Theodicy-problem: Why does God allow evil?

[Lacewing]

We don't have to think the same to ask each other questions.

No, if we had two sides of an issue, it would be possible. But the question presumes at least the possibility of the existence of God...a thing about which you already profess that you have no opinion, because the requisite premise is not even possibly true, in your view.

Why can't you answer about what you think about your belief?

[Immanuel Can]

Why can't you answer about what you think about your belief?

I can. I'm just focusing on speaking with Gary right now.

[Lacewing]

Why can't you answer about what you think about your belief?

I can. I'm just focusing on speaking with Gary right now.

[Immanuel Can]

Why can't you answer about what you think about your belief?

I can. I'm just focusing on speaking with Gary right now.

He, at least, thinks there's a question that can be asked. You don't go so far.

[Lacewing]

I can. I'm just focusing on speaking with Gary right now.

He, at least, thinks there's a question that can be asked. You don't go so far.

I have plenty of questions I think can be asked. You refuse to answer questions in response to what you say, yet you somehow think you can keep asking others to answer your questions of them. It's your own little game which is on clear display. You don't go far at all.

[Immanuel Can]

You don't go far at all.

At least I'm open to the OP question.

[Lacewing]

You don't go far at all.

At least I'm open to the OP question.

And nothing else. Whoopee!

[Immanuel Can]

You don't go far at all.

At least I'm open to the OP question.

And nothing else. Whoopee!

And nothing else. Yes. For now.

[henry quirk]

Would he give a shit about the evil that some do that affects others?

I think he'd say I made you free and capable: if evil offends you, do sumthin' about it.

So he's a hands-off kind of god. Great...don't need him.

I'm a deist: my god is gone, or on vacation, or dead, or...

Of course you don't need him: you have you...that should be enough.

[bahman]

I'd like to address the Theodicy-problem during this horrible pandemic. People suffer, and it's not only because of the carelessness or evil by other humans. It's nature itself causing innocent people - to suffer a horrible death.

I'm not addressing the philosophical issue of wether God exists or not. But in any case of any premise, you're left with several logical outcomes.

If you're a mathematician, you can invent something to begin with, but anything you invent - whether it be a flying unicorn with or without wings, the square root of -1 or an omnipotent, omniscient creator-deity who is also omnibenevolent, you can mathematically speaking, invent all of those things, yet anything you invent are subject to the rules of logic.

Which means if you invent the square root of -1, you get an imaginary number, "i" and an entire set of new rules are to be found.

Similarly if you "invent", say, God (who is omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent), even though said deity is claimed to be omnipotent, you still have to define what it means to be able to create anything, anytime - anywhere.

God could cancel the pandemic at any moment and say with a loud voice from the clouds: "I am God, and I'm here save you". But that would leave other complications. God could do away with these other complications, but that would create even more complications.

God could choose not to create the pandemic in the first place, to avoid such horrors. Well, then we'll have to specify what "such horrors" are. And which horrors are allowed? None? Well, then we'll have to do away with everything that has to do with pain and suffering, meaning we (or God) must be numb. But we do want to feel pleasure, right? Surely you don't want to be numb all the time, but an eternity of pleasure would be quite boring too - if not turning into madness and permanent insanity for all of humankind.

This entire subject made me think of what I really want... and it turns out to be vastly more complex and difficult to answer, than doing calculus.

I know I definitely don't want to feel pleasure all the time. But I don't want extreme pain either, and I don't want to feel numb, fearless or sane all the time either.

Also, I don't want to choose when I want to feel anxious, pleasure or in pain/painless, neither do I want to choose when to feel tired or awake at any time I so desire. What do I really want?

I don't know. Perhaps what I really want is to experience the world with some degree of certainty in some situations, and with less certainty in others.

I also want to feel as if I have a free will, even if I really don't have any such thing as a "free" will, I still want the illusion of my will to feel free.

From this set of rules, it follows that a horribly pleasurable, frighteningly fearless painful and nice yet scary world, with conscious observers in living mortal bodies are perhaps the least of all evils?

Just a quick take on the Theodicy-problem...

Good and evil complete each other like the answer completes the question. We need to get through.