The problem of evil

[Davian]

The Bible describes God as holy (Isaiah 6:3), righteous (Psalm 7:11), just (Deuteronomy 32:4), and sovereign (Daniel 4:17-25). These attributes tell us the following about God: (1) God is capable of preventing evil, and (2) God desires to rid the universe of evil. So, if both of these are true, why does God allow evil? If God has the power to prevent evil and desires to prevent evil, why does He still allow evil? Perhaps a practical way to look at this question would be to consider some alternative ways people might have God run the world:

1) God could change everyone’s personality so that they cannot sin. This would also mean that we would not have a free will. We would not be able to choose right or wrong because we would be “programmed” to only do right. Had God chosen to do this, there would be no meaningful relationships between Him and His creation.

Instead, God made Adam and Eve innocent but with the ability to choose good or evil. Because of this, they could respond to His love and trust Him or choose to disobey. They chose to disobey. Because we live in a real world where we can choose our actions but not their consequences, their sin affected those who came after them (us). Similarly, our decisions to sin have an impact on us and those around us and those who will come after us.

2) God could compensate for people’s evil actions through supernatural intervention 100 percent of the time. God would stop a drunk driver from causing an automobile accident. God would stop a lazy construction worker from doing a substandard job on a house that would later cause grief to the homeowners. God would stop a father who is addicted to drugs or alcohol from doing any harm to his wife, children, or extended family. God would stop gunmen from robbing convenience stores. God would stop high school bullies from tormenting the brainy kids. God would stop thieves from shoplifting. And, yes, God would stop terrorists from flying airplanes into buildings.

While this solution sounds attractive, it would lose its attractiveness as soon as God’s intervention infringed on something we wanted to do. We want God to prevent horribly evil actions, but we are willing to let “lesser-evil” actions slide—not realizing that those “lesser-evil” actions are what usually lead to the “greater-evil” actions. Should God only stop actual sexual affairs, or should He also block our access to pornography or end any inappropriate, but not yet sexual, relationships? Should God stop “true” thieves, or should He also stop us from cheating on our taxes? Should God only stop murder, or should He also stop the “lesser-evil” actions done to people that lead them to commit murder? Should God only stop acts of terrorism, or should He also stop the indoctrination that transformed a person into a terrorist?

3) Another choice would be for God to judge and remove those who choose to commit evil acts. The problem with this possibility is that there would be no one left, for God would have to remove us all. We all sin and commit evil acts (Romans 3:23; Ecclesiastes 7:20; 1 John 1:8). While some people are more evil than others, where would God draw the line? Ultimately, all evil causes harm to others.

Instead of these options, God has chosen to create a “real” world in which real choices have real consequences. In this real world of ours, our actions affect others. Because of Adam’s choice to sin, the world now lives under the curse, and we are all born with a sin nature (Romans 5:12). There will one day come a time when God will judge the sin in this world and make all things new, but He is purposely “delaying” in order to allow more time for people to repent so that He will not need to condemn them (2 Peter 3:9). Until then, He IS concerned about evil. When He created the Old Testament laws, the goal was to discourage and punish evil. He judges nations and rulers who disregard justice and pursue evil. Likewise, in the New Testament, God states that it is the government’s responsibility to provide justice in order to protect the innocent from evil (Romans 13). He also promises severe consequences for those who commit evil acts, especially against the "innocent" (Mark 9:36-42).

In summary, we live in a real world where our good and evil actions have direct consequences and indirect consequences upon us and those around us. God’s desire is that for all of our sakes we would obey Him that it might be well with us (Deuteronomy 5:29). Instead, what happens is that we choose our own way, and then we blame God for not doing anything about it. Such is the heart of sinful man. But Jesus came to change men’s hearts through the power of the Holy Spirit, and He does this for those who will turn from evil and call on Him to save them from their sin and its consequences (2 Corinthians 5:17). God does prevent and restrain some acts of evil. This world would be MUCH WORSE were not God restraining evil. At the same time, God has given us the ability to choose good and evil, and when we choose evil, He allows us, and those around us, to suffer the consequences of evil. Rather than blaming God and questioning God on why He does not prevent all evil, we should be about the business of proclaiming the cure for evil and its consequences—Jesus Christ!


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

What are the consequences of evil?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

What are the consequences of evil?

Generally speaking, bad things happen to yourself and others. You name it. Although everything cannot be blamed on evil. I admit that sometimes bad things happen. Acts of nature for example.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Davian]

If “free will” means that God gives humans the opportunity to make choices that genuinely affect their destiny, then yes, human beings do have a free will.

Belief is not within my conscious control. I asked you earlier to try it yourself, and you concurred.

Are we to be held accountable for things beyond our control?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Are you familiar with Jesus' reaction to the pharisees when they had seen the miracles right before their very eyes and still rejected them? You can read about it in Mark 4.

I'm aware of the story, I hold no opinion on it however. I don't know what those miracles were, or how they were done.

Muhammad was also said to have performed miracles in the Quran. Clearly simply reading about those acts in a book is not convincing (may it be Bible for Jesus or Quran for Muhammad), but if you saw Muhammad's miracles in person, would that then make you a Muslim?

Basically, my point is this. If Jesus performing miracles right in front of your eyes cannot convince you of anything, what would you expect to gain on an Internet forum?

Good lively debate on interesting topics, and the opportunity to learn things myself or teach other people things. Spreading knowledge and changing minds.

If someone happens to present an argument that somehow demonstrates god must be real, then I'll accept it. I've never seen that argument though.

The only thing that will convince you, and you will be convinced, is seeing God in his full glory after you die. Then it will be too late. For every knee will bow and confess Jesus is Lord before judgement. No explanations or miracles will change your mind. The only thing that can help you is prayer. I will be praying for you.

If that actually happens, then you're absolutely correct. I will have been wrong, and it may be too late.

However, if you are wrong and Muhammad was actually the real final prophet of god, the only time you'll know about it is after you die and you're facing Allah, at which point it'll be too late. I'm as worried about facing your god as you are of facing Allah after your death. If you see no reason to believe the story is true, then what would possibly motivate you to be worried about it?

I don't mean to denigrate your beliefs, however my honest view on the matter is that Christianity and the other Abrahamic religions are simply other forms of mythology, like the Greek, Roman or Norse gods and the stories and legends that surround them. Heaven is roughly analogous to Asgard or Valhalla in Norse mythology, Hell is roughly analogous to crossing the River Styx in Greek. Interesting stories, and theological perspectives. But nothing I'm ultimately worried about being true in reality.

Blessed are those who see and believe. Blessed more who do not see and still believe. But for those who see and do not believe:

Interesting that the biblical authors would build in a belief structure that values believing without evidence. What possible motivation would you have to add in that part if you had evidence to back your claims?

“The secret of the kingdom of God has been given to you. But to those on the outside everything is said in parables so that,

“‘they may be ever seeing but never perceiving,
and ever hearing but never understanding;
otherwise they might turn and be forgiven!'”

This is also another puzzling line when used in conjunction with modern Christian theology. If Jesus was sent back to save humanity, why would he purposefully obscure his message so that some people could not understand it, and therefore not be saved? That is counterproductive to his main goal in coming down to earth.

When taken in a historical perspective however, considering some beliefs of some early christian sects it makes complete sense. Some early sects believed that Jesus gave them secret knowledge that allowed members of their group to be saved, while the outsiders were not privy to this knowledge. They believed the way to be saved was to learn the true meaning of the secret teachings of Jesus.

Bible passages like that are perfectly consistent with that early christian view, however it's not consistent with modern orthodox Christianity. Still, it's a nice little nugget of history. It's an interesting part of christian scripture that dates back to a time before beliefs were authoritatively canonized, and provides insight into how the religion used to be practiced by some.

 

[Dave Ellis]

You do know that you are on a "Christian Forum "...right?

So that means that Christians are allowed to call into question the honesty or personal integrity of someone, simply because they have a disagreement over theological views?

I don't see how the fact this is a Christian forum matters to this. It would be unacceptable and rude for me to call you a liar for expressing your beliefs if we happened to be talking on an atheist site, the same goes for on here.

 

[Dave Ellis]

"For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways," declares the LORD.

So, what is his thoughts, and his ways?

And if you don't know (i.e. gods ways are mysterious), then what possible reason do you have to believe?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Well, in that case, that can go both ways.

Quite true. If I've missed responding to anything of yours, let me know and I will.

Now, will you respond to my posts?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Out of curiosity, what do you hope to gain from quoting Bible verses? Do you expect them to have a purchase on those who don't consider the Bible an authority? Because quoting scriptures seems to be more therapeutic for you than it is edifying for me.

I find quoting bible passages roughly equivalent to someone quoting Captain Kirk to me.

I have from time to time responded by quoting Captain Kirk back at other people on here when they start spamming bible verses.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

So, what is his thoughts, and his ways?

And if you don't know (i.e. gods ways are mysterious), then what possible reason do you have to believe?

Faith.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Dave Ellis]

I find all condescension and rudeness to be "in poor taste".

That last paragraph of yours is EXACTLY what many non-Christians continually say to the Christians on this forum.

And in that case, that is rude. I wrote it to express what an equally rude argument would be towards his views.

(Note: I was clearly not presenting that argument as fact, I was only bringing it up as a hypothetical argument to highlight why his post was rude)

In short, I agree with you. His post was rude to atheists, and a similar post made towards Christians would be equally rude. It has no place on here.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Because I don't think you can.

Let me try!

"Jesus is lord"

I did it... now what?

 

[Dave Ellis]

Faith.

I asked for a reason, faith is not a reason. Faith is the epistemology you used.

Why would you have faith?

 

[ScottA]

Sorry, could you rephrase that? I don't follow you.

This world was "created" in the "image"(imagination) by the only entity that is real, by God...as a contrived non-reality within the only actual reality - it's just a story. The story is real - but the media of space, time, and matter (life as we know it), is not. So...here, from within the pages of the story...it is hard to imagine the greater reality...because we are stuck within the book.

Under those/these circumstances, there are two points to be made:

1. Limited information has come into us (into our storybook) from God, as a means of carrying the plot along to the big finish. This information has come just as it was recorded (regardless of it being told by fallible men).
2. Because the media of space, time, and matter, are contrived - no one actually dies within the history of the world. The truth is, the damage is already done...and this is the story of those who did not survive, and those who did. "It is finished." John 19:30

...And we, who continue to tell of the encounters with God and the bits of information that we share...we, like those that are written of in the bible, are His witnesses here within the pages of His story.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

In order to throw this thread back onto the rails, here is an answer as to why there is evil and how Christians can account for it.

1) God could change everyone’s personality so that they cannot sin. This would also mean that we would not have a free will. We would not be able to choose right or wrong because we would be “programmed” to only do right. Had God chosen to do this, there would be no meaningful relationships between Him and His creation.

Instead, God made Adam and Eve innocent but with the ability to choose good or evil. Because of this, they could respond to His love and trust Him or choose to disobey. They chose to disobey. Because we live in a real world where we can choose our actions but not their consequences, their sin affected those who came after them (us). Similarly, our decisions to sin have an impact on us and those around us and those who will come after us.

It's demonstrably true that an omnipotent god could have created us with the ability to sin, but without any inclination.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

I asked for a reason, faith is not a reason. Faith is the epistemology you used.

Why would you have faith?

Faith is based on trust with a lack of knowledge and understanding. For a Christian to have faith, we trust even though we do not understand.

Unquestionably, faith is the essence of the Christian life. Faith is exhorted throughout the Bible and is presented as an absolute necessity. In fact, “without faith, it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6). The entire chapter of Hebrews 11 is about faith and those who possessed it. Faith is a gift from God, as we see in Ephesians 2:8–9 and not something we come up with on our own. All Christians have received the gift of faith from God, and faith is part of the armor of God—the shield with which we protect ourselves from the “flaming arrows of the evil one” (Ephesians 6:16).

The Bible never exhorts us to have “childlike” faith, at least not in so many words. In Matthew 18:2 Jesus says that we must “become as little children” in order to enter the kingdom of God. The context of Jesus’ statement is the disciples’ question, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” (verse 1). In response, Jesus “called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. And he said: ‘Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me’” (verses 2–5).

So, as the disciples focus on what constitutes “greatness” in heaven, Jesus provides a new perspective: the way “up” is “down.” Meekness is required (cf. Matthew 5:5). Jesus exhorts the disciples (and us) to seek to possess a childlike modesty in addition to their faith. Those who willingly take the lowest position are the greatest in heaven’s eyes. A young child is destitute of ambition, pride, and haughtiness and is therefore a good example for us. Children are characteristically humble and teachable. They aren’t prone to pride or hypocrisy. Humility is a virtue rewarded by God; as James says, “Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up” (James 4:10).

Although faith is not mentioned in Matthew 18:1–5, we know that it isn’t just humility that ushers a person into heaven; it is faith in the Son of God. A humble, unpretentious faith could rightly be called a “childlike faith.” When Jesus wanted to bless the children, He said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it” (Mark 10:14–15). How does a child receive a gift? With openness, honesty, and unbridled joy. That type of happy authenticity should be a hallmark of our faith as we receive God’s gift in Christ.

Of course, children are easily fooled and led astray. In their artlessness they tend to miss the truth and be drawn to myths and fantasies. But that is not what is meant by having a childlike faith. Jesus promoted a humble, honest faith in God, and He used the innocence of a child as an example. Emulating the faith of children, we should simply take God at His Word. As children trust their earthly fathers, we should trust that our “Father in heaven [will] give good gifts to those who ask him” (Matthew 7:11).


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Picky Picky]

This world was "created" in the "image"(imagination) by the only entity that is real, by God...as a contrived non-reality within the only actual reality - it's just a story. The story is real - but the media of space, time, and matter (life as we know it), is not. So...here, from within the pages of the story...it is hard to imagine the greater reality...because we are stuck within the book.

Under those/these circumstances, there are two points to be made:

1. Limited information has come into us (into our storybook) from God, as a means of carrying the plot along to the big finish. This information has come just as it was recorded (regardless of it being told by fallible men).
2. Because the media of space, time, and matter, are contrived - no one actually dies within the history of the world. The truth is, the damage is already done...and this is the story of those who did not survive, and those who did. "It is finished." John 19:30

...And we, who continue to tell of the encounters with God and the bits of information that we share...we, like those that are written of in the bible, are His witnesses here within the pages of His story.

I'm very happy to say that this makes absolutely no sense to me. But thank you for trying, at my request.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Faith is based on trust with a lack of knowledge and understanding. For a Christian to have faith, we trust even though we do not understand.

Unquestionably, faith is the essence of the Christian life. Faith is exhorted throughout the Bible and is presented as an absolute necessity. In fact, “without faith, it is impossible to please God” (Hebrews 11:6). The entire chapter of Hebrews 11 is about faith and those who possessed it. Faith is a gift from God, as we see in Ephesians 2:8–9 and not something we come up with on our own. All Christians have received the gift of faith from God, and faith is part of the armor of God—the shield with which we protect ourselves from the “flaming arrows of the evil one” (Ephesians 6:16).

The Bible never exhorts us to have “childlike” faith, at least not in so many words. In Matthew 18:2 Jesus says that we must “become as little children” in order to enter the kingdom of God. The context of Jesus’ statement is the disciples’ question, “Who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?” (verse 1). In response, Jesus “called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. And he said: ‘Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever takes the lowly position of this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever welcomes one such child in my name welcomes me’” (verses 2–5).

So, as the disciples focus on what constitutes “greatness” in heaven, Jesus provides a new perspective: the way “up” is “down.” Meekness is required (cf. Matthew 5:5). Jesus exhorts the disciples (and us) to seek to possess a childlike modesty in addition to their faith. Those who willingly take the lowest position are the greatest in heaven’s eyes. A young child is destitute of ambition, pride, and haughtiness and is therefore a good example for us. Children are characteristically humble and teachable. They aren’t prone to pride or hypocrisy. Humility is a virtue rewarded by God; as James says, “Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will lift you up” (James 4:10).

Although faith is not mentioned in Matthew 18:1–5, we know that it isn’t just humility that ushers a person into heaven; it is faith in the Son of God. A humble, unpretentious faith could rightly be called a “childlike faith.” When Jesus wanted to bless the children, He said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it” (Mark 10:14–15). How does a child receive a gift? With openness, honesty, and unbridled joy. That type of happy authenticity should be a hallmark of our faith as we receive God’s gift in Christ.

Of course, children are easily fooled and led astray. In their artlessness they tend to miss the truth and be drawn to myths and fantasies. But that is not what is meant by having a childlike faith. Jesus promoted a humble, honest faith in God, and He used the innocence of a child as an example. Emulating the faith of children, we should simply take God at His Word. As children trust their earthly fathers, we should trust that our “Father in heaven [will] give good gifts to those who ask him” (Matthew 7:11).

I see you forgot to attribute your source on the above copy and paste. You don't want to be seen as dishonest I'm sure:

http://www.gotquestions.org/childlike-faith.html

 

[Loudmouth]

This world was "created" in the "image"(imagination) by the only entity that is real, by God...as a contrived non-reality within the only actual reality - it's just a story. The story is real - but the media of space, time, and matter (life as we know it), is not. So...here, from within the pages of the story...it is hard to imagine the greater reality...because we are stuck within the book.

And people ask why atheists don't believe in the claims made by Christians. Exhibit A right above . . .

 

[Davian]

...Just remember, you are on a "Christian Forum". You are a guest in Christian home.

There are no "guest" accounts on this site.

 

[Dave Ellis]

First of all I would like to apologize for the frustration. My experiment was entirely personal in nature in order to answer or better understand some theological questions I am having. In order to get an honest assessment would require you to be completely unaware and off guard.

Since I took part in this experiment (albeit late), however before I read this post I'll respond in kind.

I will reveal my experiment. It was an effort to test (1 Corinthians 12:3). I understand scripture is saying that a person can only truly confess that "Jesus is Lord" by the power of the Holy Spirit. However, I asked myself, "Is it possible that someone would be incapable of simply stating "Jesus is Lord" if the Holy Spirit did not dwell within them? Is there some kind of force that prevents them and is it only up to God to determine whether or not their faith grows.

Some atheists on here rightfully felt that they weren't comfortable typing that in, because it is not what they believe. It's not because they are incapable of doing so, it's because they felt they would be making a dishonest statement.

I thought I saw where you were going with this, as I also know that piece of scripture. I clearly don't believe, however I also have no problems typing the words "Jesus is Lord" on request. I don't believe that to be true, however I can write those words out.

However, I can also type "Muhammad is Lord", "Zeus is Lord", "Vishnu is Lord", etc. It's all the same, none have any particular special meaning.

So as an experiment, I asked if an atheist could simply state "Jesus is Lord". The fact that many were unable to do so was evidence to support my theory. However, the fact that one person was able to raised more questions. I asked if that person was always an atheist or did they at one time considered himself saved? I thought that if the Holy Spirit dwelt in that person at one time, perhaps it still dwelt within that person even after they rejected God. Which would be why that person was able to say "Jesus is Lord" even though they claimed he did not believe it.

To help you gather data points, when I was very young my family used to go to church (Presbyterian) and at one point I considered myself Christian. However I was quite young, and simply believed because I assumed the things that I had been taught in Sunday School and whatnot were true. My family was never really religious and stopped going to church somewhere around the time I was age 8-10, and by the time I hit my teenage years I described myself as agnostic. Religion was never really a concern to me, I didn't necessarily believe anymore, but I considered it a bit of an open question.

I had my first girlfriend at age 17, and she happened to go to the church my family used to go to. So, I went along with her family to get more of a "grown up" perspective on things and to take a real look at it. I even got involved with the youth group for a time, and played a song or two for the congregation on clarinet as part of the music group. Overall, it was a fun time.

However, when I started examining the claims the religion made, and the associated theology, it raised some big credibility problems. However, researching things back in the late 90s and early 2000's wasn't as easy as it is today. The internet was a thing, but there wasn't nearly as much info, and the info that was there was harder to find. I knew enough that I came to definitively reject Christianity as it had been presented to me, but there were still a lot of unanswered questions about other possible interpretations, or even other religions.

I still referred to myself as agnostic in those days, simply because I didn't understand what an atheist was. I was going under the common, but incorrect definition that an agnostic is someone who doesn't have a belief either way, and an atheist is someone who thinks with 100% certainty that there isn't a god.

I can remember reading "The God Delusion" shortly after it came out, and became aware of the actual definition of atheism, which is someone that does not have a theological belief. I can remember thinking to myself "Oh, well in that case, I actually fit the definition of atheist". I've called myself an atheist ever since that moment. In reality, I was an atheist without knowing it back well into my teenage years, probably somewhere around the time I started calling myself agnostic, which may have been 14-15ish, however I can't really remember for certain.

Anyway, as you can tell, I never really went through an indoctrination. If anything, I had fun while I was affiliated with the youth programs at the church, but once I hit the age of reason I never really bought what they were trying to sell. Once I started trying to learn more about it, it became more and more unbelievable. It's remained somewhat of a fascination for me since those days however, I'm a bit of a history buff as it is, so I like reading into the history of the christian religion and where certain beliefs and ideas came from. There's a lot of interesting stuff out there, and occasionally on forums like this I'll hear a new perspective or idea I was not previously familiar with.

So, I don't really hold the bible in any special reverence. Scriptures, and words like "Jesus is Lord" are just that... words. There's no reason to believe some mystical spirit or force exists that would prevent me from typing them.

Many responded that they could not say "Jesus is Lord" simply because they believed it to be dishonest. And I would agree to an extent.

Sure, different people have different motivations. Other people who were once fundamentalists and feel like they were lied to by their churches may have an ethical issue with typing something out that falls in line with their previous theology. Others simply don't want to type something that they don't believe is true. Different people have different motivations.

I don't believe typing "Jesus is Lord" as part of an experiment when I've clearly made it known I'm an atheist is dishonest or lying, however others may have differing opinions on that point.

Which brings me to another question about predestination. If only the Holy Spirit can bring someone to faith, why only use its power for some and not all?

Good question, especially for me. If only the holy spirit can bring someone to faith, why was I left out? I live a good life, I have read the bible, and done far more research into it than the vast majority of Christians.

My honest search for truth came to me rejecting Christianity, and with good reason. If I'm wrong, why would the holy spirit not have guided me towards the truth? Especially if god wants everyone to know, and have a relationship with him? It makes no sense, which in itself is evidence against that god or the holy spirit.

I know there is a lot of flaws to the experiment. I confess that refusal to make a statement that would compromise ones integrity is a powerful motivator so I admit that it does not really answer my questions. Instead, more questions are raised.

Such as?