Re: # 128
Re: # 128

kaal ji


((((how can one distinguish between the following two sets of statements?:

[God is omnipotent.
God is good.]

and

[Good is omnipotent.
God is evil.]

Can these be used interchangeably? Just because good exists, it does not prove that God is not evil)))))

well..kaal.. Religion or for that matter Quran has never said that God is "good" or evil. As i mentioned earlier that, these are the modes of substance which, we derive from attributes of substance and are infinite in numbers. For example; Omnipotence can accommodate both good and evil at the same time. But before that we have to define ’good’ and evil’. Both these terms are used in an emotional way which are further responsible for an ethical interpretation of religion, the fallacy that i was once discussing with you.(#282 daughter of hajar). This argument goes like that;

God is good....some part of religion is bad (even if it is one of core principles).
God is greater than the religion so come on guys lets change the religion...God would love it...because God is love....couple of songs in the church with a few candles and that is it.

This thinking was responsible for the decline of Christianity as a religion (both socially and theologically). Now you can understand why Islam is surviving even in the most intense materialism world has ever witnessed.

We label attributes of God as good or bad according to their ((those so called attributes .e.g. mercifull.raheem...compeller..etc)) consequences on our life. in that sense good and evil are not even MODES in the strict sense. These qualities are given by us to certain Actions depending on their implications, which again have relative value.

For example; in human life good means "following moral laws" Whereas in God’s case...its God who is the source of all moralities...So any concept of Goodness of God can be understood in the context of God’s primary attributes i.e. ominieverything...etc( if at all you think that logic is relevant there).At the end of the day the problem we will face is, the concept of infinity. So here we go.....even in that case we have insufficient methodology in the form of logic to analyze religious assertion....at the end of the day problem remains there from where it started. .First of all we have to have ABSOLUTLY certain and objective LOGIC if we insist on applying it on religion....And every student of philosophy knows there is NO such logic....but the problem with philosophy is that everybody considers himself a philosopher....If a person is not a doctor he will never say he is a doctor but if a student of philosophy tells someone even a fundamental concept of philosophy "MR someone" would never accept that....this is the problem. Applying this logic on religion is just like checking an out of order bus with a medical instrument and that too a broken one.


The question of evil and good (including the one you have raised) and their internal consistency are the result of a misunderstood concept of monotheism (as I have mentioned in my reply to PM in 71) and that is, taking oneness of God, as mathematical oneness. In Mathematics one is the half of two and double of half. We don’t know what kind of oneness of God has…Quran has always mentioned it as the denial ‘’shirk’’(associating partner with Allah).Analogical thinking is not relevant here. So deriving any ‘’abstract’’ conclusion from that ‘’oneness’’ is meaningless and shows the ignorance of the relevance of different epistemological dimension suited to the universe of discourse it is dealing with. Religion itself is an independent epistemology and cannot be understood by only one methodology.

It is simply impossible to understand religion without living in its climate of opinion and looking the entire reality with its perspective. Unless you come at level of ‘I’ to ‘I’ encounter with religious truths ,you will never be able to comprehend them. Religion gives you the methodology to follow and find the truth.

Regards