Re: problem of evil - to clear things up

"commutator" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Bill Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > "Damien Stanton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > I don't think I follow your point, but if your saying that the problem
of
> > > evil is a nonsense, conceptually, then fine, but I think most people,
> > > including myself, recognise it as a problem that can be understood and
> > > thought about.  (The reason I wrote the original post was that I had
seen
> > > lengthy debates on this group about it.)
> > >
> > No, I am not saying that it is conceptual nonsense; it is more like
> > blasphemy: the proponents of there being a problem of evil are placing
their
> > wills in opposition to god's. What I am saying is that the concepts of
good
> > and evil as they are employed in presenting the problem are purely human
> > conceptions, i.e., they represent a HUMAN (and, therefore, limited and
> > partial) on things.  Those limited and partial conceptions do not
represent
> > a divine perspectives on existence.   What we are doing is demanding
that
> > god conform itself with our merely human concerns and aims, and
> > manufacturing out of that an alleged problem.  The order of existence
(and,
> > if there is a god, god's ordering of existence) flows forth wholly
> > independently of our human hopes, aspirations, etc.  For a believer in
god,
> > our task is to conform ourselves to god's will, not demand that god
conform
> > itself to our will.  To put it in different language: the human task is
to
> > accept one's fate and, with a glad heart, act in accordance with it; it
is
> > merely futile childishness to yammer and complain about how one can't,
in
> > one's finitude, discern any reason for it.  Or still differently: god's
ways
> > are utterly beyond human understanding; how can the finite grasp the
> > infinite?
>
> By your definition than belief in God is completely and utterly
> needless then because you cannot possibly have any understanding of
> God nor could you ever hope to understand what God's will constitutes.
>  Thus, the concept od God means absolutely nothing.  One must accept
> the world at face value.  Isn't that one of the fundamental views of
> the atheist to begin with, that life has no reason just accept it?
> How can the finite be held responsible for following the infinite?
>
I accept your point, except for the idea that, then, "God means absolutely
nothing."  I would say that "god" means nothing to ME.  But there are others
(like Spinoza, to whom I referred in my original reply) for whom the concept
of god (of the type I am referring to, i.e., one which is UTTERLY infinite)
is a vital and living conception.  That is not my view; I think that
god-talk is wholly irrelevant to anything that matters.  BUT, the post to
which I was replying just ignored any conception of god which was truly a
conception of an infinite being which is utterly beyond the conceptions
generated by finite beings, like us.  As Kierkegaard puts it: the true
miracle is that the infinite became finite.  Of course, K was a Christian.
I am not; the concept of an infinite being is not meaningless; it is simply
beyond the conceptual capacities of a finite being.  If you really can't
think it, then have done with it and with any arguments which depend on your
being able to think it.  Whether one affirms the existence of such a thing
or not, is ultimately a matter of what one is as the finite creature which
one is.  Some of us need the comfort of being coerced by "Ultimate Concern".

Bill Snyder

> The original post here dealt with ome of the common arguments against
> the concept of a merciful God and the counter-argument in that
> scenario.
>
> I've always found it an interesting view that evil should be
> segregated.  Could we not already be within the secluded place to
> which evil is abolished?  It doesn't seem to be lacking in our
> existance here on Earth.  Maybe the concept of heaven is simply the
> world where we have been segregated from until we can demonstrate we
> are no longer a potential carrier of evil into that place?  (I don't
> really believe the above it's just a fun thing to mull over in your
> head)