RE: "God has morally sufficient reasons for permitting evil"
December 12, 2013 at 6:33 am
(This post was last modified: December 12, 2013 at 6:35 am by Ryantology.)
(December 12, 2013 at 6:22 am)GodsRevolt Wrote: This is my point. Not to mention that the baby had no idea that it was beneficial, nor did she condone it. As the father, I came from the position of knowledge and authority. I could see the end goal and weigh it against the suffering. My child couldn't.
What you describe is really more discomfort than it is suffering. Would you subject your infant to the risk of serious, intense pain, starvation or injury to achieve the same ends? Would you let your child die so that you, or someone else, would grow and develop as a person? Would you even subject your child to that level of discomfort if you could achieve the exact same result without doing so?
Quote:Because God, as the Father, comes from a position of knowledge and authority. He sees the end goal.
God, being maximally-knowing and capable, could achieve any end by any means, without limit. It is more of a crime, not less, that a being so capable would inflict or allow suffering, because with such a being in charge, all suffering in the universe is logically unnecessary.
We don't hold animals to a higher moral standard than we hold ourselves, because their abilities and cognitive functions are beneath our own, so it is illogical to hold ourselves to a higher moral standard than we would a being who knows and can do things far beyond what we are capable of. To quote the great philosophers Voltaire and Uncle Ben Parker, "With great power comes great responsibility". Logically, with maximum power comes maximum responsibility.