Bros:
As indicated in your textbook in its discussion on the Book of Job, "the dilemma of why the good suffer and the wicked prosper in this life is known as the problem of evil" (Newland 249). However, the problem is not so simple as to say that only one side perishes while the other thrives. Ultimately, we all experience suffering in some way, often in what seem unjust or undeserved circumstances. It is this kind of suffering--the stuff that seems unfair--that defines the "problem of evil" and which the author, Jay Sklar, of the article ("Why Does God Permit Evil?") I gave you addresses in his essay.
In a well-developed essay of at least three, full paragraphs, give a summary of the article, including the author's name and the title of the article in quotations in the introduction of your essay.
Then give a well-argued and reasoned response to the article, including any agreements and/or disagreements you have. If you recognize any seeming inconsistencies in the author's argument, please state them.
Your concluding paragraph should be a reflection on your own sense of what purpose suffering gives us in our lives.
This is due, Wednesday, May 20, 2009 on the blog or typed hard copy under the following heading:
Your Name
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
Problems of Evil
"In this you are not just, let me tell you; for God is greater than man. Why, then, do you make complaint against him that he gives no account of his doing? For God does speak, perhaps once, or even twice , though one perceive it not" (Job 33: 12-13).
22 comments:
Patrick Doyle
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
REL 011.06
May 20, 2009
In Jay Sklar's article, “Why Does God Permit Evil?” the question of God is argued. “If God is all-powerful, good, (and even real),” the question states, “then why does He permit evil?” This question is even more confusing than one would think. To even begin to respond to this problem, five other questions must be addressed, the first being, “What is evil?”
Evil can mean three different things, as Sklar writes:
1. Something that is disliked, such as ignorance or end-of-the-year-itis. This is not what is being written about.
2. Consequences that are brought upon by human’s abuse of free will. Again, not the topic of this argument.
3. Events that affect us even though we (as humans) have nothing to do with. This is what the article is addressing.
(Although each “evil” is a tragic part of humanity that affects us all, sometimes people can not help but take pleasure in other’s pain. Watch the Youtube video entitled “Spongebob-Schadenfreude”. They define this “needed” event as a “Nazi word” that means “happiness at the misfortune of others.” (Don’t you feel all warm and cozy watchin’ people out in the rain? That’s Schadenfreude! People taking pleasure in your pain!)
The second important question that one must ask is “Does the problem of evil prove that there is no good and all-powerful God?” This question can be answered easily by some people who may state that the “good and all-powerful” God that others preach about would never torment His own creations like this, therefore, He does not exist. The argument is this, who ever said that humans always understand exactly what God will do? Possibly, God does have a plan, but humans mess up his plan by overreacting because of some small problem they cannot overcome. Or, humans were and are never going to understand God and therefore, can never know exactly what will happen next.
“How is evil a problem for Atheism?” Is the third question used to solve the problem of evil. The question really is “Why do we have the morals/faith that we do?” If God did create us, then why are we tested my diseases and natural disasters? Atheists would say that life is a survival of the fittest, if something were to have cancer it would be a result of their lifestyle, genes, or some other independent variable instead of it being “their time” or “God calling them home” which is just an attempt to make the dying person like likes someone who could have stopped this terrible problem instead of describing them as a “loyal disciple of Christ who now lives with Him forever.” But, why do we have emotional ties to others? A characteristic that is almost exclusive t humans, emotions keep us as a race responsible for one another which means that we all have a common bond. Is it God willing us to become closer through sympathy, or is it just the sadness that we evolved into feeling when we see a seven-year-old girl dying of a brain tumor?
Question four tries to personify God by asking, “How might the fact that God Himself experienced evil help us?” Because Jesus felt temptation, confusion, and anguish, does that mean that God knows how we feel? If he does know how we suffer, then why won’t He take us out of our misery? If we all really were created by Him, then why did He choose to send down his Son to experience what He Himself designed and knew? Atheists say that this is illogical. Catholics say that Jesus needed to be with us to have our eyes opened.
Question five is fitting, being the last question and being about the end of the line, Death. “Where does the story end?”
“Because I could not stop for Death-
He kindly stopped for me-
The Carriage held but just ourselves-
And Immortality.”
Emily Dickinson wrote these words in-between 1861 and 1865 about how Death’s icy grasp is inevitable no matter what a person may try to do to avoid it. Christians see this as a good thing because that means eternal life with God and all friends and family that went before them. Atheists, on the other hand, might see this as hypocritical. Why would someone who is our Holy Father ever made us suffer through fire and brimstone? That does not seem to be the actions that one would see as endearing and even if Atheists were to experience the afterlife (assuming they would be sent to hell), would they not be treated like royalty? Denouncing God is what Lucifer has been trying to get humans to do for literally thousands of years. Atheists would be considered the only people who respect Satan’s power, even if they did not know that was what they were doing at the time. Atheists see death as the point where cells in the body reach a critical age and break down. That is it. No afterlife, no Judgment Day, no “white light”, no nothing. Your body then breaks down, returning all the unused energy to the earth (yes, plants eventually are the winners of survivors of the fittest). Catholics see that as what physically happens, but what about the moral and spiritual life that they were trying to live? Did that all go to waste? Where is our reward?!?!
As the only species that has any religious practices, humans have the greatest possibility to be god-less. Yes, Atheism has less unanswered questions, but they also have less wonder and awe. Yes, plants photosynthesize, creating sugars that are passed throughout the food chain, but how does one measure the beauty of the sun shining on a leaf at just the right angle? How do you marvel in the beauty around you? Not just with your cornea that refracts light to bounce off of who-knows-what, but with the soul that God gave you. Yes, chemo can save the little girl from the example from Question 3, but have doctors and scientists not said that faith is an extremely strong tool that can change an entire outcome of an experiment? And yes, life sometimes does seem hopeless, but faith pulls us through. God can be found in everything that helps us to combat evil, whether one makes the choices to do something in the name of Buddha, Zeus, or even science (“Science and Religion are not at ends, Science is just too young to understand.” Angels and Demons a great philosophical book), God is there pulling us through, Maybe God throws up the occasional road block not to see who he can torture, but who will pull through. It might just be a bonus when He gets credit for it.
In Jay Sklar's article, "Why does God permit evil," we are able to really see and judge for ourselves why the righteous people of this world are unfortunately the ones that have to experience the most suffering. Maybe through his actions, we can take note of what is truly important to us instead of cursing things, people and God when we are just lucky to have them in the first place.
Sklar brings up the important topic that evil can be anything, so when we say that an inanimate object is evil, we are really just being caught up in the moment at hand and we are actually being greedy in a way by not realizing that what we think is evil is not even that big of a deal. Meanwhile, there are the innocent ones who live in third world countries and are dying of cancer and AIDS as we speak, made worse by the fact that these horrifying events are out of their control. These are the people who would love to go through the everyday challenges of a normal life that we make out to be so difficult for us to handle.
Sklar also stands up to the people who think that since there is evil in the world, God should be able to control it. From there they make false assumptions that God can't control evil and is not all powerful, and some people even question his existence because of it. Because most of what these people are saying is based off of assumptions instead of logic needed to prove a point, this makes for a weak argument because anything that these people say can either be claimed to be true or false. No matter how intense the debate, nobody can be entirely sure who is really right.
Science could also come into play here. For example, the big bang theory: from a scientific standpoint, most people would say that there was a chemical reaction on some type of matter that created the universe. However, the Christian way of viewing it is that the universe itself or that "chemical reaction" was created by God alone. However, then the point of who created God could be brought into play here. The point is, both sides could be right, and both sides could also be wrong because there is no way of telling when the actual beginning of the universe was and who or what created it.
When Sklar brings atheism into the argument, he brings up the point that since Atheists don't have a God to lean on for the sake of moral values, then how can they even know what evil is in the first place? This renders them as having a lack of dignity of not having any God to remind them of what is right and what is wrong. When the problem of evil is brought up to them, they really can't join either side of the argument because since they don't believe in a God to start with meaning anything can go any way for them. This shows how having no religious basis on which to judge moral contradictions like the problem of evil creates trouble.
God experiencing evil didn't make that much of a difference during the time of Jesus because since he was both divine and human when Jesus walked the earth, he would not have the power to change evil because since he was part human: he had to face regular human downfalls such as death himself, which he in fact did. However experiencing evil second hand meant that God would have a foremost perspective on the problems that the people of earth were creating for each other because he would've been there to know what it was like for them. Hopefully, having this experience in mind would help God understand what the common person would have to go through on a daily basis. Even though he was a God who could do anything, he could never exactly live out the life that someone else would have to live
Michael Uranker
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
In Jay Sklar's article, "Why Does God Permit Evil?" the question of God and evil are argued. The article argues the issue of how could an all-powerful and great God let there be evil. The article argues this issue by asking questions. The questions help you think about the issue in seperate views.
God gave us free will, which gave us the choice to choose between right and wrong, or good and bad. That choice is up to us. If we choose the bad choice, then it is that choice and outcome that become the evil. God out of his greatness gave us the right to free will, and that free will had the side of bad, which turns to evil.
I think that since God gave us the choice of free will, then it is up to us to choose between good and bad. It is the bad choice that becomes the evil. So if we choice the bad choice then we are creating the evil not God. So in some sense we are creating the suffering and it is the choice of free will that determines it not God.
In Jay Sklar's article, "Why Does God Permit Evil?" the question of if a God exists is argued due to the fact that there is evil and undeserved or uncontrolable suffering in the world. This article opens thought to what we mean by evil, what our identification of evil means, and what our conscience and emotional lives mean.
I think that Sklar's review effectively introduces people to the debate and gets them on the right track of thinking, but I disagree with his opinion on evil which is presented near the end. He gives many example of misinterpretations of evil and then in a similar fashion he talks about atheists and their claims that there is no God. Also, he concludes by pulling out of thin air a big "logical" idea that Jesus Christ defeated the ultimate "evil", "death" when he was ressurected. That there is a war between God and Evil and its battlefield consists of the humans on Earth. That Jesus (or another messiah) will perhaps come again and defeat all other evils. First of all, this argument conveniently excludes all other religions, most directly, Jews. He bases his argument off of Jesus, and the main difference between Catholics and Jews is Jesus having been the Messiah. Also, this concept of defeating death seems a bit silly. If he defeated it, why do we still die? A probable response would be that when you die your sins are forgiven and you live eternaly in heaven. Wait then if death is defeated, when Jesus comes back to defeat all other evils (I do not know how to categorize evil, so I will make up examples) such as greed or lust, how will he defeat those?
Anyhow, like I said, I think this article does pull the reader into the debate and breaks the ice so that everybody can give their two cents.
Matthew Miklasevich
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
REL 011.06
May 20, 2009
Dr. Jay Sklay’s article, “Why Does God Permit Evil” argues the Problem of Evil. The Problem of Evil asks the questions: How is there evil in the world if God exists? Wouldn’t an omnipotent God make the world free of evil? Why does God allow suffering? One can come to many conclusions, some lose faith in God, and others see suffering as a test of faith. To answer the Problem of Evil, Dr. Jay Sklay first answers five more questions.
The first question is, “What Do We Mean By ‘Evil’?” Dr. Jay Sklay describes evil as suffering that we cannot control. This kind of suffering is encountered in natural disasters, accidents, and diseases that afflict innocent people. Suffering is not something we do not like, or suffering that is caused by one’s sins and ignorance. Evil is suffering without a justifiable reason. I agree with his definition of evil, and his article seems very consistent up until this point.
The second question is, “Does The Problem Of Evil Prove That There Is No Good And All-Powerful God?” Dr. Jay Sklay describes the format of a legitimate argument. The first statement does not always lead to the second, like the argument disproving the existence of God: “Evil exists; therefore there is no good and all-powerful God.” He says that there is a need for statements in between giving more information on the other subject. Assumptions must be made about God, and accepted to form an argument. The format should be the following: “Evil exists; a good and all-powerful God would not permit evil unless there was a justifiable reason, it would be apparent to us; there does not appear to be any justifiable reason for evil; therefore such a God does not exist.” The argument only works if all the added statements are accepted as true. He argues the point concerning the justifiable reason for suffering. One might say that there does not appear to be a justifiable reason for suffering, therefore God does not exist. Dr. Jay Sklay argues that there is a justifiable reason for suffering, therefore God exists. However, Dr. Jay Sklay cannot identify this justifiable reason. He claims that we, as finite humans, cannot possibly comprehend an infinite being like God. This brings about his next point. It appears that according to Dr. Jay Sklay, the difference between Atheists and Christians is the belief in that justifiable reason for suffering. He claims that Atheists are too naive to understand God, and because of this lack of understanding a greater power, they discredit God. This follows the reasoning, “I cannot understand it, and therefore it is wrong. I have no basis for knowing.” Dr. Jay Sklay argues that Christians cannot understand God, like Atheists, but assume that there is a justifiable reason by trusting in God. God cannot be disproved, therefore God exists. I do not think this is a valid argument. Both points are at fault. I think Dr. Jay Sklay poorly explains the opposite side of the argument, making the opposing faction appear unintelligent. Now, he is wandering off the topic, heading towards an argument aimed at discrediting Atheism. First of all, this is not the topic of the article. Secondly, he is not arguing the point well.
The third question is, “How Is Evil A Problem For Atheism?” Dr. Jay Sklay argues that Atheists have no moral values on the basis that according to their beliefs, humans are not sacred. We are just the result of random evolutionary chance. Without God, humans would just be animals, with crimes such as murder justifiable. With God, humans have dignity, therefore have moral values to protect that dignity. I completely disagree with his argument. First of all, this is completely off-topic. This article should argue the Problem of Evil, not Atheism. I think all humans are not animals because we have a higher basis of thought and understanding, with more abilities. It is up for one to decide whether humans obtained these qualities through God or evolution. All humans have moral values, regardless of their beliefs. This is a result of society, and the society can be influenced by religion, or it could be influenced by Atheism. A Christian is just as likely to commit a crime as an Atheist. Atheists’ lack of belief does not influence their moral judgment, and humans have value because we think we have value. There is not even a way to justify this prejudice towards humans. We are not the “best” organisms on the planet, or the most highly evolved. Humans are not the pinnacle of evolution. We just have more ability to think and reason, giving us the ability to dominate this planet. Religion uses God as the reason for our worth, and Atheists do not have any less value, but look at the situation in a different way. This argument should not even be a part of this article, and Dr. Jay Sklay even says that he does not know the answer, after his ramble against Atheism. This question lead to nowhere, and was completely irrelevant. The next question is more on topic.
The fourth question is, “How Might The Fact That God Himself Experienced Evil Help Us?” Dr. Jay Sklay tells the reader how God, incarnated as Jesus, suffered for us on the cross as an act of love. This is the basis of the Christian faith, and can be understood as a viable reason for the Problem of Evil. God understands our pain, so He is not making us go through anything that is impossible to get through. He beings up a valid point that Christians worship a God that relates to them, which makes sense. However, Dr. Jay Sklay has to continue the argument, saying that God does understand suffering, but chooses to not respond to it. It is not because He does not understand it, but for some unknown reason. To me, this does not make God look so great. I understand that God’s reasons are far beyond humans comprehension, but this does not seem like an argument that ends in God’s favor. Dr. Jay Sklay ends this question by asking where the story will end. Will God continue to ignore out prayers? Or will He save us in the end?
The fifth question is, “Where Does The Story End?” Dr. Jay Sklay explains that suffering will not last forever. This claim is made on the basis that Jesus rose from the dead. If he had ended the argument here, this article may have made some, but not complete, sense. However, he has to continue. Jesus defeated the greatest evil, therefore God has the power to end all suffering. This does not do God any good at all. Dr. Jay Sklay asks why God does not do so sooner, but reaches the same conclusion as he has numerous times earlier on the article: He does not know. But he does know that he believes in Jesus, the “victorious king.” Jesus comforts us in our suffering, and will come again to defeat all forms of suffering. This is the assurance of Christians. To me, his article can be interpreted to be against Christianity. This argument was very inconsistent and ineffective. According to his article, Jesus has the power to end suffering whenever He wants to, but, for some unknown reason, he chooses not to do so. Christians emerge as victors because they believe they are comforted in suffering (however, according to this article, they are clearly left alone by God and His divine powers). Jesus will return to defeat all evil. Why He does not do so right now is beyond human comprehension. Dr. Jay Sklay’s concluding point is contradictory to his entire article. According to his “assurance of Christianity”, I would rather be an Atheist. I would not enjoy having a God that lets you endure suffering that He has the power to end, all for the purpose of ending it for another generation in a distant future. Such a God, as described in the article, seems useless.
I believe that this article was inconsistent and irrelevant throughout almost every sentence. This article went nowhere, arriving on an irrelevant conclusion, and not reaching any conclusion regarding the Problem of Evil, which should have been the topic of the article. I personally disagree with Dr. Jay Sklay’s points. I believe that God knows our suffering but puts us through it to test our faith, not for some unknown reason. Our faith will be rewarded with eternal life in heaven with God, not unknowns and helplessness. According to the article, Jesus does not comfort us, but I believe He encourages us to keep fighting suffering, to achieve the greatest reward, eternal life. It is through the greatest suffering, death, that we can achieve this ultimate goal. Suffering can have a purpose, and is justified with belief in God. Atheists can see suffering as a challenge without a goal similar to Christians, but that does not make them wrong. All humans have value, and the only ideal that differs is the reward we receive in the end.
John Yost
Bro. Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
The theme of this article is the problem of evil-if God is all-powerful then why is there evil in the world?
-Question 1: What do we mean by "evil"?
Evil has several meanings, there of the most common are the thought of hating something, something materialistic such as fruitcake or the DMV. The second most common use of evil is the evil we bring upon ourselves through selfless acts or injury. The third use, the one we are talking about, is the suffering that is brought upon us, the suffering we cannot control.
-Question 2: Does the problem of evil prove that there is no good and all-powerful God?
Not necessarily, we as finite beings cannot question somethingwe do not understand. If we do not understand something than we cannot assume that it is wrong or untruthful. This applies to this question in that if there is an all-powerful God and he allows suffering, then it is his decision to allow us to understand it or not.
-Question 3: How is evil a problem for atheism?
This would be a problem for atheists because they would lose the sense of morals. Because God has given us a basis of morals, if God doesn't exist because of evil then how can atheism exist. Atheism being the contrary to Christianity would make it false, especially atheism cannot provide a basis of dignity.
-Question 4: How might the fact that God himself experienced evil help us?
In history it is shown that God came to Earth through man and suffered. Whether it being emotional or physical pain God has not been immune. As one writer, John Stott, wrote in his book "The Cross of Christ": "I could never myself believe in God, if it were not for the cross." In this he explains how if people were to believe in God then they would need to be shown that he to can suffer and see evil. This then brings us to the last question on when does the evil and suffering finally end.
-Question 5: Where does the story end?
In the book of Revelation we read on how one day God will come and end all pain and suffering. People label evil through many scenarios but one that is unlike the rest is death because death cannot be avoided. The only person that has ever beaten death is Jesus. So we know that God has the power to get out of evil. That being said if God can avoid evil, why hasn't he defeated evil for the rest of us then. The bible doesn't tell us but for those who call him King know that he will come at the perfect time.
In my opinion I believe that God does allow evil because in my mind everything is a test. In a way God had to become man and suffer through evil to show us that he will save us. But for him to save us he is challenging us, even though we have the gift of free will, to do good in the world. This is God's test and my reason for why he allows for evil.
Cam Brown
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
Jay Sklar's "Why Does God Permit Evil?" discusses the problem of evil existing in the world when there exists a good and mighty God. It talks about the different kinds of evil and what they mean. It talks about the establishment of a morale system concerning human worth and dignity and what it means to live. It then takes a logical perspective concerning the fact that the existence of evil proves that there is no God. It also states the finiteness of humans and how they cannot comprehend everything. It shows how God's exposure to evil through Jesus can help us to get through hardship and suffering. Finally, it concludes that God, along with good, will triumph in the very end, no matter the circumstances or situation.
I think that the ongoing logical perspective of the article gives it credibility a reasonable cause. It takes the reader through the argument step by step. The discussion of the establishment of good and evil morals was interesting because that was, I feel, the core of the problem. Also, the presentation of the point that God has indeed suffered and felt evil through Jesus Christ is another good factor in this article. Overall, the article seems to cover all the bases and is a good confrontation of this dilemna.
I think that evil exists in the world because it is a way to test to see who is faithful or unfaithful. This has to do with the human gift of free will and if they use it with discretion or not. Also, I think that evil gives an example to the good of what will happen to sinners in the end. This allows the good people in the world to counteract the deeds of the sinners. I see it as an ongoing battle between good and evil.
Durkin Nick
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
In Jay Skylar's "Why Does God Permit Evil?" there are three theories of evil. One is that if evil exists then a powerful good does not. Another theory is that some people just feel pain from evil but except it the way it is. The final theory is that people feel their faith is dishonest and they are too for following their faith.
Evil is used in three different ways. One is to describe something we dislike. The other is to refer to an unpleasant, suffering, negative situation. It is also used to describe suffering we cant control.
A topic brought up in the article was, "Since there is evil there is no good and powerful god." Skylar argues that that is not a valid argument because God may have a justifiable reason for evil to be permitted in the world. He argues that we humans wouldn't understand why God allows evil in this world because God is a much higher being than us.
Evil is a problem for Atheists because they believe that everything is for survival, all reactions to the world are instinct. But Atheists react the same way to death and murder as any other human would. They are appalled at how the human dignity is taken away. We as a race see murder and death as wrong. Not because of instinct, but because of our conscience, which was given to us by God.
Another question was how if God experienced evil it might help us. God did experience evil when he sent his son down from Heaven to save us. His son was killed because of evil. This fact may or may not help us but once again, we just don't know if God suffered from evil. Maybe this is part of the greater plan.
In the end we will be united with God and our friends and families. At least we hope. There will be no evil. One evil we can't avoid is death. After we die evil will be gone.
In my life suffering brings me wisdom and the happy moments are all the happier because they're so few. By experiencing the suffering I learn how to live with it or avoid it. Other than that suffering serves no other purpose and just shouldn't be around.
Alex Hooper
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 19, 2009
In Dr. Jay Sklar's article "Why Does God Permit Evil?", God's power is questioned. David Hume writes, "is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?" To understand this statement, you need to ask yourself the questions proposed by Sklar.
The 1st question is "what do we mean by evil?" Evil can be interpreted many different ways, but the evil that causes suffering that we can not control is the real evil. Examples of evil are natural disasters and diseases that strike the innocent.
The 2nd question is "Does the problem of evil prove that here is no good and all-powerful God?" For many, this does prove that there is no good and all-powerful God. However, without God, there would be no good and the world would be in complete chaos.
The 3rd question is "How is evil a problem for Atheism?" Atheists still have Moral values but they don't accept that God made us in his image and likeness. However, If we weren't evil would not be a problem because no one would have any dignity.
The 4th question is "How might the fact that God himself experiencing evil help us?" In Jesus' life he suffered more evil than one can imagine. Knowing that God let his only son come into this world full of evil explains that he can not prevent it, but he sent his son to help us find hope when evil occurs.
The 5th question is "Where does the story end?" In the second to last chapter of he bible, it says that god will triumph over evil. Therefore, God is almighty and one day he will end all evil.
With this in mind, suffering in our lives is good for us. It shapes who we are, our personalities, and it strengthens our faith. Knowing that one day God will wipe evil off of the face of the earth strengthens us.
Pat Quirin
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
In Jay Sklar's article, "Why Does God Permit Evil?", God's authority is somewhat argued. "If God is all powerful, good, then why does He permit evil?", says Sklar. To further his thoughts, he goes on to state 5 questions pretaining to what evil is.
The Lord God gave us the power of decision making, which in modern society and even in history hasn't been used to its fullest.., or wisely persay. Throughout this article, Sklar takes you step by step through the processes of evil. God, whom is above all, was questioned in this article for a reason which everyone in their lifetime eventually will most likely ask, in some form or text. For us to put together this puzzle of a question and answer this question is way out of our reach and I believe that to try to state a fact about this without God's conscent or advision is a false fact. God created this so called evil for us to live by in a sense, rather to state falsely what the answer is.
In my opinion, not that no one has the right to speak out about whatever they damn well please, but this question is a somewhat meditative question that is disgusted between yourself and God. Facts about this evil we speak of aren't necessarily correct without God's conscent because he is the one who made evil not to be questioned, but lived by. I'm not saying we should live by evil ways, but he does everything for a reason and evil is here because God is keeping us in line with it. Without evil, what would the world be like? To be left with question makes you question. Does it not?
Jay Sklar's "Why Does God Permit Evil?" depicts the problem of evil existing in the world if there is a God. Sklar's article goes into complete detail of each type of evil, but this article talks specifically about type of evil we can not control. Also talks about why if there is a God, he lets evil into our world. Also if God felt our suffering would he change his mind about preventing evil.
I agree with most the well put together article, but there is one particular area that I truly disagree with. That disagreement comes under Question 2 and Jay writes, "Evil exist a good and all powerful God would not permit evil". I disagree with this because i feel God gave us free will so that there would be a evil to show what is rights and just to do.
God, in my opinion has felt the most pain and suffering that anyone of us could ever image. By sending his only son, Jesus down to earth to save us from evil. Then to have him killed my people that he made, God has felt suffering and pain. But at the same time i don't think God has purposely put evil in this world. I think God loves us so much that he gives us the action of free will, and with this we bring evil on our selves. But at judgment day God will see all the "evil" you have committed against his name.
Matthew Doherty
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
REL 011.06
May 20, 2009
The article (Why Does God Permit Evil? by Jay Sklar) informs the reader about the different types of evil present in daily life. The three kinds specifically mentioned are the evil of someone disliking or hating a people or views of a certain group, the evil that is created by a human's immoral choice, and the evil that is uncontrollable such as sickness or natural disaster. The article goes on to include why evil is a problem for atheism to exist but also entails that the shaky question of a good God allowing suffering. The article finishes up teaching how everyone suffers in physical life, even God (the incarnation of Christ). If you live morally through all the suffering then you will be rewarded an eternal life without suffering among God.
Though the article has some loose ends, especially about atheism, I think Sklar gives a good setting for the reader to form a distinct view of evil. From what sklar has said about everyone suffering including God, I start to visualize everything on larger scale. Here is an example From a Catholic point of view. If someone one suffered their entire life they would probably have suffered for less than one hundred years. If this person endured all the suffering and continued to live morally they would at death be rewarded by life with God, an infinite life of good. So 82 years of suffering would seem like a small price to pay on a universal level. All the anguish you would ever experience would be relatively minimal compared to all of time.
I like about 90 percent of the points in the article. Some points are very simple and supported well, preventing a reprisal from opposing views. Other parts of the article are not supported much at all. It is like reading a roller coaster. Some of the material is sensible and other times I ask myself "Why would Sklar include that?" Overall I am lead to the conclusion that without religion how could there be a true morality. Is it truly evil when a child gets sick and dies? To answer these questions you have to thoroughly define what evil is. No matter what everyone suffers or will suffer in their Physical life. The way to defeat this evil is by continuing faith in God and not letting painful events destroy your beliefs. If you have a powerful faith then your soul never suffers. Evil prevails when you allow something physical to harm your soul and your relationship with God.
Teddy Larkin
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
REL 011.06
May 20, 2009
“Why Does God Permit Evil”, by Jay Sklar, talks about if there is a good and all-powerful god, why does he allow such suffering and pain? Jay formats the article into five major questions, What do we mean by "evil"? Does the problem of evil prove that there is no good and all-powerful God? How is evil a problem for atheism? How might the fact that God himself experienced evil help us? Where does the story end? These five questions will be discussed throughout the following paragraphs.
What do we mean by "evil"? The article is not talking about the type of evil when we speak of a disliked team or a flavor we don't like. It is talking about the suffering that is brought upon us, the suffering we cannot control, like a divorce, a tsunami, or a death of a close friend.
Does the problem of evil prove that there is no good and all-powerful God? No this does not necessarily mean that. We can not determine the fact that God exists or that He does not. We do not fully understand the concept therefore can not determine a true answer.
How is evil a problem for atheism? It is a major problem because if they recognize an evil then there must be a great good, aka God. Also it is said that the atheists will not know where they received their morals if they are not from a higher being.
How might the fact that God himself experienced evil help us? It helps to know that he made him self much lower in order to show that he is willing to go through so much pain for us and understands the evil, pain, and suffering we all go through also.
Where does the story end? In the end God will come down and all of suffering in the Book of Revelation. If God is able to defeat the greatest evil, then he is capable of defeating the rest.
There is much more that should be included in theses arguments. Some examples would be that we as humans have much better morals than other animals, faith is a major issue under this topic, and there is no definite conclusion to this article. This topic as of now is just of opinion since no real conclusion can be found because of lack of proveable facts.
I enjoy speaking on this topic, but I believe that since God gave us free will, an awesome gift, it would not be truly free will if he did not allow us to be able to choose evil. God did not put this suffering onto us. We had a perfect world in the garden of Eden but we screwed up on our chance and therefore we were placed in an imperfect world where death, suffering, and evil are much more common. Also if there was no evil then everyone would get into heaven, because they would be unable to sin against the Lord. Evil is a necessity and I do not believe that I will be able to fully grasp the concept of why the Lord allows tsunamis and famines until I have died and passed into the next life.
Chad Goldman
Bro.Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
In the article, "Why Does God Permit Evil?" by Jay Sklar. Do God have a plan for the problem of evil? If God in deed have a plan with this evilness it was most likely to teach us (Humans) about that God is there to turn to when things are bad. As we all know we have no control over evil but does God? God is the creator of all even Evil so that is in God's control.
The article makes the problem of evil more important in a person's mind. Evil stands for many things in others' minds, but here Sklar has three basic points, someone dislike something calling it evil, the streach of common sense not being followed ending in problems be called as evil, and bad and unforgiving events the are out of our control is known as evil. That last one is the theme of untold events we can't stop.
In the article Sklar writes about the tsunami in which millions have suffered and still are today and 250,000 tragic death just from the tsunami caused physicially, but many later did of lack of food and illness. This relates to Noah and the flood that washed away all sinners on earth. God was using evil to stop evil creating a peaceful area later. The way we want to evul is that most common factor "death". When we see the face of death or one of its victims we call it Evil, but if there is a forgiving and powerful God why do we blame others. God intended this to happen. Evil in basics is everything that is bad in the eyes of humans.
In the article “Why does God Permit Evil?” Dr. Jay Sklar explores several commonly asked about God, evil, and Atheism. The first question regards what we think is evil. Sklar quickly rejects the notion that evil is anything bad that happens to us, because many times we bring it upon ourselves. Sklar instead argues that evil is something that we cannot control, like a drunk driver killing a friend or a natural disaster that destroys a home. This brings up the question that why does allow evil. Sklar argues that God may have reasons to permit evil that we, as immortal humans, cannot even begin to comprehend. The next argument Sklar makes is that Atheists have no morals, values or dignity, because they come exclusively from religions that believe in God. The next question is how does God’s suffering help us? While, in my mind, Skylar does not give a direct answer, he says that there may be ways that God helps us through our suffering, but we may not notice it. In his conclusion Sklar says that since God has destroyed the ultimate evil, death, he can destroy all evils, and it is only a matter of time before God ends all evil.
For the next two paragraphs, I will focus on two particular aspects of Sklar’s argument that I disagree with.
The first point in Sklar’s argument I disagree with is the assumption he makes is that there is a God. However, an assumption is an educated guess, at best, and Sklar provides no details to show that there is a God. While I personally believe that there is a God, one cannot make a viable argument while making assumptions and without providing details to back up their theory. While there is not much scientific evidence to prove or disprove the existence of a God, Sklar should have at least said something along the lines of that the existence of a God is an assumption, and the whole argument is only true if his assumption is correct, if he could not find enough evidence to support a viable argument.
The second area of Sklar’s argument that I disagree with is his belief that since Atheists do not believe in God, they have no dignity. In his argument, he even compared them to a lion that kills another lion, and feels no remorse for it. This is absolutely not true. While Atheists have different beliefs, as humans who are brought up in an educated society, they have at least a basic understanding of what is right and wrong. Most criminals even have a set of morals, but they become skewed by rage or anger of the thrust for power and money. There are no stories on the news of the entire Atheist population going out and killing everyone in sight. As with all religious groups, including Christianity, there are some people whose morals are clouded or they have a disorder preventing them to make the correct choice, but to claim that an entire population has no morals because they do not believe in a hypothetical God is a completely baseless argument.
Vaughn Franz
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20 2009
In Jay Sklar's article "Why Does God Permit Evil?" he discusses evil and why, if there is a God does he permit it. To ebgin to dicuss this question he states five additional questions that would be helpful in responding to it. the first question he states is "What Do We Mean By Evil?". He argues that some types of things such as the DMV or fruitcake are not the types of evil that we suggest when we discuss the problem of evil. The second type of evil that he discusses is self inflicted evil and this is often blamed on God because he could have prevented it. The third type is evil that we can not control. He says that in the face of this type of suffering that we conclude that there is no good and all powerful God.
That leads into his second question "Does the Problem of Evil Prove That There Is No Good and All-powerful God?". He responds to this with the argument that there are many assuptions made to believe that because of evil there is no God. He states that we make the assuption that there must be a justifiable reason for God to permit evil and this reason is not apparent to us there for there is no reason. He says that this does not make an appliable argument because just because the reason is not apparent to us it does not mean that this reason does not exist.
The Third question that he poses is "How is Evil a Problem for Atheism?". He responds to this by saying that by acknowledging evil we admit that injustice is occuring and therefore there is a good. By establishing that there is good and justice we need to establish a reason for this also. He comes to the conclusion that the only reason there could be human dignity, good and justice is the existance of a God.
The fourth question that he asks is "How might the Fact That God Himself Experienced Evil Help Us?".
He states that God in atjking the form of the human Jesus Christ he experinced the full human world of suffering and the human difficulties that we face. He argues that God pays the penalty himself to bring justification for the sufferings of the world and to show that it does not exixt because he doesn't love us.
The fifth and final question that he poses is "Where Does the Story End?". By this he means does it end with life just being a long sad existance with a God that understands our suffering but does nothing to stop it. He answers no it is shown through the resurrection of Jesus that by defeating the strongest evil, he can defeat all of them. He says that the story ends with Jesus defeating all evils of the earth.
I agreed with Sklar's response to the first and second question and believe that his arguments are sound. In the response to the third question he states that by evolutionary standards there is no problem with evil and that God can be the only basis for good. I think that established society and culture have eliminated the killing of other beings to survive as necessary. In society the need for killing has been replaced by competion for jobs and in education. Therefore with the necessity removed killing can be deemed morally wrong. He also states that religion is the only thing that can create a reason for moral wrongness. In the fourth question he states that God experienced our life to understand us. I believe that this is in contradiction to the statement of God's omniprescence. He would already understand our suffering because he understands all things. In the fourth and fifth question he implies that God is in a battle with evil. This statement is in contradiction to God's omnipotence that he before stated. GOd would be able to eradicate it with no battle because he is all powerful. He also states that death, the unavoidable thing that everyone of us face is an evil. I am thinking of the natural death not one inflicted by an "evil" would not be evil. It being an evil would contradict the argument for an afterlife because if there is one and it means that you would be with God then it would by all means be a good thing by his standards.
Kevin Petnuch
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
In Jay Sklar's article,"Why Does God Permit Evil?" Jay explanes how evil can exist with an almighty and powerful God. He states and answers five questions explaning this conflict in detail.
I do agree with this article and how Jay writes and explanes the topic. One topic that i strongly agree with is the three types of evil:
1. Refering to things that we dont like as evil.
2. Refering to some negative sicustance we choose to bring upon ourselves.
3. The suffering that we cannot control.
I think that the third is the worst one because you canot control the outcome. An example of this is death. Everyone must die so it is not avoidable. I also think what he says about peoples moral choices plays a part in the third evil. An example of this is a drunk driver killing a familymember who never did anything to deserve to die.
In our world we all face amny evils just as god did in human form when Jesus came to the earth through mary. This shows us that in order to have good in our world there must be evil. God suffered on the cross for us and then conqured death proving that he has power over evil but that it still has to exist.
George Tsounos
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Religion
In Jay Sklar's article, "Why Does God Permit Evil?" the question is argued that why does god permit evil. In the article Jay argues why would an all powerful god would permit evil. The articule agrues by asking questions.
God gave us all the power of free will. So that means you choose the wright path betwean good and bad or wright from wrong. If we make a bad choice then we have to live with it and the consicence for the rest of our life.
Since God gave us the power of free will then it is up to him if we pick a bad choice.So if we choice the bad choice then we are creating the evil not God. So in some sense we are creating the suffering and it is the choice of free will that determines it not God.
Conor Coleman
Bro. Rob Peach FSC
Rel 011.06
May 20, 2009
Dr. Jay Slkar describes a common argument between theologians in his article "Why Does God Permit Evil?" This argument addresses the problem in beliefs, asking how a supposedly kind and loving God permit such atrocities as the Holocaust. In short, Sklar breaks the argumentinto five questions:
1. What do we mean by the problem of evil?
2. Does the problem of evil prove that there is no all-powerful and loving God?
3. How does the problem of evil contradict the atheists' arguments?
4. How does God's experience of evil help us?
5. Where does the story, or the
problem of evil end?
He then goes on to describe and answer each question.
And although he does a relatively good job at doing this, there are some holes in his argument, such as the rather large one concerning the Atheists' problem with the problem of evil. Sklar says that it contradicts these people's faith, in that if there is evil, there must also be good, possibly pointing towards the force of good, or God. Sklar says this without really considering the possible atheist's point of view, which could be that it is less that God is the cause for good, and the Devil the cause for evil, but rather that good and evil are separated by one's sense of morality, and that they themselves have the power to govern waht is right and wrong. Other than this, and a few other points, Dr. Sklar's argument seems to be correct.
This is especially true in his recognition that Evil remains to be a major problem in todays society. Evil, though, has its place as well. It causes pain, suffering and death, but also forces one to keep hope alive and to perservere. Evil shows how versatile we as humans truly are.
Jack Treado
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
REL 011.06
May 20,2009
In Dr. Jay Sklar's article "Why Does God Permit Evil?" some very interesting and valid questions are asked in order to answer the main question of the article. The first is "What do we mean by 'evil'?" This question and section of the article addresses the real definition of evil, which is "suffering we cannot control" The second question the article addresses is "Does the problem evil prove that there is no good and all-powerful God." The author addresses this question by saying there is not enough concrete evidence to prove God unreal. The third question is How is evil a problem for atheism?" This section ultimately states that they don not know the answer to this question. The fourth section asks the question "How might the fact that god himself experienced evil help us?" This section says that because God experienced pain himself, he knows how important pain and suffering is in human life. The final question is "Where does the story end?"
This section talks about how because death can not be avoided, it is not truly evil, which hen shows that all other evils can be stopped, and therefore showing that there is a God and he does care.
I agree with this article. It makes good sense. The beginning three sections were not very good, because they stated either pointless things or they dodged around the question. The final questions are the ones that hit home, because they speak real thruths and actually give good reasons for there argument.
I beleive in God, and I do beleive he is all powerful and loving. Just because some bad things happen, it doesnt mean that he does not care, he just might want to show us that there are bad consequences for bad actions. Or, perhaps he loves us, but he doesnt care as much for this life as much as the next. He might not punish evildoers, but when they die, they could have "hell to pay."
Mike S
Bro. Rob Peach, FSC
Rel 011.04
May 20, 2009
The artice "why does god permit evil" by Dr jay sklar, i honestly didnt agree with much of it. Now bro, bare with me through this. I have a very different and unique view on this. Now i do agree, there is evil in life, we all can agree with that. Many different situations can be blamed on "evil" whatever that may be. im not an atheist by any means, but to a certain extent i could be. I hate to blame things on god, i never do and i never will. God had nothing to do with anything that happened in my life, that is what i think.
Blaming something on the sky, is pretty much what were doing. looking up to the sky and saying "why! why did you let this happen to me!" Things happen for a reason, sometimes were too pathetic to realize it was our fault even.
Im going to leave you with this. there is the main point that i can agree with and thats, that there is evil out there. yes there is, in many different ways, but i also think, blaming this evil on god is a waste of time and emotions.
Post a Comment