The problem of evil

[ScottA]

I am going to Hell because you are talking nonsense?

No, but because God has created the world and place you in it and sent His spirit to speak through His creation and sent His servants to speak for Him, and set before you a choice of life and death, and you do not believe but seem determined to choose death.

 

[Loudmouth]

No, but because God has created the world and place you in it and sent His spirit to speak through His creation and sent His servants to speak for Him, and set before you a choice of life and death, and you do not believe but seem determined to choose death.

I don't believe you. You are not God.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

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

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.

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

This too appears to have been copied directly from here: http://www.gotquestions.org/God-allow-evil.html

 

[Dave Ellis]

This too appears to have been copied directly from here: http://www.gotquestions.org/God-allow-evil.html

Not only is plagiarizing dishonest, why would you waste your time on a forum just copy-pasting things from websites to argue your points? Makes no sense. It's almost as if he doesn't understand the arguments himself.

 

[bhsmte]

Not only is plagiarizing dishonest, why would you waste your time on a forum just copy-pasting things from websites to argue your points? Makes no sense. It's almost as if he doesn't understand the arguments himself.

What you explain, is all too common on this site.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Not only is plagiarizing dishonest, why would you waste your time on a forum just copy-pasting things from websites to argue your points? Makes no sense. It's almost as if he doesn't understand the arguments himself.

Perhaps I should have provided references. But why does that matter? Is the information not relevant because it is not in my own words? No. Is this academia where my grades or attendance is at risk? No. The truth is, the information that was provided is not for you. Rather, it is for any other open minded reader who have truly wants to understand. Here is why.

When you ask a Christian why he or she believes something, the answer is simple. It is because, out of faith, they believe the bible and the posts that were provided explained what the bible says about the topic. No further explanation is needed. Christian believe what they believe because that is what the bible teaches...period. If yourself or any other skeptic is not satisfied with that fact, any further discussion is futile and the debate begins.

In a discussion, people with differing views exchange views in order to get a better understanding of the topic. Usually, both parties will learn from each other and hopefully leave with a mutual agreement. However, in a debate, two opponents argue against each other not to actually learn from each other but rather to "win" an arguement. The winner is decided by a judge. There are no official judges to declare a winner on these forums so the arguments continue in circles until one grows tired and moves on.

Faith based biblical explanations will never satisfy a skeptic because it is completely contrary to the nature of a sckepic. Christians believe something because they have faith. By deffinition, skeptics find faith irrational, illogical, and flawed. Hence, skeptics like yourself will never be satisfied with any biblical explanation and as a result, skeptics don't come here to have discussions. Rather, yourself and many others come here to debate.


There is no problem with having a debate here. Because this is a discussion and debate section. Just know that if you come here to debate, the information that I provide is not for you. It is for the readers who have genuine questions and truly want answers. The reader will Google the question and this tread will pop up. They will read it and see the information that both sides provided. The person who has convinced the reader is the winner. It does not matter if my opponent is convinced of anything. So it really doesn't matter to me if you think I am dishonest. The information provided is relevant and accurate and and that is all an open minded reader needs to make an informed decision.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Perhaps I should have provided references. But why does that matter? Is the information not relevant because it is not in my own words? No. Is this academia where my grades or attendance is at risk? No. The truth is, the information that was provided is not for you. Rather, it is for any other open minded reader who have truly wants to understand. Here is why.

Intellectual honesty doesn't matter to you? When you present someone else's work as if it is your own, people's confidence in your intellectual honesty decreases, which impacts on how they view your posts overall.

When you ask a Christian why he or she believes something, the answer is simple. It is because, out of faith, they believe the bible and the posts that were provided explained what the bible says about the topic. No further explanation is needed. Christian believe what they believe because that is what the bible teaches...period. If yourself or any other skeptic is not satisfied with that fact, any further discussion is futile and the debate begins.

Why faith in the Bible and not faith in the Quran?

Faith based biblical explanations will never satisfy a skeptic because it is completely contrary to the nature of a sckepic. Christians believe something because they have faith. By deffinition, skeptics find faith irrational, illogical, and flawed. Hence, skeptics like yourself will never be satisfied with any biblical explanation and as a result, skeptics don't come here to have discussions. Rather, yourself and many others come here to debate.

I'm not sure why faith-based explanations should satisfy anyone who cares about the truth of biblical claims.

There is no problem with having a debate here. Because this is a discussion and debate section. Just know that if you come here to debate, the information that I provide is not for you. It is for the readers who have genuine questions and truly want answers. The reader will Google the question and this tread will pop up. They will read it and see the information that both sides provided. The person who has convinced the reader is the winner. It does not matter if my opponent is convinced of anything. So it really doesn't matter to me if you think I am dishonest. The information provided is relevant and accurate and and that is all an open minded reader needs to make an informed decision.

Actually, it does matter. If you cannot defend your position honestly, then what does that say about your position?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Actually, it does matter. If you cannot defend your position honestly, then what does that say about your position?

I find it highly ironic that we immoral heathens have to keep reminding the Christians that plagiarism is dishonest...

 

[Eudaimonist]

I find it highly ironic that we immoral heathens have to keep reminding the Christians that plagiarism is dishonest...

*shrug* Now he knows.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Intellectual honesty doesn't matter to you? When you present someone else's work as if it is your own, people's confidence in your intellectual honesty decreases, which impacts on how they view your posts overall.

Does that change the relevancy and accuracy of the information? No.

Why faith in the Bible and not faith in the Quran?

Because Christians have faith in the bible and not in the Quran?

I'm not sure why faith-based explanations should satisfy anyone who cares about the truth of biblical claims.

For a skeptic I wouldn't expect it to unless you really just want to understand why a Christian believes something. The answer is simply because they have faith in the bible. Question answered.

Actually, it does matter. If you cannot defend your position honestly, then what does that say about your position?

I will let the judges decide that.


Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Does that change the relevancy and accuracy of the information? No.

Personally, I'm not inclined to discuss the relevancy or accuracy of information with someone who I don't consider to be intellectually honest, for obvious reasons.

Because Christians have faith in the bible and not in the Quran?

But why should they?

For a skeptic I wouldn't expect it to unless you really just want to understand why a Christian believes something. The answer is simply because they have faith in the bible. Question answered.

But that isn't a good reason. Faith can be used to justify whatever one wishes.

I will let the judges decide that.

In the past, there have been certain members (whose names shall remain anonymous ) who have done what you have done - copied-and-pasted shamelessly and without attribution - in addition to other disreputable behaviour. I've had Christians PM me to tell me that they were disgusted with the overall conduct of such members.

If you're right, and this thread were to be found via a Google search, "the judges" might likewise have an unfavourable view of your conduct.

 

[amariselle]

I find it highly ironic that we immoral heathens have to keep reminding the Christians that plagiarism is dishonest...

I think we have all been dishonest at times, don't you? Why the need to point out another's mistakes in a condescending way? Is there no better way to go about this?

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

I think we have all been dishonest at times, don't you? Why the need to point out another's mistakes in a condescending way? Is there no better way to go about this?

Perhaps addressing the information contained in the post rather than critique the citation?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I think we have all been dishonest at times, don't you? Why the need to point out another's mistakes in a condescending way? Is there no better way to go about this?

Quite frankly, I think most people are tired of the apologists who continue to do this. This guy isn't the only one. Others have been more conceited than he has though.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Perhaps addressing the information contained in the post rather than critique the citation?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Why bother discussing it with someone who cannot defend their position honestly?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Perhaps addressing the information contained in the post rather than critique the citation?

Since apparently the standard of discussion has lowered to the point where one is permitted to give prepared remarks instead of engaging what the other person has said (even if those remarks were prepared by someone else), you have no right to complain when others do the same. From now on, instead of replying to what you yourself have said, we should respond by posting a wall of pre-written text from another source that ostensibly addresses your comments. When you complain about this, we'll simply point out that you are critiquing the citation rather than addressing the information contained in the post -- information written by someone other than the person you are interacting with. Sound fair?

 

[amariselle]

Quite frankly, I think most people are tired of the apologists who continue to do this. This guy isn't the only one. Others have been more conceited than he has though.

I think we are all tired of EVERYONE who chooses to do this. Like it or not however, we have all lied in our lives. This is why we should not be prideful in pointing this out in other people.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I think we are all tired of EVERYONE who chooses to do this. Like it or not however, we have all lied in our lives. This is why we should not be prideful in pointing this out in other people.

Prideful? The person I am responding to seems to see nothing wrong in his conduct. The ends justify the means, in his mind; lying is wrong, unless one is lying for Jesus apparently.

 

[HitchSlap]

Perhaps I should have provided references. But why does that matter? Is the information not relevant because it is not in my own words? No. Is this academia where my grades or attendance is at risk? No. The truth is, the information that was provided is not for you. Rather, it is for any other open minded reader who have truly wants to understand. Here is why.

When you ask a Christian why he or she believes something, the answer is simple. It is because, out of faith, they believe the bible and the posts that were provided explained what the bible says about the topic. No further explanation is needed. Christian believe what they believe because that is what the bible teaches...period. If yourself or any other skeptic is not satisfied with that fact, any further discussion is futile and the debate begins.

In a discussion, people with differing views exchange views in order to get a better understanding of the topic. Usually, both parties will learn from each other and hopefully leave with a mutual agreement. However, in a debate, two opponents argue against each other not to actually learn from each other but rather to "win" an arguement. The winner is decided by a judge. There are no official judges to declare a winner on these forums so the arguments continue in circles until one grows tired and moves on.

Faith based biblical explanations will never satisfy a skeptic because it is completely contrary to the nature of a sckepic. Christians believe something because they have faith. By deffinition, skeptics find faith irrational, illogical, and flawed. Hence, skeptics like yourself will never be satisfied with any biblical explanation and as a result, skeptics don't come here to have discussions. Rather, yourself and many others come here to debate.


There is no problem with having a debate here. Because this is a discussion and debate section. Just know that if you come here to debate, the information that I provide is not for you. It is for the readers who have genuine questions and truly want answers. The reader will Google the question and this tread will pop up. They will read it and see the information that both sides provided. The person who has convinced the reader is the winner. It does not matter if my opponent is convinced of anything. So it really doesn't matter to me if you think I am dishonest. The information provided is relevant and accurate and and that is all an open minded reader needs to make an informed decision.

I strive to live a rational life, therefore, I have no need for faith.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

Prideful? The person I am responding to seems to see nothing wrong in his conduct. The ends justify the means, in his mind; lying is wrong, unless one is lying for Jesus apparently.

No, Eelhsa is right. Rather than accepting the fact that it was wrong. My stubbornness in admitting it was out of pride. This is my formal apology. I should have provided the reference.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk