hindi ba talagang kayang gumawa ng Diyos ng masama pero hindi lang niya gagawin dahil siya ay righteous? Kung wala siyang kakayahang gumawa ng masama e di yung masasama lang ang may kayang gumawa nun? Saan galing yung masama o evil? i tried to do some readings specially from a christian philosophy pov . chaka na yung origin ng evil-- yun munang kakayahang gumawa ng masama-
yung sinabi ni Always na- GOD is not human, he is a holy spirit of the highest sense who is not bound by any kinds of limit but rather a GOD who conveys morality based from absolute truth. arukin natin- this conveys "limits" discuss natin to a little with Always
|
|
|
Post by linsi on Mar 21, 2010 3:29:14 GMT 10
Always, why would the word "limit" be used in discussing God's capacity regarding evil?
|
|
|
Post by Always on Apr 2, 2010 9:03:15 GMT 10
In a way, an earhtquake is a reality that is beyond what is perceptible to our senses. Pag beyond what is perceptible to our senses e di metaphysical na nga
Ang metapisikal ay isa lamang sa mga aspeto ng natural evil. Ganyan lang ka-simple
|
|
|
Post by Always on Apr 2, 2010 9:08:54 GMT 10
Always, why would the word "limit" be used in discussing God's capacity regarding evil?
If you try to read my post more completely once again, I did write that God is NOT BOUND BY ANY KINDS OF LIMIT which simply means that God is NOT LIMITED.
|
|