The Problem Of Evil

The problem of evil does not favor atheism since there is not such a thing as "evil" in nature. Evil becomes what I want it to be.

Lucifer and the fall of man was foreseen by God before it all happened. The fall and the ensuing battles were well within God's plan. The idea that God was ever surprised and thus needing to work out a contingency plan, that is a thought that denies the perfect power and knowledge of God unto all things. He didn't send His Son as damage control. No. It is written that Christ was slain from the foundations of the world.

So, there is no problem with evil except in the minds of those who lack vision and discernment. The culmination of it all will become apparent for all to see. He has revealed it to a chosen few on this earth who ask for a truth of which the majority cannot and will not accept. (1 John 2:27)

Bro. Dave Gardner said:

Points of consideration:
(All arguable, of course)

• God has created His beings with intellectual ability and creativity.
• Lucifer created the idea of rebellion—specifically, the notion that a created being can govern himself and/or others better than the Creator could/would/does—in his own heart/mind.
• As soon as God detected (notwithstanding He would have, of course, foreseen it) this idea as it was conceived by Lucifer, He could have immediately disposed of Lucifer.
• Lucifer was highly esteemed in the heavenly courts and would have been missed immediately.
• God would have been faced with questions about Lucifer's whereabouts, welfare, etc., and would certainly have answered them honestly.
• It is unlikely He would have been able to give them much information about the nature of Lucifer's offense without contaminating their pure minds.
• They would have then been left to conclude that there is something of which to be frightened in the service of God and that caution should be the rule of their lives henceforth.

Clearly, this scenario leaves much to be desired as a solution to the problem of evil. In fact, in light of God being the righteous, just, and merciful God that He most certainly is, it could barely qualify as a solution at all.

It goes without saying that even if He opted to diffuse the situation by artificial/supernatural means (erasing of angelic memories, etc.), God would now have set a precedent for patching things up and ignoring them which is, simply, and yet squarely inconsistent with His character.

This is another optional scenario:

• God has created His beings with intellectual ability and creativity.
• Lucifer created the idea of rebellion—specifically, the notion that a created being can govern himself and/or others better than the Creator could/would/does—in his own heart/mind.
• God allows this notion to mature and bear fruit so it can be judged by his creation as a whole.
  
• Reasoning with Lucifer about the nature and consequences of his error come to naught.
  
• Eventually, the seeds of his rebellious imaginings spread to the point that he and his recruits must be ejected from Heaven. No elaborate plan of redemption is fashioned for them, since they have had the privilege of seeing the Glory of God to its fullest, and have rejected it.
  
• A new creation—earth and mankind—are initiated.
  
• Lucifer and his band are quarantined to this new creation, which is to be the place of probation (proving ground) for his newly conceived and adopted principles of rebellion.
• He succeeds in enlisting the allegiance of mankind to his cause, and usurping the kingdom (dominion) of Adam over the earth.
• A plan of redemption is immediately introduced to the Edenic pair who have now been ejected from Paradise.
• The terrible results of sin are revealed for the universe to behold.
• Christ comes and completes His earthly ministry and sacrifice for sin, which decides Lucifer's (now known as Satan) case forever in the eyes of the unfallen intelligences.
• Christ returns to Heaven to finish the rest (heavenly, High Priestly) of the atonement process.
• He returns to harvest His people and destroy the earthly rejectors of His Grace.
• His people (now judges of men and angels) live and reign with Him for 1000 years, while Satan and his band roam the desolate earth with nothing to do but gaze upon that which they have ruined.
• Christ again returns to the earth, with his people and the New Jerusalem resting upon the earth.
• He resurrects the wicked and they are marshaled by Satan and his host in a last-ditch effort to overthrow the Kingdom of God-in-Christ.
• To each of the rebels—angelic and human—is administered the exact reward of the suffering which they have caused, resulting in their complete annihilation.
• The earth and its atmosphere are gloriously refashioned.
• And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the middle of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bore twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations. And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads. And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God gives them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever. Revelation 22:1

Click to expand...

Just some thoughts:
I don't think having the knowledge of Good and Evil is bad, it just wasn't intended for humans to consume because it placed a knowledge/a cross/a burden we couldn't bare. The devil knew it, I guess Adam and Eve didn't, I mean they had no idea what it was like being disconnected from God. Although, they must've had some sort of knowledge of Good and Evil (maybe provided by another fruit since they actually ate life and ate knowledge) because if you tell a child not to do something and tell them to be obedient to you, then the child must know it is an order about not doing something; they must've known what the word obedience and order means, so they must've known the opposite to it too?

The devil was stealing God's glory, we were made in God's image (He is our Glory, so we reflect Him in the physical), how can I be stealing God's glory/image when He himself gave it to me? The thing is that the devil was insinuating that he was the source of the glory, which is what men, by eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil ended up doing. But Christians know, through Jesus, that only God is the source of everything, I guess we are doing the work/privilege the devil lost. We are to reflect God's glory in the physical, we just know/are aware its not ours, its God's.

The problem of evil isn't due to free will, but sin, Satan's temptations, our sinful nature, and not being able to overcome the temptations. I think all we can do is lessen temptation, provide moral guidance in society, and provide laws and our own judgement and punishment through our justice systems. God has already destroyed the world once. With Jesus, he's going to provide final judgement and determine final destination, and God will destroy the world once again. The problem of evil leads to even more death and destruction.

David Cabrera said:

The problem of evil does not favor atheism since there is not such a thing as "evil" in nature. Evil becomes what I want it to be.

Click to expand...

But then there is evil. The majority of my friends are either agnostics or atheists. Evil in that context isn't some ontological force bur rather a descriptor of effect and outcome. I mean I disagree with them but if you want to talk about more secular ethical methods you kinda work with their framing.

J03y said:

But then there is evil. The majority of my friends are either agnostics or atheists. Evil in that context isn't some ontological force bur rather a descriptor of effect and outcome. I mean I disagree with them but if you want to talk about more secular ethical methods you kinda work with their framing.

Click to expand...

Except that their framing is not consistent.

David Cabrera said:

Except that their framing is not consistent.

Click to expand...

Again, it depends on whom you're speaking to. So I can think of two atheist mates I have who are moral realists. One is a threshold deontologist, the other is a rule utilitarian. The rule utilitarian cares about the outcomes of moral rules and takes up the ones that would eventuate is welbeing, I find his framework internally consistent. The threshold deontologist however, despite me agreeing with him a bit more, doesn't have a method of getting to the rights he asserts or the point to which consequences outweigh those rights.

You can be incorrect and internally consistent.

J03y said:

Again, it depends on whom you're speaking to. So I can think of two atheist mates I have who are moral realists. One is a threshold deontologist, the other is a rule utilitarian. The rule utilitarian cares about the outcomes of moral rules and takes up the ones that would eventuate is welbeing, I find his framework internally consistent. The threshold deontologist however, despite me agreeing with him a bit more, doesn't have a method of getting to the rights he asserts or the point to which consequences outweigh those rights.

You can be incorrect and internally consistent.

Click to expand...

I could see that.

My problem with atheistic utilitarianism is the question of who gets the utility and why? And if you are willing to deny other "morals" or "rights".

Job3315 said:

Just some thoughts:
I don't think having the knowledge of Good and Evil is bad, it just wasn't intended for humans to consume because it placed a knowledge/a cross/a burden we couldn't bare.

Click to expand...

And it is that very burden the Lord knowingly, from before the foundations of the world, allowed man to take upon himself, because it is by that burden that we are tested for who we are; whether it be in Christ, or outside of Christ and His redemption. By way of this burden He has a people who are tested and true, and it is by this burden that He was enabled to show His perfect love beyond anything man could possibly have ever imagined.

Jr

Regarding the fall of Lucifer I once had a discussion with a great friend of mine who stated that simple freewill by itself does not really properly convey the account of the fall but is rather an element of it. Think of it in this way. How could any single being who stands before the presence of the Almighty which is more overwhelming then a thousand suns even consider in their right minds no matter how great they may be that they can ever think of daring to conceive a wicked thought in his perfect presence? That is not an environment where sin can flourish. Even after he became a bad apple it was obvious to Satan that he was not just going to storm the throne room of God that would have ended rather very quickly indeed. Its clear that the act of rebellion began by Satan's attempt to corrupt Gods creation in the garden and thus attempt to thwart, hurt or catch God in some dire scenario knowing that he loves man but is also Holy and will never stand for sin to be unaccounted for. I think his reason was to tempt God in some way as to act in a manner that he foresaw but God never one to be mocked already had a plan in advance on how to destroy sin and crush the serpents head. Satan's power thus lies in his deceit, trickery, half truths and lies but hes already done for and he knows it thus he rages against the Saints day and night.