The Problem of Evil

[Liberation]

We are not kept from doing those things, we just do not know how to do them.

To stop evil would mean we would be unable to do things we already know how to do.

 

[NannaNae]

Well, from the sound of it, you've already discounted all the answers you have received thus far and must have already formed your own conclusions. I will give you my answer which I suspect you will discount as well.

God left. Adam failed the test whereby he (and we) could have attained eternal life. Israel rejected His rule. Satan is the god of this world. God is allowing us to make our own decisions and rule ourselves.

Christ will return when we have almost totally destroyed ourselves and the planet.

no that is too simple they won't get it either.. but that is all about that one thing they hate so much and the source of their every problem and excuse .. ! their own free will. maybe he should take it away from us after all. not!

 

[NannaNae]

Help me understand. Does this mean the god you believe in doesn't care enough to eradicate mass calamities? Or is it that he is incapable?

he does that by wiping out the millions who cause the trouble then . then a boat load come up here and blame him for that too.

 

[talquin]

It's logically impossible for an all powerful & all loving God to exist in the presence of mass calamities & mass catastrophes.

This is logical problem one. If we entertain God as we know Him philosophically, then He is definitively a paradox. Nothing is impossible for Him.

If nothing is impossible for God and things like genocide, the holocaust, rapes & molesting of children, famines, destructive tsunamis, destructive earthquakes and destructive tornadoes do occur, then it defines God as NOT loving.

But you are right, The Most High cannot exist in unholiness - no matter how minute. He destroys imperfection by consequence of His power. But, paradoxically, He is everything so, He is everywhere.

How do you know God is everywhere? Have you searched every last corner of the universe and failed to find a spot where he wasn't?

What we define as 'evil' might be subject to interpretation, but we can all agree that things like genocide, the holocaust, rapes & molesting of children, famines, destructive tsunamis, destructive earthquakes and destructive tornadoes do occur.

According to the set of principles for which mortal people live their lives - morality - it still depends. Some agree genocide is necessary, and peace is weak. Morality is anyone's game. Spiritually, what has to be done, and what is good is done.

When you say "it still depends", what is "it"? Why would genocide be necessary?

If God loves everyone, then he would want to see that people don't suffer as a result of the aforementioned items. But since such things do occur, then we can conclude if God is all-loving, then he is incapable of preventing such catastrophes.

Just because He doesn't want them to happen, or because He doesn't prevent them from happening like we want doesn't mean He is incapable of preventing them. It doesn't even mean those catastrophes are not the best things for everyone - even victims. If you knew every possible iteration and possibility for every single quantized event, you would have insight into what the best thing for someone is, and what their end will be. He gave us examples in parents.

If God is capable of preventing the aforementioned calamities, then by definition, God isn't loving. Why? Because such atrocities do occur. A loving being who was capable of preventing such atrocities would prevent them.

God is natural; He isn't going to use magic and make everyone love Him. He will let all of us naturally destroy or vindicate ourselves.

Most people who believe in God say he is supernatural, not natural. Can you please explain what you mean by natural?

Similarly, if God can do anything, then he would be able to prevent all the aforementioned catastrophes. But since these things do occur, we can conclude if God can do anything, then he doesn't love humans enough to prevent the aforementioned catastrophes.

Nah. It just means He chooses not to prevent them.

If he can do anything but chooses not to prevent the aforementioned catastrophes, then by definition, he wouldn't be loving.

If you watch enough Sci if movies about time travel, you will realize that sometimes people have to go through traumatic events to get to a point of reckoning, and possibly an epiphany toward a much better life. God knows everything - all possible options. Why would He intervene just because catastrophes are horrible?

If he were all-loving, he would have to prevent catastrophes - or he would cease to be all-loving.

Love is more than saving you out of dicey situations; sometimes it means enduring through. How do you know a particular evil genocidal event wasn't used to make Internet available - that if a certain incident didn't happen a series of events would lead to the barring of that innovation? You dont. You don't know whether or not your next breath is coming. Life is mathematical nonlinear chaotic dynamics. It is not easy to figure out, and small things (initial conditions) can greatly influence future events.

If God can do anything, then he could cause the internet to be available without requiring a genocidal event to occur.

A frequent Christian response to this is: "God has to allow these things to occur so he can accomplish some greater purpose". That in turn effectively says that God would no longer be able to accomplish this greater purpose if he stopped the rapist from raping the child or prevented the tsunami from wiping out Banda Aceh, Indonesia. And if he can't accomplish something, then he isn't omnipotent after all.

No, it just means that is His will. Again, God knows every possible outcome to every possible perturbation and constant of every single universal system. We give Him a lot of lip, but I am inclined to believe this creation is the iteration that will provide for maximum entities that choose to love God, while at the same time allowing Him to show every bit of His character to His creation.

How does God get his knowledge of every possible outcome?

If pressed, Christians would respond along the lines of "God doesn't prevent such calamities because it would jeopardize his omnipotence".

He chooses what He wants to do: in really is that simple.

Once again, you're revealing that you hold an implicit belief that God is not all-good.

Some have faith that what He does is Good, and the best for us (like you would any good parent.) Some people do not like Him, and/or downright hate and reject Him.

Why do you suppose some people hate God?

But if God is outside of time, then he is always omnipotent - meaning if he stopped the tornado from ripping through Joplin, then he would continue to be omnipotent. So the defense of God allowing these things to accomplish a greater purpose fails. And this in turn helps confirm that an all-loving & all-powerful god doesn't exist.

Why does it fail? If a tornado in Joplin is allowed, nonlinear chaotic dynamics may yield an incredible harvest for villagers across the world - villagers who may have been earnestly praying and staying faithful. It could also serve as a test of faith for people in Joplin - especially if they claim faith in Him. There are literally infinite reasons why God would allow a tornado in Joplin out of expressing all of His character. One of them includes He wills it.

Your explanation fails because if God can do anything, then he can cause that incredible harvest for villagers whether the tornado occurs or the tornado doesn't occur. Or do you believe that stopping the tornado would diminish God's omnipotence?

 

[talquin]

I hold an implicit belief that is the purpose of your agenda.

What exactly do you think the purpose of my agenda is?

 

[talquin]

Evil is a tool of God, used to achieve His purpose(s).

This is a logic answer, may be you would like it.

If God didn't allow evil, would he still be able to achieve his purpose? If not, then he isn't omnipotent. If so, then why allow evil?

 

[juvenissun]

Your explanation fails because if God can do anything, then he can cause that incredible harvest for villagers whether the tornado occurs or the tornado doesn't occur. Or do you believe that stopping the tornado would diminish God's omnipotence?

Do you know your argument is very childish?

According to you, God loves everyone. So God makes everyone have everlasting happy life.

Is that what you like to see?

 

[talquin]

God loves you. But you don't love God.

Does this one make logic sense?

If you believe that God loves everyone and you're cognizant of the aforementioned calamities, then you hold an implicit belief that God is incapable of doing anything.

 

[talquin]

If someone was going to die from an earthquake, and I could save them by pushing a button, I would.

But God doesn't save them, even if they ask to be saved. Is God a bad guy?



So is God the bad guy?

Apparently he is - especially if he's posited to be able to do anything.

Here's a quote from Tracie Harris:

“You either have a God who sends child rapists to rape children or you have a God who simply watches it and says, ‘When you’re done, I’m going to punish you.’If I could stop a person from raping a child, I would. That’s the difference between me and your God.”

 

[talquin]

If you and Talquin are both really interested in finding out the nature of God and His character, I recommend a very good book for you to read. It's called "The Holy Bible" and can be found at Walmart or at many other stores.

I've read the Bible. It doesn't adequately describe God. The dictionary and Wikipedia each provide a better description of God than the Bible does.

 

[talquin]

To end suffering would mean you need to limit free will.

Please explain. Why would preventing a typhoon from slamming into a highly populated area of the Philippines affect free will?

 

[talquin]

Help me understand. Does this mean the god you believe in doesn't care enough to eradicate mass calamities? Or is it that he is incapable?

he does that by wiping out the millions who cause the trouble then . then a boat load come up here and blame him for that too.

You didn't answer the question. Is he incapable of preventing the aforementioned calamities? Or does he not want to prevent the aforementioned calamities?

 

[talquin]

Your explanation fails because if God can do anything, then he can cause that incredible harvest for villagers whether the tornado occurs or the tornado doesn't occur. Or do you believe that stopping the tornado would diminish God's omnipotence?

Do you know your argument is very childish?

It's childish because even a child would understand it.

According to you, God loves everyone. So God makes everyone have everlasting happy life.

Is that what you like to see?

I never claimed God loves everyone. Please don't put words in my mouth.

 

[juvenissun]

If God didn't allow evil, would he still be able to achieve his purpose? If not, then he isn't omnipotent. If so, then why allow evil?

No.

But He is STILL omnipotent.

Because what God wants can be achieved through evil. He CAN have what He wants.

Do you know what He wants? Can He simply say: "Be it" and gets what He wants? God wants YOU. Could He have you? Can He create something like you and automatically belong to Him? Is that you the same as YOU?

God gets me, finally. How does He do that?

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Same old, same old...

This question has been demonstrated to be self-contraditory, pointless and silly. It has been answered countless times by many different people.

Here it is again.

Someone answer this: Why do atheists keep beating a dead horse? I mean, everyone salutes those with 'grit' and 'stick to it' attitude. But this is past farce.

Atheists claim ignorant Christians discredit Christianity. In some cases, I agree. Therefore, the same atheists have to admit: stupid atheists discredit atheism.

 

[juvenissun]

It's childish because even a child would understand it.


I never claimed God loves everyone. Please don't put words in my mouth.

But God does love everyone, like it or not.
But not everyone, such as you, likes Him.

So, He is omnipotent. Should He "makes" you like Him?

 

[juvenissun]

Same old, same old...

This question has been demonstrated to be self-contraditory, pointless and silly. It has been answered countless times by many different people.

Here it is again.

Someone answer this: Why do atheists keep beating a dead horse? I mean, everyone salutes those with 'grit' and 'stick to it' attitude. But this is past farce.

Atheists claim ignorant Christians discredit Christianity. In some cases, I agree. Therefore, the same atheists have to admit: stupid atheists discredit atheism.

Patient, brother. There are atheists who make the same old argument for the first time.

 

[Sophrosyne]

I'm thinking that non Christians debating Christian theology isn't allowed in any forum here. They banned the idea from General Theology for a reason in that this isn't a playground for non believers to debate Christianity.

 

[orangeness365]

You're kind of asking why God doesn't just send Satan's people to hell before they have a chance to live. He says that he allows the weeds to grow amongst the wheat so as to not disrupt the wheat from growing. In the afterlife the results of people's behavior to finally come back to them. Until then, people are granted mercy enough to repent in between the time they committed the offense and when they die.

Matthew 13:24-30
The Parable of the Weeds
24He put another parable before them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field, 25but while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weedsc among the wheat and went away. 26So when the plants came up and bore grain, then the weeds appeared also. 27And the servantsd of the master of the house came and said to him, ‘Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have weeds?’ 28He said to them, ‘An enemy has done this.’ So the servants said to him, ‘Then do you want us to go and gather them?’ 29But he said, ‘No, lest in gathering the weeds you root up the wheat along with them. 30Let both grow together until the harvest, and at harvest time I will tell the reapers, Gather the weeds first and bind them in bundles to be burned, but gather the wheat into my barn.’”

Also, the Bible calls for his people many times over to suffer on behalf of Christ, and to celebrate when people persecute you in the name of Christ. Suffering can produce gold and silver in the spirit.

Revelation 3:18-19
18I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, so that you may be rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself and the shame of your nakedness may not be seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, so that you may see. 19Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Same old, same old...

This question has been demonstrated to be self-contraditory, pointless and silly. It has been answered countless times by many different people.

Here it is again.

Someone answer this: Why do atheists keep beating a dead horse? I mean, everyone salutes those with 'grit' and 'stick to it' attitude. But this is past farce.

Atheists claim ignorant Christians discredit Christianity. In some cases, I agree. Therefore, the same atheists have to admit: stupid atheists discredit atheism.

Atheists keep bringing it up because Christian apologists have not advanced a satisfying answer to the problem. The answer they give is typically a variation on "It's necessary to have free will," or "Man introduced evil into the world," or the "God works in mysterious ways" canard.