Film: Creation (2009)

I don't know anyone who thinks god is omni-benevolent and also accepts evolution.Typically, the people who think god is omni-benevolent are the ones who don't accept evolution and the ones who accept evolution allow for more variety in gods qualities.I accept evolution, but I don't think god is omni-benevolent. However, I can make whatever assumptions necessary and speak hypothetically... Is this any different than that standard "Problem of Evil"?The escape from the contradiction is that either god is not omni-benevolent or that said things are not really evil.Are you just wanting to explore the explanations for why an exceedingly wasteful plan would not be evil?

If you look at the Catholic Encyclopedia entry on the Nature and Attributes of God, you won't find the word 'omni-benevolent'. Too, the page on Divine Attributes doesn't mention it. That page does have this at the bottom, from the Vatican Council:

quote:

---

The Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church believes and professes that there is one living and true God, Creator and Lord of heaven and earth, omnipotent, eternal, immense, incomprehensible, infinite in intellect and will and in all perfection Who, being One, singular, absolutely simple and unchangeable spiritual substance, is to be regarded as distinct really and in essence from the world most blessed in and from Himself, and unspeakably elevated above all things that exist, or can be conceived, except Himself.

---

We could look to the Nicene Creed, but that doesn't mention omni-benevolence either. Now, I'm not saying that nobody in Catholicism thinks that god is omni-benevolent, or even that there is nowhere that it is mentioned, but I do think we can say that its not really a big deal. It isn't something I remember being specifically taught during my Catholic education. What I was trying to convey, was that the people who promote god as being omni-benevolent are the same ones who deny evolution. For the ones who accept evolution, omni-benevolence isn't really a big deal. And I was trying to use the word in the same context that you were, because in the way that Catholics typically use omni-benevolence, there is no issue/contradiction with the "wasteful design" that you bring up. Like I said, they allow for a little more variety than a stict absolutley-no-evil-allowed that the people who promote god as omni-benevolent usually mean. I see. One solution to the problem of evil is through the freewill of mankind so this "wasteful design" being before man doesn't fit with that.I don't see why this "wasteful design" necessarily suggests the malevolence that would be a problem for omni-benevolence. Can you expound that claim a bit?

Its not a big deal in the sense that it really doesn't come up very much and they aren't making it a point to teach it enough so that the average student remembers hearing about it. Certainly, less of a big deal than, say, masturbation... If you want to go Biblical, then we do have this:

quote:

---

Isaiah 45:7
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

---

Oh, and that whole part about killing everything in a flood. Those would seem to be better candidates for a problem with omni-benevolence than nature being wasteful. Anything in particular? Quote it. Then what were you going on about in the Opening Post (OP)? Except that its rediculous to think that humans might have not died if they hadn't sinned. A better reconciliation, would be that god really isn't omni-benevolent. And that makes sense in the light of god being Just, as he'd have to be "not-good" to badness itself to maintain justice. You know, the whole damning people to hell for eternity.Personally, I don't like that "omni" prefix on any qualities as it adds more confusion.

Sorry to disappoint. I'll know that its totally pointless when you stop replying I think we all understand what you are seeking, we're just telling you that you're wasting your time looking for it. Oh, you'll know when I'm winding you up (smileys are a hint) I figured that from the OP. Had you found those people, what did you expect to discuss with them? I can make whatever assumptions and discus this with you, but it'd help to know what direction you want to go in. As I said earlier:

quote:

---

The escape from the contradiction is that either god is not omni-benevolent or that said things are not really evil.

​

Are you just wanting to explore the explanations for why an exceedingly wasteful plan would not be evil?

---

I understand the premises, so what do you want to discuss? Yes and no. Its so diverse there's not gonna be one representative. But the approach we've taken to this is standard for what we were replying to. Just look around. Do you ever use google sitesearch? Put in some key words or topics you like and see what we've been on about. People here will discuss ANYTHING. They also take it fairly seriously and mostly are honest about it.This place *is* awesome, though. The quality of the posters is only surpassed by the quality of the software. The owner of the site is also the software developer (its unique to this site), and whenever I try a different discussion board, I'm always dissappointed with the software. Sometimes it sucks to be spoiled. We have a lot of good experts to learn from, from archaeologist to cosmologists and from pastors to wacko religious nutjobs, so it can definately be worth your time. But you reap what you sow. You gotta give us somethign to work with. Your OP is just too limited. You're not gonna find people who fit, and there isn't enough info on what you want to discuss for others to assume the premises and follow the direction.