Necessity of evil

[pc_76]

From a Christian perspective it is surely true that God intervenes to lessen evil.

To be fair to God, we couldn't know if/how he does if he did because he exists outside of our reasoning.

 

[pc_76]

If you'd like to save yourself a headache or two, forget the "God does not interfere in people's free will" answer to the problem of evil. It's something of a catch-all or cop-out answer some people give when they don't have an answer to the question.

That being said, we do not know if or when God "interferes" with a person's free will or when He doesn't. The bible is filled with examples of God doing just that. We see murders committed every day and ask why God didn't move to stop them. But we do not know how many murders God did in fact stop. So to answer your question, we do not know. And since we don't know, we may well have a nice world to live in because it would that much worse without it.

This is a fair explanation.

 

[pc_76]

—Or maybe God intended it, so that he could redeem us and demonstrate his justice, power, wisdom, mercy and love?

That just makes it sound like God is using something he hates as a useful idiot of sorts just to fulfill his own agenda and only because he wants to show everyone how awesome he is. It is what would be called narcissist if a man did that.

 

[Mark Quayle]

That just makes it sound like God is using something he hates as a useful idiot of sorts just to fulfill his own agenda and only because he wants to show everyone how awesome he is. It is what would be called narcissist if a man did that.

Which is why he is God. It's quite a different thing from man.

But, in the end, is there really any other agenda than his? His was the only one when he began all this.

 

[disciple Clint]

I’m not a religious believer. Most religious doctrines (of all world religions—not just Christianity) don’t make logical sense to me. Here’s a question: Other than faith, how can anyone know that God is good? We all observe that both good and evil exist in the world. The kind and compassionate often suffer, while the wicked prosper. Why wouldn’t it be possible that God is dualistic—sometimes benevolent, sometimes malevolent? Or maybe there are 2 God’s—one good, one evil, who are in constant struggle with each other. I know this is unscriptural. But maybe the Biblical depiction of God as inherently good was a product of God’s evil side, and was intended to cause confusion. Other than faith (and I won’t argue with faith) there’s no way to objectively determine anything about God’s moral nature.

And of course, neither can it be unarguably determined that any kind of god or gods even exist.

We can be certain that there are not two Gods as some Gnostic beliefs have indicated. How can we be certain? Because there can only be one “omnipotent”, “omniscient”, and “omnipresent” being more than one being with these qualities would be a logical contradiction.

 

[jayem]

We can be certain that there are not two Gods as some Gnostic beliefs have indicated. How can we be certain? Because there can only be one “omnipotent”, “omniscient”, and “omnipresent” being more than one being with these qualities would be a logical contradiction.

Why can't 2 equipotent Gods exist? Is that anymore contradictory--or arbitrary--than the single OT God being divided into 3 entities by a committee in the 4th century?

 

[disciple Clint]

Why can't 2 equipotent Gods exist? Is that anymore contradictory--or arbitrary--than the single OT God being divided into 3 entities by a committee in the 4th century?

God has always existed in three persons and one essence, the Spirit, the Son (Word or Logos), and Father are clearly expressed in the beginning and throughout the entire bible.
The prologue to the Gospel of John clearly spells that out, please read it and see what you think. It should be obvious that there cannot be two all powerful beings one of them is not all powerful. It is good that you are asking questions, keep asking until you get answers that are acceptable to you.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Why can't 2 equipotent Gods exist? Is that anymore contradictory--or arbitrary--than the single OT God being divided into 3 entities by a committee in the 4th century?

It is more contradictory and more arbitrary. It is simple. This all came from somewhere. God did not "come from" at all. The way I say it is, "It makes more sense that God exists, than that I should exist. Yet, here I am, apparently."

It is contradictory to say 2 (or more) equipotent Gods exist, because there can be only one omnipotent, first cause. If not omnipotent, not God. 'Equipotent' is not omnipotent.

 

[jayem]

God has always existed in three persons and one essence, the Spirit, the Son (Word or Logos), and Father are clearly expressed in the beginning and throughout the entire bible.

Well, what does Deuteronomy 6:4 mean?

Hear O' Israel, the Lord is our God, the Lord is one.

And BTW, are there not unitarian Christians?

The prologue to the Gospel of John clearly spells that out, please read it and see what you think. It should be obvious that there cannot be two all powerful beings one of them is not all powerful. It is good that you are asking questions, keep asking until you get answers that are acceptable to you.

Your argument is based purely on faith in one particular interpretation of the Bible and religious tradition. And as I said, I won't argue with faith. But can you not think outside the box? Or maybe outside the book?

 

[Diamond72]

That being said, we do not know if or when God "interferes" with a person's free will or when He doesn't.

There is a difference between free will and choice. Adam and Eve were given a choice if they would eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil. We are given many choices in life and there is clearly a right and a wrong choice.

 

[Frank Sophia]

There is a difference between free will and choice. Adam and Eve were given a choice if they would eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil. We are given many choices in life and there is clearly a right and a wrong choice.

From love there is never choice... there is only ever one answer.

 

[jayem]

There is a difference between free will and choice. Adam and Eve were given a choice if they would eat the fruit of the tree of good and evil. We are given many choices in life and there is clearly a right and a wrong choice.

Not to get off topic, but didn't God know that they would disobey? Wasn't this God's will?

Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, "My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please."

Isaiah 46:9-10:

There was no choice. Adam and Eve's actions were part of God's plan all along.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Not to get off topic, but didn't God know that they would disobey? Wasn't this God's will?

Remember the former things, those of long ago; I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me. I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come. I say, "My purpose will stand, and I will do all that I please."

Isaiah 46:9-10:

There was no choice. Adam and Eve's actions were part of God's plan all along.

God's plan ESTABLISHES choice, including theirs. But if that isn't free will, then there is no free will of creatures.

 

[Neutral Observer]

God's plan ESTABLISHES choice, including theirs. But if that isn't free will, then there is no free will of creatures.

But it seems like a bit of a cop-out to then blame humanity for what is in essence a design flaw on God's part. Theists argue that God in His divine wisdom granted us humans free will, and it's we humans who through our prideful exercise thereof who are to blame for all of the world's sin and debauchery, not God.

But this would be like Google creating an AI that chose to destroy humanity, and then having the head of Google place the blame for that destruction on the AI instead of on the people who designed the AI. At least the head of Google would have ignorance as an excuse, God can claim no such defense.

Are you suggesting that when it comes to designing an intelligent being God can do no better than Google? (Although the jury is still out on Google's efforts)

 

[Diamond72]

There was no choice. Adam and Eve's actions were part of God's plan all along.

Nothing in the Bible suggests that God wants us to disobey him. I know what Calvan and Joseph Smith teach on this and I do not agree with them. God can know the future, but He can also choose not to know. Just like we are told He will remember our sins no more.

 

[Mark Quayle]

But it seems like a bit of a cop-out to then blame humanity for what is in essence a design flaw on God's part. Theists argue that God in His divine wisdom granted us humans free will, and it's we humans who through our prideful exercise thereof who are to blame for all of the world's sin and debauchery, not God.

But this would be like Google creating an AI that chose to destroy humanity, and then having the head of Google place the blame for that destruction on the AI instead of on the people who designed the AI. At least the head of Google would have ignorance as an excuse, God can claim no such defense.

Are you suggesting that when it comes to designing an intelligent being God can do no better than Google? (Although the jury is still out on Google's efforts)

How is that a design flaw? What do you think God is doing?

But FWIW, I don't believe in the kind of "Freewill" that most people think they mean by it.

Absolutely EVERY thing that comes to pass, does so by causation, either directly or indirectly, from First Cause. That gives nobody an excuse to do what they shouldn't. They have a conscience, and they do choose, just as God determined that they would from the beginning. Now if you want to look at it from God's perspective, then justice has to be done to them, or to a substitute. We don't operate on his level. Sin is not a creation. Its a 'privation of good'.

But if you want to talk about hard things, yes, God caused all that too, some of it by the sins, the wrong choices, of his creatures.

Google doesn't compare to God. Sorry. He has the right of ownership and of the source of all fact, including existence, to do as he pleases with his creation. But what we see is the least of it; our notion of reality is a vapor compared to the solid reality of "God's economy". This is like a play, but when the Author walks out onto the stage, the play is over.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Nothing in the Bible suggests that God wants us to disobey him. I know what Calvan and Joseph Smith teach on this and I do not agree with them. God can know the future, but He can also choose not to know. Just like we are told He will remember our sins no more.

"Wants"? What do we know of what God wants, but his commandments? His plans, however, that is a whole different thing. No need to want something there —that IS going to happen. Don't look at him like he's one of us. He isn't.

 

[Neutral Observer]

Absolutely EVERY thing that comes to pass, does so by causation, either directly or indirectly, from First Cause.

But this is true regardless of whether there's a God or not, so why propose the existence of something for which there is no need? Why not simply refer to it as the First Cause and leave it at that?

 

[Robban]

But this is true regardless of whether there's a God or not, so why propose the existence of something for which there is no need? Why not simply refer to it as the First Cause and leave it at that?

Life is full of surprises.

 

[IoanC]

Christians do not experience sadness, illness, death, the secular world,etc., because God's Grace/Energies keeps them within Himself where there is only rest, light, happiness and countless other gifts. So, God intervenes to prevent evil, but also exceeds all expectation.