Why Does God Let Bad Things Happen?
- Thread starter megan_26
- Start date
- Mar 4, 2018
- 1,075
- 849
- 78
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Married
What part of God's Word have you been reading? Jesus certainly didn't "prosper" in any worldly sense, nor did His Apostles. Nor did He promise us that we would live charmed lives, free of pain and suffering. We live in a natural world, and are subject to natural forces. If we fall off a roof, gravity will accelerate us toward the ground. Is God supposed to nullify gravity every time a Christian falls? Also, the ungodly acts of of others, as well as our own un godly acts, can bring pain to ourselves and to others. He has promised us perfect happiness forever, once we are in Heaven. Why would we expect perfect happiness here on Earth as well?
Upvote
0
As the saying goes, be careful what you wish for. Since humans cause the majority of the suffering in the world, to end all suffering would require ending all of us.
Upvote
0
Marvin Knox
Senior Veteran
I certainly wouldn't want to dismiss or make light of any particular pain or evil in someone here's life.
But it seems to me that one would be better off confronting the problem of original sin and why God allowed it to happen (or even, it would seem, orchestrated it's happening).
IMO theologians and us would find it much more productive to confront the big question of why God allowed Satan's fall, created man and woman and put them in a garden with Satan knowing full well what the outcome would be - than they would asking little questions like about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices or the eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed (or even about the holocaust for that matter).
Granted they are all difficult questions.
But the ones beyond the big question itself (what with us being willful sinners since the fall) are far more easily answered than the big one itself.
Upvote
0
These are not difficult question. God wanted to give us choice. If we weren't given the option to choose, then we wouldn't have free will. So do you want freedom to choose or not? People say they don't want god forced on them, if god didn't give us a choice, then it would the same as forcing himself on us. So again, do you want god to force you into submission, or would you rather have a choice in the matter?
This applies to why God doesn't reveal himself, if he did, we would have no choice but to believe in him, so if we can either choose to believe there's a god or not.
You can't have it both ways, if God intervenes in world affairs and stops bad things from happening then we aren't free. Freedom has it's pitfalls, in a free world bad things happen.
Then finally, bad things force people to examine their own mortality and ponder things like God.
Upvote
0
1213
Disciple of Jesus
I believe the reason is that people wanted to know evil. That is the reason why were expelled to this first death. Here we can learn truly what good and evil means. And those who learn well and are or become righteous, have after this opportunity to come back to life.
Upvote
0
FatalHeart
Wisdom's Associate
- Jan 23, 2013
- 334
- 117
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
Prologue:
Hey, Megan. I was helping a friend through Romans when I was struck by a peculiar concept. The fact is most people teach religion as an idea, rather than God as a person. The problem with this is that there really is no distinction between one religion and another as long as God remains an idea. God, in being a real person, is perfectly able to do things that will lead those who know Him, making a distinction between any false religion based on idea and culture and the truth which is based only on His Spirit. That's why the Bible calls those who do not acknowledge His Son as liars, because they are lying. Without His grace, no one is able to come to Him, so the depth of their deception is directly related to their inability to acknowledge God; they can do nothing but lie to themselves. That's why they are so, "certain," yet so wrong. It's not a lack of conviction or an ignorance of the truth, but lack of God's grace for them to acknowledge what is wrong that keeps them in their ideas and culture. That's why we are supposed to pray for our enemies, because, like them, we were doomed until the grace of God came into our lives and enabled us to live differently. That being said, when one claims God as a person, they must therefor open themselves up to His ability to direct, correct, and prove them wrong. That's why most people follow a religion or scattered denominations. It's not because they want to know who God is, but because as long as they are being taught by someone other than God, they can use the excuses of following that teaching or culture or what they have been told by an authority to ignore the conviction of the Holy Spirit. You will find many religious people following what their parents have taught them, but it is those who follow the Spirit of God who are sons of God, and God is not divided.
Now, in Romans, it does clear this up somewhat by acknowledging that no one has an excuse. It also says elsewhere that the Spirit has convicted the world and that even nature has taught man of the true Jesus Christ. And, seeing that Jesus appeared to Thomas when he doubted, or Job when he questioned, and that God shows no favoritism, it can be safely said that if any man has any real doubt of God, that God Himself will clarify things. "If anyone lacks wisdom let him ask of God." Not his pastor. Not his church. There is no room, then, for resisting the Spirit apart from sin in the heart, and God will not overlook a willful ignorance and turning from His Spirit simply because of temptation or hardship or family or culture or friends. I therefor would encourage you to steel yourself under the umbrella of proof and direction that God has/will provide to this trouble and to remember what Jesus and the prophets have endured for you. It is a long road, but the trip is worthy of it. It is also a narrow road, so you won't win unless you compete according to the rules.
Answer:
In Romans we see Paul discussing the existence of law and the reason for sin. This can be very accurately related to good and evil as the Bible is the word of God, capable for instruction, "so that the man of God may be made complete, fully equipped for good works." He starts, "Is the law sin?" In other words, does the existence of good and it's stimulation for the capacity of evil, then become evil itself? He says, "Without the law, sin was dead." So, if God had not initially made a command for Adam to follow, death would not have been able to enter the world. Sin would have been there all the same, but the distinction, and the consequences for it, would have remained dormant: death would never have had to be. "To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone's account where there is no law." So, the capacity to miss God's target isn't important until a target is set. There's no need to regard it as anything until its function comes against God. Right? "You were blameless until the day wickedness was found in you." Now he says, "the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good," meaning that it was not sinful for God to make a command, nor was it a wrong command, but one that had the capacity to bring life because it was given by God; "the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me." So we have what is right making a distinction, bringing about the function of sin, and releasing death to what is evil; "But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful."
So, by making a distinction between right and wrong, righteousness rightly condemned evil, revealing it for what it was and brought it to death. Consequently, however, we were caught by death as well, because we were the ones who sinned; "For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. But God found fault with the people and said: "The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people."
As Paul relates, "For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."
The reasons for this are given: "he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment--to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ." "For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross." And, as it says elsewhere, "When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."
So, what the scriptures are saying is that God, in creating the world, had purposed to reconcile all things to Himself through Jesus Christ, to condemn the capacity of evil by the righteous judgment of the law, bringing to light the necessity of His mercy, and to put everything under His subjection through His gift of grace, for even the world we now live in exists by grace, "But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD."
It is not an unjust thing for Good to condemn Evil, nor is it wrong for right to make a distinction from itself and that which is wrong, rather, "What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory--"
It is therefore God's right to allow whatever He wishes, to have mercy on whom He wants to have mercy, for even the Son learned obedience through what he suffered. Pain is therefore a necessity in the current order to hold all things accountable to the distinction of sin; "For he who has suffered in his body is done with sin." But God will one day take away all pain, "For the old order of things has passed."
All that being said, knowing the reasons of God will never be enough to follow God, because man's knowledge is not the way to God. What we get by asking questions, or seeking our own understanding, is not obedience, but comfort, and comfort, while it has its place, and, we are to pray unselfishly for things, like knowledge, will never be what leads us to God. You cannot through cleverness of reason attain to the character of God. Rather, "so that your faith may be based on God's power." Salvation therefor rests on God's power in your life; or, as Jesus stated elsewhere, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them."
But sin will always ask for more time. It is never satisfied with the answer and that's one of the reasons why it is foolish to ask such questions as, "Why were the former days better than these?" The real war is in the heart with sin. For even if you see God, you will still have to decide whether or not you like Him, and seeing as we doubt someone we know exists, even His reasons cannot compel obedience. It is only through grace that one is saved from themselves. It is only through the Spirit that one achieves life, for even Jesus was born through the Spirit and God silenced the testimony of demons, even though it was about His son because it came not through the Spirit of God, but demons. Questions, while good for understanding, are not salvation nor security. The only real security rests in the finger of God in your life and that's the primary reason Adam was unable to remain perfect. It has only always been the will of God that sustains life; it will only always be through Jesus that God is with us.
"Let us make man in our image." It's not the physical Adam or his offspring that God was talking about, but a story that would perfectly embody His likeness and His glory; we need Him. Granted, darkness really never had to be a certain way, but this is the way that He chose according to His character to bring things to light: "God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace." For if a goodness comes to us through merit, it is limited to our capacities, but if it comes to us by grace, it has no bounds, and this freely bought for us by the blood of Jesus. "You were sold for nothing and without money you will be redeemed." "For God has bound all men over to disobedience that He may have mercy on them all." Jesus asked God three times to change His mind, and God reminded Jesus of His choice three times by using man's inability to stay awake in his time of need. In short, Jesus has already asked your questions and made your pleas for you and for the countless that came before you and those who will come after you, but God did not change His mind. It is therefor better now to put yourself into subjection of His will for your life, come what may, for "anyone who trust in Him will never be put to shame."
"For the joy set before him, he endured the cross, despising its shame." It is godliness to accept the lot that God has given you because He is faithful. "You will not let your holy one see decay." And if you do ever feel alone in the sea of religious people, remember, "I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever-- the Spirit of truth." "If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ." So, do not be discouraged by life or the sins of others or get distracted. Keep your eyes on Jesus, to obey God, for he has overcome the world; "you will reap what you sow."
Hey, Megan. I was helping a friend through Romans when I was struck by a peculiar concept. The fact is most people teach religion as an idea, rather than God as a person. The problem with this is that there really is no distinction between one religion and another as long as God remains an idea. God, in being a real person, is perfectly able to do things that will lead those who know Him, making a distinction between any false religion based on idea and culture and the truth which is based only on His Spirit. That's why the Bible calls those who do not acknowledge His Son as liars, because they are lying. Without His grace, no one is able to come to Him, so the depth of their deception is directly related to their inability to acknowledge God; they can do nothing but lie to themselves. That's why they are so, "certain," yet so wrong. It's not a lack of conviction or an ignorance of the truth, but lack of God's grace for them to acknowledge what is wrong that keeps them in their ideas and culture. That's why we are supposed to pray for our enemies, because, like them, we were doomed until the grace of God came into our lives and enabled us to live differently. That being said, when one claims God as a person, they must therefor open themselves up to His ability to direct, correct, and prove them wrong. That's why most people follow a religion or scattered denominations. It's not because they want to know who God is, but because as long as they are being taught by someone other than God, they can use the excuses of following that teaching or culture or what they have been told by an authority to ignore the conviction of the Holy Spirit. You will find many religious people following what their parents have taught them, but it is those who follow the Spirit of God who are sons of God, and God is not divided.
Now, in Romans, it does clear this up somewhat by acknowledging that no one has an excuse. It also says elsewhere that the Spirit has convicted the world and that even nature has taught man of the true Jesus Christ. And, seeing that Jesus appeared to Thomas when he doubted, or Job when he questioned, and that God shows no favoritism, it can be safely said that if any man has any real doubt of God, that God Himself will clarify things. "If anyone lacks wisdom let him ask of God." Not his pastor. Not his church. There is no room, then, for resisting the Spirit apart from sin in the heart, and God will not overlook a willful ignorance and turning from His Spirit simply because of temptation or hardship or family or culture or friends. I therefor would encourage you to steel yourself under the umbrella of proof and direction that God has/will provide to this trouble and to remember what Jesus and the prophets have endured for you. It is a long road, but the trip is worthy of it. It is also a narrow road, so you won't win unless you compete according to the rules.
Answer:
In Romans we see Paul discussing the existence of law and the reason for sin. This can be very accurately related to good and evil as the Bible is the word of God, capable for instruction, "so that the man of God may be made complete, fully equipped for good works." He starts, "Is the law sin?" In other words, does the existence of good and it's stimulation for the capacity of evil, then become evil itself? He says, "Without the law, sin was dead." So, if God had not initially made a command for Adam to follow, death would not have been able to enter the world. Sin would have been there all the same, but the distinction, and the consequences for it, would have remained dormant: death would never have had to be. "To be sure, sin was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not charged against anyone's account where there is no law." So, the capacity to miss God's target isn't important until a target is set. There's no need to regard it as anything until its function comes against God. Right? "You were blameless until the day wickedness was found in you." Now he says, "the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good," meaning that it was not sinful for God to make a command, nor was it a wrong command, but one that had the capacity to bring life because it was given by God; "the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me." So we have what is right making a distinction, bringing about the function of sin, and releasing death to what is evil; "But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful."
So, by making a distinction between right and wrong, righteousness rightly condemned evil, revealing it for what it was and brought it to death. Consequently, however, we were caught by death as well, because we were the ones who sinned; "For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another. But God found fault with the people and said: "The days are coming, declares the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and with the people of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their ancestors when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they did not remain faithful to my covenant, and I turned away from them, declares the Lord. This is the covenant I will establish with the people of Israel after that time, declares the Lord. I will put my laws in their minds and write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people."
As Paul relates, "For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the flesh but according to the Spirit."
The reasons for this are given: "he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, to be put into effect when the times reach their fulfillment--to bring unity to all things in heaven and on earth under Christ." "For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross." And, as it says elsewhere, "When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."
So, what the scriptures are saying is that God, in creating the world, had purposed to reconcile all things to Himself through Jesus Christ, to condemn the capacity of evil by the righteous judgment of the law, bringing to light the necessity of His mercy, and to put everything under His subjection through His gift of grace, for even the world we now live in exists by grace, "But Noah found favor in the eyes of the LORD."
It is not an unjust thing for Good to condemn Evil, nor is it wrong for right to make a distinction from itself and that which is wrong, rather, "What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory--"
It is therefore God's right to allow whatever He wishes, to have mercy on whom He wants to have mercy, for even the Son learned obedience through what he suffered. Pain is therefore a necessity in the current order to hold all things accountable to the distinction of sin; "For he who has suffered in his body is done with sin." But God will one day take away all pain, "For the old order of things has passed."
All that being said, knowing the reasons of God will never be enough to follow God, because man's knowledge is not the way to God. What we get by asking questions, or seeking our own understanding, is not obedience, but comfort, and comfort, while it has its place, and, we are to pray unselfishly for things, like knowledge, will never be what leads us to God. You cannot through cleverness of reason attain to the character of God. Rather, "so that your faith may be based on God's power." Salvation therefor rests on God's power in your life; or, as Jesus stated elsewhere, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them."
But sin will always ask for more time. It is never satisfied with the answer and that's one of the reasons why it is foolish to ask such questions as, "Why were the former days better than these?" The real war is in the heart with sin. For even if you see God, you will still have to decide whether or not you like Him, and seeing as we doubt someone we know exists, even His reasons cannot compel obedience. It is only through grace that one is saved from themselves. It is only through the Spirit that one achieves life, for even Jesus was born through the Spirit and God silenced the testimony of demons, even though it was about His son because it came not through the Spirit of God, but demons. Questions, while good for understanding, are not salvation nor security. The only real security rests in the finger of God in your life and that's the primary reason Adam was unable to remain perfect. It has only always been the will of God that sustains life; it will only always be through Jesus that God is with us.
"Let us make man in our image." It's not the physical Adam or his offspring that God was talking about, but a story that would perfectly embody His likeness and His glory; we need Him. Granted, darkness really never had to be a certain way, but this is the way that He chose according to His character to bring things to light: "God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace." For if a goodness comes to us through merit, it is limited to our capacities, but if it comes to us by grace, it has no bounds, and this freely bought for us by the blood of Jesus. "You were sold for nothing and without money you will be redeemed." "For God has bound all men over to disobedience that He may have mercy on them all." Jesus asked God three times to change His mind, and God reminded Jesus of His choice three times by using man's inability to stay awake in his time of need. In short, Jesus has already asked your questions and made your pleas for you and for the countless that came before you and those who will come after you, but God did not change His mind. It is therefor better now to put yourself into subjection of His will for your life, come what may, for "anyone who trust in Him will never be put to shame."
"For the joy set before him, he endured the cross, despising its shame." It is godliness to accept the lot that God has given you because He is faithful. "You will not let your holy one see decay." And if you do ever feel alone in the sea of religious people, remember, "I will ask the Father, and he will give you another advocate to help you and be with you forever-- the Spirit of truth." "If anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ." So, do not be discouraged by life or the sins of others or get distracted. Keep your eyes on Jesus, to obey God, for he has overcome the world; "you will reap what you sow."
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Marvin Knox
Senior Veteran
I know the oft repeated "free choice" answer does it just fine for most people.
But it doesn't explain all things satisfactorily for others - particularly those of us who believe in an omniscient and omnipresent providentially controlling sovereign God.
To us it has more to do with God displaying His attributes in this age, at least in representative form (including His innate knowledge of good and evil - never to be repeated) , for His own glory through His Son, the Word of God.
Too big a subject for this thread perhaps
- but nevertheless there it is.
Upvote
0
needhugs
Flibbertyjibbet
Listen, if you are losing faith in mainstream Christianity, why not go listen to this guy's vids before you leave God...
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJSqb5uxlQ0FA7EQS6DpLOg
bible-truths.com
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCJSqb5uxlQ0FA7EQS6DpLOg
bible-truths.com
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
marineimaging
Texas Baptist now living in Colorado
- Jul 14, 2014
- 1,449
- 1,228
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Metaphors: I see our relationship with God as our heart being a vessel and inviting God to pour his spirit into it and fill it with him and him only. I can imagine a person in the middle of a pitch black field. All around whispers and voices. Here, shoot here. There, over there it is. No. Not there not here. There here. They shoot an arrow in an arbitrary direction. And another in a different direction. They shoot arrows in all directions and everything they hit is destroyed, or bounces back and stabs them, or hurts somebody, or lands nowhere. Suddenly God turns on a light and there in the beam is a target. That is the Law of God. A hateful God would have let us keep shooting into the dark. A loving God turned on the light and gave us a target. Now we know were to aim and how high to angle the shot.
Upvote
0
Apologetic_Warrior
Pilgrim
- Oct 21, 2003
- 6,793
- 3,289
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
The Problem of Evil Answered Part I
by Puritan Lad
Introduction
One of the oldest, and still most popular, arguments against the Christian God is the so-called problem of evil. Dr. Walter Kaufmann, who tragically lost family members in the Holocaust, refers to the problem of evil as his strongest argument against Christianity, a "complete refutation of popular theism". H. J. McCloskey, in a 1960 Philosophical Quarterly article, wrote that "Evil is a problem, for the theist, in that a contradiction is involved in the fact of evil on the one hand and belief in the omnipotence and omniscience of God on the other."
Perhaps the original problem of evil argument was attributed Epicurus by Lactantius (See Lactantius - A Treatise on the Anger of God; Chap. XIII. - Of the Advantage and Use of the World and of the Seasons; AD 260-330). Although it is debatable if Lactantius chose the correct philosopher, it is clear that the "problem of evil" argument existed very early in Christendom. The Apostle Paul, in some rhetorical measure, dealt with the problem of evil in regards to the doctrine of unconditional election (Romans 9:14 - See Jay Adams' answer below).
The problem of evil is presented as a logical problem in regards to an omnipotent and omnibenevolent Deity. With a few variations, the arguments is stated as such:
P1: If God were omnipotent, He would be able to prevent all evil.
P2: If God were omnibenevolent, He would want to prevent all evil.
P3: Evil exists.
Conclusion: There is no omnipotent, omnibenevolent God.
The Atheist's Problem of Evil
While the problem is presented as an obstacle to Christianity, it must be pointed out that it presents two huge (and I would say, insurmountable) challenges to atheism. The first is the premise P3: Evil exists. The entire argument is based on the idea the evil is an objective reality. However, such a reality cannot be accounted for in an atheistic worldview. A judgment of "evil exists" requires an absolute moral standard, an objective "right and wrong" that goes well beyond simply subjectivism and "conventional wisdom". But how can a moral absolute come into existence in a materialistic universe? In an atheistic world, complete with its "survival of he fittest" ontology, there may be things that are painful, tragic, and grate against our sensibilities. However, such a worldview logically leads to genetic determinism, thus no grounds for proclaiming that evil exists. Yet, aside from Stoics who deny the existence of evil, every man has an innate and inescapable knowledge of evil, because they "by nature do what the law requires" (Romans 2:14), proving their knowledge of the one true God. And even if variable "secular" ethical theories could provide an objective moral standard, there is no grounds for demanding any life form to subject themselves to that standard. Materialism cannot produce morality, and "is" cannot justify "ought". C.S. Lewis explains this problem by looking back on his days as an atheist:
“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?... Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too--for the argument depended on saying the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies." (C. S. Lewis Mere Christianity - Touchstone: New York, 1980 p.45-46)
The second obstacle is that the problem of evil argument presupposes, not just a god, but the one and True Christian God. To suppose any other deity would eliminate evil as being a problem. From a standpoint of "general theism" (whatever form it may take), there are many logical reasons why evil may exist. There could be an evil god, who loves to do evil things. There could be an irrational god, who cannot tell the difference between good and evil. There could be a weak god, who is unable to prevent evil.
So we must concluded that, if the problem of evil is a valid problem, then atheism is refuted, and the Christian God is presupposed a priori. Nonetheless, the Christian is commanded by His Lord to answer the problem (1 Peter 3:15), though the problem itself is proof of the unbeliever's suppressed knowledge of God (Romans 1:18).
Past Answers Attempted
There have been many attempts throughout history to answer the logical problem of evil, yet without examining the truth of it's premises. Irenaeus suggested that evil is necessary and useful for men to seek God. Variations consider that evil is necessary for free will to exist (Plantinga). Justin Martyr attributed evil to angels who "transgressed their appointment", but does not explain how this idea is compatible with God's omnipotence. Dionysius echoed the Stoic view that evil does not exist. Augustine suggested that evil was simply an absence of good, but unwittingly denies the omnipresence of God in the process. Various "Best Possible World" Theories have abounded. C.S. Lewis holds to a combination of the "best possible world" and "free will" theories. He suggests that "Perhaps this is not the 'best of all possible' universes, but the only possible one" (C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain, p. 26). In Lewis's view, evil is a result of a "fixed nature of matter" (pp. 23-25), and is necessary for free will to exist. He writes, "We can, perhaps, conceive of a world in which God corrected the results of this abuse of free will by His creatures at every moment,...But such a world would be one in which all wrong actions would be impossible, and in which, therefore, freedom of the will would be void." (p. 24)
However, The Christian Doctrine of a perfect heaven is a death blow to "free will", necessary evil, or "best possible worlds" arguments. No Christian truly believes that this is the best possible world, for we all look for a better world yet to come, where evil will finally be defeated, and man's "will" shall truly be free of it's sinful nature.
Other theories tend to compromise God's attributes, making Him less than God. Monism holds that God is above good and evil, thus denying God's omnibenevolence. Dualism denies God's sovereignty, teaching that God produces only good, but a separate power (usually Satan) produces evil. Process Theology ("open" theism) flatly denies the omnipotence of God. The unthinkable result is that, in order to satisfy a weak intellect concerning the problem of evil, these poor deluded souls have no rational hope that evil won't eventually triumph in the universe. Those who hold that evil is "necessary" deny the solitariness of God, who does not need "anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything." (Acts 7:24-25). Whatever answer we come up with for the problem of evil, we cannot let that answer make God to be anything less than God.
by Puritan Lad
Introduction
One of the oldest, and still most popular, arguments against the Christian God is the so-called problem of evil. Dr. Walter Kaufmann, who tragically lost family members in the Holocaust, refers to the problem of evil as his strongest argument against Christianity, a "complete refutation of popular theism". H. J. McCloskey, in a 1960 Philosophical Quarterly article, wrote that "Evil is a problem, for the theist, in that a contradiction is involved in the fact of evil on the one hand and belief in the omnipotence and omniscience of God on the other."
Perhaps the original problem of evil argument was attributed Epicurus by Lactantius (See Lactantius - A Treatise on the Anger of God; Chap. XIII. - Of the Advantage and Use of the World and of the Seasons; AD 260-330). Although it is debatable if Lactantius chose the correct philosopher, it is clear that the "problem of evil" argument existed very early in Christendom. The Apostle Paul, in some rhetorical measure, dealt with the problem of evil in regards to the doctrine of unconditional election (Romans 9:14 - See Jay Adams' answer below).
The problem of evil is presented as a logical problem in regards to an omnipotent and omnibenevolent Deity. With a few variations, the arguments is stated as such:
P1: If God were omnipotent, He would be able to prevent all evil.
P2: If God were omnibenevolent, He would want to prevent all evil.
P3: Evil exists.
Conclusion: There is no omnipotent, omnibenevolent God.
The Atheist's Problem of Evil
While the problem is presented as an obstacle to Christianity, it must be pointed out that it presents two huge (and I would say, insurmountable) challenges to atheism. The first is the premise P3: Evil exists. The entire argument is based on the idea the evil is an objective reality. However, such a reality cannot be accounted for in an atheistic worldview. A judgment of "evil exists" requires an absolute moral standard, an objective "right and wrong" that goes well beyond simply subjectivism and "conventional wisdom". But how can a moral absolute come into existence in a materialistic universe? In an atheistic world, complete with its "survival of he fittest" ontology, there may be things that are painful, tragic, and grate against our sensibilities. However, such a worldview logically leads to genetic determinism, thus no grounds for proclaiming that evil exists. Yet, aside from Stoics who deny the existence of evil, every man has an innate and inescapable knowledge of evil, because they "by nature do what the law requires" (Romans 2:14), proving their knowledge of the one true God. And even if variable "secular" ethical theories could provide an objective moral standard, there is no grounds for demanding any life form to subject themselves to that standard. Materialism cannot produce morality, and "is" cannot justify "ought". C.S. Lewis explains this problem by looking back on his days as an atheist:
“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust?... Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too--for the argument depended on saying the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my fancies." (C. S. Lewis Mere Christianity - Touchstone: New York, 1980 p.45-46)
The second obstacle is that the problem of evil argument presupposes, not just a god, but the one and True Christian God. To suppose any other deity would eliminate evil as being a problem. From a standpoint of "general theism" (whatever form it may take), there are many logical reasons why evil may exist. There could be an evil god, who loves to do evil things. There could be an irrational god, who cannot tell the difference between good and evil. There could be a weak god, who is unable to prevent evil.
So we must concluded that, if the problem of evil is a valid problem, then atheism is refuted, and the Christian God is presupposed a priori. Nonetheless, the Christian is commanded by His Lord to answer the problem (1 Peter 3:15), though the problem itself is proof of the unbeliever's suppressed knowledge of God (Romans 1:18).
Past Answers Attempted
There have been many attempts throughout history to answer the logical problem of evil, yet without examining the truth of it's premises. Irenaeus suggested that evil is necessary and useful for men to seek God. Variations consider that evil is necessary for free will to exist (Plantinga). Justin Martyr attributed evil to angels who "transgressed their appointment", but does not explain how this idea is compatible with God's omnipotence. Dionysius echoed the Stoic view that evil does not exist. Augustine suggested that evil was simply an absence of good, but unwittingly denies the omnipresence of God in the process. Various "Best Possible World" Theories have abounded. C.S. Lewis holds to a combination of the "best possible world" and "free will" theories. He suggests that "Perhaps this is not the 'best of all possible' universes, but the only possible one" (C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain, p. 26). In Lewis's view, evil is a result of a "fixed nature of matter" (pp. 23-25), and is necessary for free will to exist. He writes, "We can, perhaps, conceive of a world in which God corrected the results of this abuse of free will by His creatures at every moment,...But such a world would be one in which all wrong actions would be impossible, and in which, therefore, freedom of the will would be void." (p. 24)
However, The Christian Doctrine of a perfect heaven is a death blow to "free will", necessary evil, or "best possible worlds" arguments. No Christian truly believes that this is the best possible world, for we all look for a better world yet to come, where evil will finally be defeated, and man's "will" shall truly be free of it's sinful nature.
Other theories tend to compromise God's attributes, making Him less than God. Monism holds that God is above good and evil, thus denying God's omnibenevolence. Dualism denies God's sovereignty, teaching that God produces only good, but a separate power (usually Satan) produces evil. Process Theology ("open" theism) flatly denies the omnipotence of God. The unthinkable result is that, in order to satisfy a weak intellect concerning the problem of evil, these poor deluded souls have no rational hope that evil won't eventually triumph in the universe. Those who hold that evil is "necessary" deny the solitariness of God, who does not need "anything, since he himself gives to all mankind life and breath and everything." (Acts 7:24-25). Whatever answer we come up with for the problem of evil, we cannot let that answer make God to be anything less than God.
Upvote
0
Apologetic_Warrior
Pilgrim
- Oct 21, 2003
- 6,793
- 3,289
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Private
The Problem of Evil Answered Part II
by Puritan Lad
Lactantius' answer to Epicurus' alleged statement over 1700 years ago was very close to the correct answer.
"For God is able to do whatever He wishes, and there is no weakness or envy in God. He is able, therefore, to take away evils; but He does not wish to do so, and yet He is not on that account envious. For on this account He does not take them away, because He at the same time gives wisdom, as I have shown; and there is more of goodness and pleasure in wisdom than of annoyance in evils. For wisdom causes us even to know God, and by that knowledge to attain to immortality, which is the chief good. Therefore, unless we first know evil, we shall be unable to know good." (Lactantius - A Treatise on the Anger of God; Chap. XIII. - Of the Advantage and Use of the World and of the Seasons.)
Thomas Aquinas expounded this line of thought even further, holding that God is the primary cause of evil (as penalty), but not the secondary cause (as fault) (See Summa Theologica: Question XLVIII - The Distinction of Things in Particular.) Jay Adams was short to the biblical point, Evil exists for God to show his wrath on evildoers and "in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory" (Romans 9:23). While this is true, (as well as the broad argument that everything, including evil, exists for the glory of God), it doesn't provide a direct answer to the logical problem presented. Using a combination of the arguments above, let us re-examine the premises presented in the problem of evil.
P1: If God were omnipotent, He would be able to prevent all evil.
P2: If God were omnibenevolent, He would want to prevent all evil.
P3: Evil exists.
Conclusion: There is no omnipotent, omnibenevolent God.
Premise 1 is sound, God is clearly omnipotent and "he does all that he pleases." (Psalms 115:3). "...he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, "What have you done?" (Daniel 4:35). These passages can be considered God's job description.
As we saw earlier, Premise 3 poses a problem for atheists, thus is a good starting point for discussion with one who uses this argument. But from the Christian perspective, it is quite obvious that evil does exist. Unbelievers are aware of evil, though they have issues defining it or accounting for it.
The real issue is Premise 2. Does an omnibenevolent God necessarily want to prevent all evil? How does this premise match the God of Scripture?
"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7 KJV)
Therefore Premise 2 is false. The Bible teaches that the omnibenevolent God does not want to prevent evil, but actually creates evil and uses it for His own ends. It will come as no surprise that many Christians are uncomfortable with this rendering, thus many translations substitute "calamity" in place of "evil", as though it really makes any difference (See also Amos 3:6). But why would a omnipotent, omnibenevolent God create evil? Based on the clear teachings of Scripture concerning God's omnipotence and His omnibenevolence, we may propose the following correction to Premise 2:
P2: If God were omnibenevolent, He would have a good purpose behind the evil He creates.
With this corrected premise, the problem of evil ceases to be a problem. The premise is biblical, and solves the logical problem with evil in God's universe. We may conclude that evil exists, therefore there is an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God who uses that evil for his own good purposes. We have also established that, without God, there can be no evil, only a material world governed by undesigned chance or blind fate. So it is the atheist worldview that has the real "problem with evil".
One may object to my correction of Premise 2 by asking what precisely is the "good purpose" for evil. That I have no answer for, nor do I need to in order to validate this answer for the problem with evil. "The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deuteronomy 29:29)
We have clues as to why God sovereignly works in certain evil events. The kidnapping and enslavement of Joseph was a direct act of God (Genesis 45:7), yet while Joseph's brothers meant it for evil, "...God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive...". (Genesis 50:20). The most evil act in history was the death of God's own Son, delivered into the hand of wicked men according to the "determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23), for all these did nothing but "what the hand and counsel of God had decreed" (Acts 4:27-28). Yet the good that has come about by the evil act is wondrous indeed, the redemption of poor, deformed sinners, deserving of God's wrath, into adopted sons who have the promise of an inheritance.
We may not know what the ultimate "good" purpose for evil is in God's most wise and determinate counsel, for He has not revealed that to us. However, let not this keep us from the One who has all power and authority, and guarantees "that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose." (Romans 8:28) PURITAN LAD OF COVENANT THEOLOGY BLOG
by Puritan Lad
Lactantius' answer to Epicurus' alleged statement over 1700 years ago was very close to the correct answer.
"For God is able to do whatever He wishes, and there is no weakness or envy in God. He is able, therefore, to take away evils; but He does not wish to do so, and yet He is not on that account envious. For on this account He does not take them away, because He at the same time gives wisdom, as I have shown; and there is more of goodness and pleasure in wisdom than of annoyance in evils. For wisdom causes us even to know God, and by that knowledge to attain to immortality, which is the chief good. Therefore, unless we first know evil, we shall be unable to know good." (Lactantius - A Treatise on the Anger of God; Chap. XIII. - Of the Advantage and Use of the World and of the Seasons.)
Thomas Aquinas expounded this line of thought even further, holding that God is the primary cause of evil (as penalty), but not the secondary cause (as fault) (See Summa Theologica: Question XLVIII - The Distinction of Things in Particular.) Jay Adams was short to the biblical point, Evil exists for God to show his wrath on evildoers and "in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory" (Romans 9:23). While this is true, (as well as the broad argument that everything, including evil, exists for the glory of God), it doesn't provide a direct answer to the logical problem presented. Using a combination of the arguments above, let us re-examine the premises presented in the problem of evil.
P1: If God were omnipotent, He would be able to prevent all evil.
P2: If God were omnibenevolent, He would want to prevent all evil.
P3: Evil exists.
Conclusion: There is no omnipotent, omnibenevolent God.
Premise 1 is sound, God is clearly omnipotent and "he does all that he pleases." (Psalms 115:3). "...he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, "What have you done?" (Daniel 4:35). These passages can be considered God's job description.
As we saw earlier, Premise 3 poses a problem for atheists, thus is a good starting point for discussion with one who uses this argument. But from the Christian perspective, it is quite obvious that evil does exist. Unbelievers are aware of evil, though they have issues defining it or accounting for it.
The real issue is Premise 2. Does an omnibenevolent God necessarily want to prevent all evil? How does this premise match the God of Scripture?
"I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7 KJV)
Therefore Premise 2 is false. The Bible teaches that the omnibenevolent God does not want to prevent evil, but actually creates evil and uses it for His own ends. It will come as no surprise that many Christians are uncomfortable with this rendering, thus many translations substitute "calamity" in place of "evil", as though it really makes any difference (See also Amos 3:6). But why would a omnipotent, omnibenevolent God create evil? Based on the clear teachings of Scripture concerning God's omnipotence and His omnibenevolence, we may propose the following correction to Premise 2:
P2: If God were omnibenevolent, He would have a good purpose behind the evil He creates.
With this corrected premise, the problem of evil ceases to be a problem. The premise is biblical, and solves the logical problem with evil in God's universe. We may conclude that evil exists, therefore there is an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God who uses that evil for his own good purposes. We have also established that, without God, there can be no evil, only a material world governed by undesigned chance or blind fate. So it is the atheist worldview that has the real "problem with evil".
One may object to my correction of Premise 2 by asking what precisely is the "good purpose" for evil. That I have no answer for, nor do I need to in order to validate this answer for the problem with evil. "The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law." (Deuteronomy 29:29)
We have clues as to why God sovereignly works in certain evil events. The kidnapping and enslavement of Joseph was a direct act of God (Genesis 45:7), yet while Joseph's brothers meant it for evil, "...God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive...". (Genesis 50:20). The most evil act in history was the death of God's own Son, delivered into the hand of wicked men according to the "determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God" (Acts 2:23), for all these did nothing but "what the hand and counsel of God had decreed" (Acts 4:27-28). Yet the good that has come about by the evil act is wondrous indeed, the redemption of poor, deformed sinners, deserving of God's wrath, into adopted sons who have the promise of an inheritance.
We may not know what the ultimate "good" purpose for evil is in God's most wise and determinate counsel, for He has not revealed that to us. However, let not this keep us from the One who has all power and authority, and guarantees "that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose." (Romans 8:28) PURITAN LAD OF COVENANT THEOLOGY BLOG
Upvote
0
- Aug 6, 2007
- 8,191
- 2,450
- 37
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
I don't find that the argument that God creates evil to be good because of this bible verse:
Rom 3:1-8 (ESV2011)
Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.
What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, “That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged.”
But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? ( I speak in a human way.)
By no means! For then how could God judge the world? But if through my lie God's truth abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner?
And why not do evil that good may come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.
I don't think God does evil that good may come because the NT seems to condemn that.
I think that it makes more sense that we not lump various things into a plain category of "evil". there seems to be a real difference between suffering or necessity or catastrophe and in evils in the human heart.
though I think that at least sometimes the evil conditions of the human spirit can cause those kinds of forms of suffering in the world. for instance the soviet union took away lands from expert farmers and that resulted in a famine where many died. fracking might help to trigger earthquakes.
I see the world of creaturehood and necessity as rules of a tough game to play and not so much the same thing as the evil that humans are capable of doing.
so for human evils I would say that they exist due to us needing freedom. freedom is so important that the sacrifice of the potential for evil has to be. there is no goodness without freedom.
but depending on ones view of God and ultimate results in the process of salvation you could say that Gods people created evil but in the end they are saved by union with God and so he in some sense takes our sins upon himself.
2Cor 5:20-21 (ESV2011)
Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
due to uniting himself to our evil nature he is able to transform it. thus God creates evil only by the absence of himself, which is what we are, because we are not God but he ultimately absorbs ourselves back to himself and thus repairs any lack in us, since the lack was a disconnection to God. only God is good.
and so it is only in a kind of mystical way in which it is said that "God creates evil".
Rom 3:1-8 (ESV2011)
Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the value of circumcision? Much in every way. To begin with, the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.
What if some were unfaithful? Does their faithlessness nullify the faithfulness of God? By no means! Let God be true though every one were a liar, as it is written, “That you may be justified in your words, and prevail when you are judged.”
But if our unrighteousness serves to show the righteousness of God, what shall we say? That God is unrighteous to inflict wrath on us? ( I speak in a human way.)
By no means! For then how could God judge the world? But if through my lie God's truth abounds to his glory, why am I still being condemned as a sinner?
And why not do evil that good may come?—as some people slanderously charge us with saying. Their condemnation is just.
I don't think God does evil that good may come because the NT seems to condemn that.
I think that it makes more sense that we not lump various things into a plain category of "evil". there seems to be a real difference between suffering or necessity or catastrophe and in evils in the human heart.
though I think that at least sometimes the evil conditions of the human spirit can cause those kinds of forms of suffering in the world. for instance the soviet union took away lands from expert farmers and that resulted in a famine where many died. fracking might help to trigger earthquakes.
I see the world of creaturehood and necessity as rules of a tough game to play and not so much the same thing as the evil that humans are capable of doing.
so for human evils I would say that they exist due to us needing freedom. freedom is so important that the sacrifice of the potential for evil has to be. there is no goodness without freedom.
but depending on ones view of God and ultimate results in the process of salvation you could say that Gods people created evil but in the end they are saved by union with God and so he in some sense takes our sins upon himself.
2Cor 5:20-21 (ESV2011)
Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us. We implore you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.
For our sake he made him to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.
due to uniting himself to our evil nature he is able to transform it. thus God creates evil only by the absence of himself, which is what we are, because we are not God but he ultimately absorbs ourselves back to himself and thus repairs any lack in us, since the lack was a disconnection to God. only God is good.
and so it is only in a kind of mystical way in which it is said that "God creates evil".
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
FatalHeart
Wisdom's Associate
- Jan 23, 2013
- 334
- 117
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
There are of course many reasons for God doing things the way He did; proof of course is the extensive way the Bible addresses everything and the fact it talks about just Jesus' deeds being, "more books would be written than the world could contain." (Loosely translated, of course. XD) I like to go back to Enoch. He walks with God for 300 years and God just takes him. It's a very simple picture of love.
Upvote
0
marineimaging
Texas Baptist now living in Colorado
- Jul 14, 2014
- 1,449
- 1,228
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
That one phrase was the major turning point for me. Around 1985 or so, in my garage at night, working on a piece of furniture for a fireman buddy, and I stopped and was reading and that verse suddenly stood out like an orchestra's crescendo at the end of an old movie where all the hero's stood with their chests proud and the breeze blowing their hair and clothing with the setting sun on the horizon and the guidon of Jesus Christ shining brightly as we fade out of the scene. Everything I had been trying to understand about our Father, Son, and Holy Spirit suddenly became as clear as a bell ringing on the church one crisp Sunday morning as we readied for services.
Upvote
0
Sketcher
Born Imperishable
There has been no assurance of bad things not happening to decent people since Adam and Eve brought sin into the world. And we're not in Heaven yet.
People might object to why there's sin in the world at all - but I don't recall one such person believing that they need to repent of all their sins. So they're still part of the problem.
People might object to why there's sin in the world at all - but I don't recall one such person believing that they need to repent of all their sins. So they're still part of the problem.
Upvote
0
FatalHeart
Wisdom's Associate
- Jan 23, 2013
- 334
- 117
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Single
Glad you had such an experience. XD God can be romantic sometimes. XD
Upvote
0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Chronel
Member
I personally struggle with this kind of question once in my life. I was angry to God, why it happened to me. But i realized that it is not a matter of "I" or what I think it was better for me. I kept saying "God promised a brighter future if I believe in Him. If He lied, He is no God". Little by little, I see how the God works. I got things I never imagine. I learned how to walk with God.
On your struggle, do not judge the God by our view. He is the God, He knows what He does. Yes, bad things happen to good people, the bad getting richer. But, we are not the one who judge the God and what He does. Our part is, what we will do when we see it? How we can deliver the love of God to the world? Bad things are chances for us to be a blessing to others.
Why we kept on the dark?
Because He wants us to believe in Him, though we cannot see His plan.
Just an illustration:
a husband and his wife.
His wife checks his phone all the time, eagerly to know what her husband does, with whom, where to go, how long will he go, when he will return, what he will bring, and so on.
I would say she doesn't trust his husband, and i bet most of man does not comfort with that kind of treatment. Me, as a man, would like to have a trust from woman to do the best for her. It annoys me every time i need to report things in every detail.
Thus, imagine that God wants us to believe that He will give the best for us.
Hope this may help you. God bless.
On your struggle, do not judge the God by our view. He is the God, He knows what He does. Yes, bad things happen to good people, the bad getting richer. But, we are not the one who judge the God and what He does. Our part is, what we will do when we see it? How we can deliver the love of God to the world? Bad things are chances for us to be a blessing to others.
Why we kept on the dark?
Because He wants us to believe in Him, though we cannot see His plan.
Just an illustration:
a husband and his wife.
His wife checks his phone all the time, eagerly to know what her husband does, with whom, where to go, how long will he go, when he will return, what he will bring, and so on.
I would say she doesn't trust his husband, and i bet most of man does not comfort with that kind of treatment. Me, as a man, would like to have a trust from woman to do the best for her. It annoys me every time i need to report things in every detail.
Thus, imagine that God wants us to believe that He will give the best for us.
Hope this may help you. God bless.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
