The problem of evil

[Achilles6129]

What's logically inconsistent with a god creating a world in which free willed beings choose not to inflict suffering upon each other?



That's nonsensical. You can't undo suffering that's occurred.Even if a god wiped the memory of everyone involved in the suffering, the suffering had existed nonetheless. Even if a god "rewound" time to change an outcome, the suffering had existed nonetheless.

If you can undo sins, then you can also undo evil. How could you possibly know whether or not an omnipotent being can or cannot undo sufferings that have occurred? By your logic God could also never purge sins. Remember we're also talking about Biblical theology here, which obviously says that God can purge sins.

 

[FireDragon76]

How can anyone know there is unnecessary suffering? What if all suffering is necessary for varying reasons only known to God?

It could be that God suffers the most in order to achieve His will of giving life to His creation.

Interesting idea, but it flies in the face of classical theism that states that God is impassible (does not experience pain or pleasure from the actions of other beings)... and it's more associated with Open Theism, Process Theology, two theologies which many of the moderators on CF probably think of as heretical or "controversial". It is also associated with various postmodern theologies.

 

[Chriliman]

Interesting idea, but it flies in the face of classical theism that states that God is impassible (does not experience pain or pleasure from the actions of other beings)... and it's more associated with Open Theism, Process Theology, two theologies which many of the moderators on CF probably think of as heretical or "controversial". It is also associated with various postmodern theologies.

Any idea we have about God should always be in light of what scripture says and teaches. To say that our actions have no affect on God, whether that affect be positive or negative, goes against what scripture clearly teaches.

Matthew 23:37
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Jesus clearly conveys the desire of God to gather His children, but His children would not obey. His children were not pleasing Him. This is why Jesus, being the Word of God in the flesh, was sent to set things right between creation and God.

 

[FireDragon76]

Any idea we have about God should always be in light of what scripture says and teaches. To say that our actions have no affect on God, whether that affect be positive or negative, goes against what scripture clearly teaches.

Matthew 23:37
"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

Jesus clearly conveys the desire of God to gather His children, but His children would not obey. His children were not pleasing Him. This is why Jesus, being the Word of God in the flesh, was sent to set things right between creation and God.

Nothing you say here really challenges the doctrine of impassibility, and sometimes what you are doing is overlooking obvious Biblical material that shows the contrary.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying "our actions affect God". The Bible also says that God has no shadow or change within Him- that is precisely what impassibility is God. God's attitude and motivations are constant and unchanging. He can/willl not be persuaded to some new realization.

 

[Chriliman]

Nothing you say here really challenges the doctrine of impassibility, and sometimes what you are doing is overlooking obvious Biblical material that shows the contrary.

I'm not sure what you mean by saying "our actions affect God". The Bible also says that God has no shadow or change within Him- that is precisely what impassibility is God. God's attitude and motivations are constant and unchanging. He can/willl not be persuaded to some new realization.

How do you explain God being pleased and God being angry?

God is pleased when His creation obeys and God is angry when His creation disobeys. God is unchanging in that He only does what is right and good and it was right and good for Him to create beings who are truly free to listen to Him or not.

I agree that God doesn't have new realizations, but His creation does have new realizations, which can help to bring us closer to Him over time.

 

[FireDragon76]

God is pleased when His creation obeys and God is angry when His creation disobeys.

Those are anthropomorphisms or analogies, similar to talking about the "finger of God" (God doesn't literally have a body, after all). This makes sense too, everything we know about emotions suggest they are tied to a mammalian brain, which God in his nature doesn't have (he is not a creature). The dissimilarity of the creature and the Creator is infinitely greater than any similarity, that's just a basic belief found in all ancient Christian and Jewish theologies.

 

[Chriliman]

Those are anthropomorphisms or analogies, similar to talking about the "finger of God" (God doesn't literally have a body, after all).

So the body of Christ is not a literal body?

This makes sense too, everything we know about emotions suggest they are tied to a mammalian brain, which God in his nature doesn't have (he is not a creature). The dissimilarity of the creature and the Creator is infinitely greater than any similarity, that's just a basic belief found in all ancient Christian and Jewish theologies.

So what does it mean to you to be created in the image of God?

 

[FireDragon76]

So the body of Christ is not a literal body?

The body of Christ is more like what you'ld probably call a metaphor.

Apart from the incarnation of Christ, God by nature does not have a body. He is spirit and omnipresent... why would a carnal body be compatible with that?

 

[Chriliman]

The body of Christ is more like what you'ld probably call a metaphor.

Apart from the incarnation of Christ, God by nature does not have a body. He is spirit and omnipresent... why would a carnal body be compatible with that?

I'd say the body of Christ is alive and well today and is made up of a finite amount of born again Christians and the Spirit of God dwells within them and me and you if you know you are born again. This is real, not a metaphor, wouldn't you agree?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

If you can undo sins, then you can also undo evil. How could you possibly know whether or not an omnipotent being can or cannot undo sufferings that have occurred?

Because it's not logically possible for any god to make something that happened not have happened. If someone suffered, then they suffered. "Undoing" it by for example going back in time does not "undo" what was experienced. It only creates an additional time line where it the suffering didn't occur in that timeline.

As another example, I exist. There's no possible god that could make it so I never existed. No magical tricks could make it so that I don't exist, right now.

By your logic God could also never purge sins. Remember we're also talking about Biblical theology here, which obviously says that God can purge sins.

No, we're not talking about Biblical theology. The problem of evil (or suffering, as I prefer) applies to any god that's said to be all powerful and all good.

 

[Loudmouth]

We've been through this before:

1) God has a good reason for permitting evil
2) There is a divine intervention; God undoes all evil.

Clearly you don't accept these lines of reasoning as sufficient. I do.

They aren't lines of reasoning. They are bare assertions. For all we know, God has a bad reason for permitting evil.

 

[Dan Bert]

God can forgive sins sins and sins cannot be undone but God can afect the effect of sins on individuals....but effects of sins cannot be totally removed until judgment day. People you have to start thinking in higher concepts....God by Isaiah said he created good and evil....light and darkness...etc If he did that it is for our good. We have to come to the knowledge that God is in charge of each one us as individuals...if for example a plane crashes and everyone on board is killed...then it is not a coincidence for those people...there are there because God let their path to it....No one ever dies unless God permits it....No one ever suffer unless God permits it....God is good....and everything He creates is good. Accepting God is good and everything He creates is good is hard...because it means accepting all the things we call evil happening to us...is Good. It is also trusting that God knows what He is doing with everyone of us. We must heal this separation and disconnect the exist between us and God. Then the world is transformed from good/evil into what is and what is ....is Good. Whatever God permits for individuals is for their good and if it means being taken off this world by wrath, accidents, diseases...wars, terrorist act....it is also for the good of the individual.

bert10

If you can undo sins, then you can also undo evil. How could you possibly know whether or not an omnipotent being can or cannot undo sufferings that have occurred? By your logic God could also never purge sins. Remember we're also talking about Biblical theology here, which obviously says that God can purge sins.

 

[Loudmouth]

God can forgive sins sins and sins cannot be undone but God can afect the effect of sins on individuals....but effects of sins cannot be totally removed until judgment day.

Again, just bare assertions. You give no reason why God could not remove the effects of sins immediately.

People you have to start thinking in higher concepts....God by Isaiah said he created good and evil....light and darkness...etc If he did that it is for our good.

Yet another bare assertion. You give no reason why God could not have created good and evil for a very bad reason.

Accepting God is good and everything He creates is good is hard...because it means accepting all the things we call evil happening to us...is Good.

It is hard to ignore your own sense of morality. What you are asking people to do is replace morality with obedience. You are asking people to just assume everything God does is good for no good reason. Human history is full of horrible genocides and wars where people also replaced morality with obedience.

 

[Achilles6129]

Because it's not logically possible for any god to make something that happened not have happened. If someone suffered, then they suffered. "Undoing" it by for example going back in time does not "undo" what was experienced. It only creates an additional time line where it the suffering didn't occur in that timeline.

As another example, I exist. There's no possible god that could make it so I never existed. No magical tricks could make it so that I don't exist, right now.



No, we're not talking about Biblical theology. The problem of evil (or suffering, as I prefer) applies to any god that's said to be all powerful and all good.

So you reject the Biblical assertion that God can purge sins, then.

How do you arrive at your conclusion that an omnipotent being would be unable to undo or "set right" an action? It sounds to me very much like that you're talking about things that you can't possibly know.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

So you reject the Biblical assertion that God can purge sins, then.

As a non-theist I reject everything in the Bible having to do with a god.

How do you arrive at your conclusion that an omnipotent being would be unable to undo or "set right" an action? It sounds to me very much like that you're talking about things that you can't possibly know.

Because once something (and in this case that something is suffering) has existed, it's impossible for it not to have existed. It's as impossible as a square circle.

You don't believe that your god can make a square circle, right?

 

[Loudmouth]

How do you arrive at your conclusion that an omnipotent being would be unable to undo or "set right" an action? It sounds to me very much like that you're talking about things that you can't possibly know.

Why do theists continually fail to understand the burden of proof? It is up to theists to prove that there is a deity who purges sin. It isn't up to atheists to disprove it.

 

[Dan Bert]

Good is God's title and also His nature....He cannot act otherwise and remain Good. In fact the English word.."God" is translated from "Good" old word...As Jesus said ....There is but one Good. I am not here to try to convince you or argue... I just share what I know to be true. Whether you accept or not....is up to you. It is not my Scriptures, not my teachings and my kingdom.

Dan

Again, just bare assertions. You give no reason why God could not remove the effects of sins immediately.



Yet another bare assertion. You give no reason why God could not have created good and evil for a very bad reason.



It is hard to ignore your own sense of morality. What you are asking people to do is replace morality with obedience. You are asking people to just assume everything God does is good for no good reason. Human history is full of horrible genocides and wars where people also replaced morality with obedience.

 

[Picky Picky]

Good is God's title and also His nature....He cannot act otherwise and remain Good. In fact the English word.."God" is translated from "Good" old word...As Jesus said ....There is but one Good. I am not here to try to convince you or argue... I just share what I know to be true. Whether you accept or not....is up to you. It is not my Scriptures, not my teachings and my kingdom.

Dan

The English word "God" does not derive from "good" — the two are etymologically unrelated. "God" appears to the etymologists to derive from ancient verbal roots connected to meanings "to pour" or "to summon".

 

[bhsmte]

Good is God's title and also His nature....He cannot act otherwise and remain Good. In fact the English word.."God" is translated from "Good" old word...As Jesus said ....There is but one Good. I am not here to try to convince you or argue... I just share what I know to be true. Whether you accept or not....is up to you. It is not my Scriptures, not my teachings and my kingdom.

Dan

Thats cool that you personally know this to be true. But, if you cant demonstrate this truth in an objective verifiable way, you understand why others dont agree with you, correct?

 

[Loudmouth]

Good is God's title and also His nature....

So if the Nazi's titled Hitler "Hitler the Good", everything he did would have been good? If someone said, "Hitler can't do anything bad, it is impossible," would you accept that explanation?

Just because people claim God can only do good does not make it true.

It is not my Scriptures, not my teachings and my kingdom.

Writing stuff in books doesn't make it true. Surely you understand that.