Christians: How do you reconcile the problem of evil?

[Akureyri]

In order for your logic to succeed, you must still prove that there is absolutely no reason that God might have to allow these things to happen. Unless you are omniscient yourself, I seriously doubt you will ever succeed in doing that.

Did you know that there are several examples of suffering in the bible and sometimes the people who suffered or witnessed others suffering did not understand it either (although sometimes reasons are given for our benefit).

This Epicurean argument you keep referring to really carries no thrust at all with Christians. I personally think the Epicurean argument is one of the worst challenges to Christianity. It seems like the only ones who find it persuasive are other atheists.

Let's say for a moment that God has a reason for allowing rapists to rap children. And let's say that God puts his reason aside and stops the rapists. If he is omnipotent, then he could do anything or still accomplish his "reason". Furthermore, if he has a reason, then his reason is greater than his love for the children who are victims of rape. What kind of loving God would allow children to needlessly get raped in exchange for some kind of mysterious reason?

 

[Akureyri]

Your premise is wrong because we do have an all-powerful God who exists in the presence of evil.

It would then follow that you don't believe that God loves everyone. IN other words, you reconcile the problem of evil by believing that God doesn't love everyone.

 

[Akureyri]

God has done something and he does love everyone.

How do you know this?

He sent his son, Jesus Christ, to die on the cross to free us all from the eternal death we would have had to endure for our own sins. Jesus, took our sins upon himself. But because Jesus was sinless those sins could not kill him, unlike how we can die eternally because of our sins.

How do you know this?

Thus, through Jesus we can have eternal life if we accept that he loves us enough to take our sins away from us. This means that anyone who dies while believing in Christ will not remain dead, but will one day rise to live eternally with God.

What if a person is blown up into ten thousand pieces. Would that person not be dead?

Nothing on this earth can permanently doom a believer in Christ. On the day he returns for those who love and believe in him they will live with God forever from that day on in a perfect world where will be no more dying, pain or sorrow.

Won't you please believe and accept Jesus as your Savior from sin and death, and gain eternal life today Akureyri? He loves you personally and wants you to have a freeing, loving relationship with him.

Have him come visit me at my house. He's welcome to stop by any time I'm here. I'll be happy to have him as a friend. Just send him my way.

 

[prov1810]

If you had the power to stop rapists to rape children, would you? Of course you would. Why then are you more morally solid than God - who doesn't stop the rapists from raping the children?

God isn't just another person in the world. He's not our valet and he's not our policeman. We brought sin into the world and the responsibility for dealing with it is ours. Injustice is humanity's failure, not his.

 

[Hammster]

It would then follow that you don't believe that God loves everyone. IN other words, you reconcile the problem of evil by believing that God doesn't love everyone.

God doesn't love everyone in the same way. I love my wife differently than I love my daughter who I love differently than the neighbor kid down the street who I love differently than a friend from high school who I haven't seen in years.

Two of them I'd give my life for.

 

[golgotha61]

Many Christians I've encountered claim that God can do anything and loves everyone.

God does love everyone but the premise that God can do anything leaves the Christian open to the omnipotence paradox; "can God create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it"? This is the type of question that is ignorant of the meaning of omnipotent.

"God is able to do whatever he wills in the way in which he wills it. God does not choose to do anything contrary to his nature of wisdom and holy love" (Evangelical Dictionary of Theology).

"Omnipotence. The term omnipotence signifies that God is all powerful. However, it does not suggest that because God is all powerful He can and Hoes do anything or everything at random. A proper definition states: “God is all-powerful and able to do whatever he wills. Since his will is limited by his nature, God can do everything that is in harmony with his perfections.” In other words, the question, “Can God create a stone so large that He could not lift it?” is not a legitimate question. God can do all things that are in harmony with His nature and Person" (The Moody Handbook of Theology).

If you disagree with those Christians, then you are not in the camp of people from whom I desire a reconciliation on the problem of evil.

Yeah, I know. As I suspected, you are not seeking meaning in this thread and would rather play word games and bend logic. Unfortunately the God that you are claiming to be non-existent, does exist. My final words to you will be that God loves you as an individual and Christ died for your offenses against His character. Christ's death is the proof of His love for mankind and His resurrection is proof of His claims and of His divinity. No more games friend, you may not see tomorrow. Today is the day of salvation.

Golgotha

 

[Akureyri]

God isn't just another person in the world. He's not our valet and he's not our policeman. We brought sin into the world and the responsibility for dealing with it is ours. Injustice is humanity's failure, not his.

How do you think God feels about doing nothing to stop children from getting raped by rapists when he wants to do something and is capable of doing something?

 

[Akureyri]

God doesn't love everyone in the same way. I love my wife differently than I love my daughter who I love differently than the neighbor kid down the street who I love differently than a friend from high school who I haven't seen in years.

Two of them I'd give my life for.

Then why call God all-loving if the type of love he has isn't enough for him to stop a rapist from raping a child?

 

[Akureyri]

God does love everyone but the premise that God can do anything leaves the Christian open to the omnipotence paradox; "can God create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it"? This is the type of question that is ignorant of the meaning of omnipotent.

What paradox is created if God stops the rapist from raping the child?

"God is able to do whatever he wills in the way in which he wills it. God does not choose to do anything contrary to his nature of wisdom and holy love" (Evangelical Dictionary of Theology).

Who defines God's nature? And how is it defined? For example, is it within God's nature to be loving? Is it within the nature of a loving being to stop a rapist from raping a child if given the power to do so? If not, why?

"Omnipotence. The term omnipotence signifies that God is all powerful. However, it does not suggest that because God is all powerful He can and Hoes do anything or everything at random. A proper definition states: “God is all-powerful and able to do whatever he wills. Since his will is limited by his nature, God can do everything that is in harmony with his perfections.” In other words, the question, “Can God create a stone so large that He could not lift it?” is not a legitimate question. God can do all things that are in harmony with His nature and Person" (The Moody Handbook of Theology).

Is it within God's nature to be loving and kind? Is it within the nature of a loving being who can do anything to stop a rapist from raping a child?

Yeah, I know. As I suspected, you are not seeking meaning in this thread and would rather play word games and bend logic. Unfortunately the God that you are claiming to be non-existent, does exist. My final words to you will be that God loves you as an individual and Christ died for your offenses against His character. Christ's death is the proof of His love for mankind and His resurrection is proof of His claims and of His divinity. No more games friend, you may not see tomorrow. Today is the day of salvation.

This thread isn't about whether or not a logically impossible God can exist. It's about how Christians reconcile their belief when their belief entails two independent claims which are logically inconsistent.

 

[Hammster]

Then why call God all-loving if the type of love he has isn't enough for him to stop a rapist from raping a child?

One, I've never called Him all-loving. I don't see scripture that states that. Two, as horrible as child rape is, it isn't the worst crime ever committed. The worst crime was killing a completely innocent, sin-free man.

 

[Akureyri]

One, I've never called Him all-loving. I don't see scripture that states that. Two, as horrible as child rape is, it isn't the worst crime ever committed. The worst crime was killing a completely innocent, sin-free man.

If God is so far removed from being all-loving that he would allow a rapist to rape a child - when he is more than capable of preventing this heinous act - then why would you worship such a malevolent being?

 

[Hammster]

If God is so far removed from being all-loving that he would allow a rapist to rape a child - when he is more than capable of preventing this heinous act - then why would you worship such a malevolent being?

Because as terrible as that is (and I say this as a father of five), my sinning is just as bad, and He shows mercy to me. Plus, there's always purpose in what He causes or allows. We, in most cases, do not understand it. But that doesn't mean there's no purpose.

 

[Akureyri]

Because as terrible as that is (and I say this as a father of five), my sinning is just as bad, and He shows mercy to me. Plus, there's always purpose in what He causes or allows. We, in most cases, do not understand it. But that doesn't mean there's no purpose.

What you're saying is if God stopped the children from getting raped, he wouldn't be able to accomplish some kind of purpose which we don't understand. However, if he is omnipotent, then he could still accomplish that purpose. Unless his purpose is for the children to get raped - in which case he isn't all-loving but is a highly malevolent being. How do you reconcile this?

 

[Hammster]

What you're saying is if God stopped the children from getting raped, he wouldn't be able to accomplish some kind of purpose which we don't understand. However, if he is omnipotent, then he could still accomplish that purpose. Unless his purpose is for the children to get raped - in which case he isn't all-loving but is a highly malevolent being. How do you reconcile this?

I reconcile it by understanding how horrible sin it, and that all sin is ultimately against God. David recognized this. After being confronted with his sin of murder, he wrote in Psalm 51 "Against You and You alone have I sinned."

So now you have to ask, what's worse: a fallen creature committing a sin against another fallen creature, or a fallen creature committing a sin against a holy and righteous God? Your sin of hating God is far more egregious than the sin against the child. That's why you need to repent and believe the gospel, and come to Christ.

 

[Joshua260]

Let's say for a moment that God has a reason for allowing rapists to rap children. And let's say that God puts his reason aside and stops the rapists. If he is omnipotent, then he could do anything or still accomplish his "reason". Furthermore, if he has a reason, then his reason is greater than his love for the children who are victims of rape. What kind of loving God would allow children to needlessly get raped in exchange for some kind of mysterious reason?

What if God's purpose in allowing the free will of the rapist to be actualized was to "awaken" the rest of society from an apathetic mood towards the welfare of defenseless children? Maybe the rape will provoke society to finally gather enough gumption to start programs designed to teach youngsters good morals so that they won't grow up to be rapists, programs to teach parents how to protect their children from suspicious characters, and programs designed to enforce stricter punishment of child rapists. There you go...you have your reason for allowing the free will of the rapist to be actualized: The little girl's suffering was not in vain, but actually served to improve the society as a whole...your Epicurean argument has now failed.

 

[Akureyri]

Because as terrible as that is (and I say this as a father of five), my sinning is just as bad, and He shows mercy to me. Plus, there's always purpose in what He causes or allows. We, in most cases, do not understand it. But that doesn't mean there's no purpose.

Really? So you do things that just as heinous as a rapist raping a child. Have you turned yourself into the authorities? If not, why?

What purpose do you suppose God is trying to accomplish by allowing rapists to rape children? And why would God not be able to accomplish such purpose if he did stop the rapist from raping the child - especially if he is omnipotent?

 

[Akureyri]

What if God's purpose in allowing the free will of the rapist to be actualized was to "awaken" the rest of society from an apathetic mood towards the welfare of defenseless children?

If God is omnipotent, then can't he awaken society from an apathetic mood without allowing the rape of the child to occur? Or is God less than omnipotent?

Maybe the rape will provoke society to finally gather enough gumption to start programs designed to teach youngsters good morals so that they won't grow up to be rapists, programs to teach parents how to protect their children from suspicious characters, and programs designed to enforce stricter punishment of child rapists. There you go...you have your reason for allowing the free will of the rapist to be actualized: The little girl's suffering was not in vain, but actually served to improve the society as a whole...your Epicurean argument has now failed.

If God can do anything, then can't he provoke society himself? How do you think God feels by allowing the rape when he could have provoked society himself? After all, can't he do anything?

 

[Joshua260]

If God is omnipotent, then can't he awaken society from an apathetic mood without allowing the rape of the child to occur? Or is God less than omnipotent?


If God can do anything, then can't he provoke society himself? How do you think God feels by allowing the rape when he could have provoked society himself? After all, can't he do anything?

As many have explained already, yes, God is omnipotent. One of the things our omnipotent god did was share some of his power with humanity. That power was the power to make free will choices. Unless the free will choice of the rapist is actualized, then the gift of free will was only lip-service from God. However,God used the evil act of the rapist to bring about a greater good. There are many examples of exactly this same type of story in the bible.

It is perfectly logical for suffering and God to exist. In order for one to defeat your Epicurean argument, all one needs to do is point out that the one making the argument is less than omniscient. You are not omniscient, therefore you cannot possibly know whether God has a reason to allow a particular type of suffering to occur. That is where your argument fails. So i offered a solution anyway even though it was not required to defeat your logic.

You seem to be desperately trying to prove that the Christian faith is unreasonable. I keep praying that one day you will see that it IS reasonable to have faith in our God. I hope that you will one day stop putting up this desperate fight against the God who is pursuing you and accept his loving gift of salvation...before it's too late.

 

[Hammster]

Really? So you do things that just as heinous as a rapist raping a child. Have you turned yourself into the authorities? If not, why?

What I've done is bad enough that God needed to send His Son to the cross the bear the penalty for my sin. Your sin is as bad, and I still implore you to come to Christ with repentance.

What purpose do you suppose God is trying to accomplish by allowing rapists to rape children? And why would God not be able to accomplish such purpose if he did stop the rapist from raping the child - especially if he is omnipotent?

I know why you are asking these emotionally charged questions. I know that you want to impugn God's character. So I will warn you to tread carefully with your questions.

But to answer your question, I don't know. Outsiders trying to ascertain why God allows or causes certain tragedies is often an effort in futility. When one of my daughter's died, that was the first question that was asked. Why? No answers at the time, but we can look back now and see how He was working, and the good that came from it. My wife is chronically ill, and we would ask why? But we've seen good that's come from it to the point that she wouldn't change it.

Don't forget that your sin against God is more heinous than a rape against a child. So ask yourself why God has allowed you to continue to draw breath.

 

[Akureyri]

As many have explained already, yes, God is omnipotent. One of the things our omnipotent god did was share some of his power with humanity. That power was the power to make free will choices. Unless the free will choice of the rapist is actualized, then the gift of free will was only lip-service from God. However,God used the evil act of the rapist to bring about a greater good. There are many examples of exactly this same type of story in the bible.

So God would prefer to allow the rapist to rape the child than to stop the rapist in a method that wouldn't interfere with his free will. Sounds like a twisted & sadistic God to me. Why would you worship a god who is so self-centered and narcissistic that he wouldn't stop a rapist from raping a child to accomplish a greater good, which due to his omnipotence, he can accomplish without the rapist raping a child.

It is perfectly logical for suffering and God to exist.

True, if God either doesn't love all or isn't capable of doing anything.

In order for one to defeat your Epicurean argument, all one needs to do is point out that the one making the argument is less than omniscient.

The Epicurean argument is independent of what abilities the one presenting the argument has. It's a static argument that reads the same if read by an omnipotent God or a man made machine. Why do you think an argument is different if read by two different people - when the argument still reads the same?

You are not omniscient, therefore you cannot possibly know whether God has a reason to allow a particular type of suffering to occur. That is where your argument fails. So i offered a solution anyway even though it was not required to defeat your logic.

Well, if God is sadistic, then his reason for allowing the rape to occur is due to his sadistic nature. If he stops the rape, then he wouldn't be sadistic. Furthermore, if he had to allow the rape to occur to accomplish some kind of greater good, then it means he couldn't accomplish his greater good if he did stop the rape. And if he couldn't accomplish a greater good, then he isn't omnipotent.

You seem to be desperately trying to prove that the Christian faith is unreasonable. I keep praying that one day you will see that it IS reasonable to have faith in our God. I hope that you will one day stop putting up this desperate fight against the God who is pursuing you and accept his loving gift of salvation...before it's too late.

Not trying to prove anything. Just trying to understand how Christians reconcile the problem of evil.