From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Subject: Re: Existence of Concepts
Organization: Glassboro State College
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 16:10:06 GMT


Lonnie Schubert continues the discussion of concepts, and so far as I can
make him out these are the points of his argument:

1) The literal word in the Isaiah passage about evil is `create'.

2) He believes his ideas are consistent with Scripture and required for him
   to maintain a consistent philosophy.

3) The devil is coersive, but Mr Schubert believes it is absurd to say that
   the devil generates coercive power.  Therefore, it must be "the coersivity
   of evil itself".  He also writes that "If evil exists ONLY in the actions
   of people, if it is completely dependent upon the human nature, then why
   is it not eliminated from the life of the born-again, recreated, Holy
   Spirit filled individual?"

(1) is irrelevant, so far as I can tell.  When I say "Don't go stirring up
trouble", the literal word verb is a form of `stir'.  But nobody would say
for a second that trouble is something that can be literally stirred.  If the
passage uses a figure of speech, then the literal reading is (by definition)
wrong.  You cannot argue against a figure of speech by making claims about the
literal words -- you must show the _intent_ is to be literal.

(2) is probably correct; Mr Schubert's ideas look to me as if they are in
accord with the Bible, and I never said otherwise.  But I do not think that
they are _required_ by the Bible.  His interpretation is one among many that
are valid, but it is not the only valid one.  I do not begrudge him his ideas,
and what he thinks is his business; besides, he might be right.  But I don't
believe things just because they are consistent with the Bible, or because
they might be true.  I believe things when there is some reasonable argument
in their favor.  To paraphrase Jeff Zurschmeide, "If I believed everything
which might be true and which was consistent with the Bible, I'd be quite a
confused individual."

(3) I don't think the devil generates coercive power, because I don't believe
there is such a thing as `coercive power', except metaphorically.  The `power'
in a temptation is not a kind of energy or electricity, but rather facets of
the temptation which are attractive to us.  For some people, the temptation to
adultery is very strong, for me, it is nothing.  In my way of looking at these
things, this is because adultery is not at all attractive to me.  From how I
understand you, the devil must just forget to put `coercive power' into his
attempts at making me unfaithful, or else he's nice enough to go easy on me,
or maybe he's just never tried.  Why would the devil do any of that?  If he
has the ability to put more/less `coercive power' into a temptation as he
wants, why not hit me a zillion watts?  Why hit other people harder than he
hits me?

My conclusion is that the `power' of a temptation lies in its attractiveness
to the person tempted.  This is similar to the way the `power' of a poem/
symphony/painting/sculpture lies in how the artist's work "strikes a chord"
with the audience.  There is no magical power in a set of sounds, but there
_is_ a kind of magic in the way Beethoven's Ninth Symphony stirs my soul.

Also, note that I did not say evil exists only in the actions of people, or
that it is dependent upon human nature -- I said it was dependent upon the
existence of sentient beings.  Devils, for example, are self-aware beings
capable of some kinds of action; but they are not people.  If the only
creature ever made was Satan, he'd still be capable of Evil.


Please note that none of this says evil is not `real'.  Merely that it need
not be any kind of thing, material or spiritual.  If I beat someone up with a
bat, that would be evil, and it would be very real.  But I can beat someone
up even if `evil' is used only as an adjective.  The reality of emotions and
intentions does not dependent on their existing outside of the creatures who
experience and act.

-=-=-

I do not believe evil is self-existent, and Mr Schubert asked why.  The answer
is that `self-existent' describes something which exists in and of itself,
dependent upon nothing else.  In orthodox Christian theology, the only self-
existent thing is God: everything else which exists was created by Him.  This
means that evil cannot be self-existent, whatever its form.

At another point, Mr Schubert wrote:

> Interpret a given passage of scripture litterally until you find good
> (& scriptural) cause to interpret it as figurative.

If the only good reasons must also be Scriptural ones, please tell me which
parts of the Bible specifically state that Jesus is _not_ a door.  8^)

Joking aside, I hope you see that we all reject some literal interpretations
just because they are absurd, even though there is no passage of scripture
which reads `And Jesus had neither hinges nor knobs bolted to his body.'


Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"It only makes sense that every facet of our daily lives should depend upon
the position of celestial bodies hundreds of millions of miles away." - Calvin
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU