The Problem of Evil

[quote]ToShinDo wrote:
haney wrote:
So God would
2. Be able to control all things until the destruction of time.

That’s not true haney. If we do have free will, then God cannot control us. Which implies non-omnipotence. If he can control us, but chooses not to, then God values freedom above all else, including love, joy, redemption, faith, chastity, honesty, etc.
[/quote]

He could He chooses not to since He has allowed us that free will.

I knew I should of re-worded that. My point is He could control all surrounding forces and even the beings that could antagonize us like Satan did Job. Not make us do His will but impress His will upon us.

[quote]ToShinDo wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ToShinDo wrote:

You only think it contradicts itself. If it is logically consistent that you choose good on several occasions, why is it not logically consistent that you choose good on all occasions? Notice I say choose. Free will is about free choice. Whether or not anyone takes the “bad” choice is immaterial. For example I can have you choose to drink from a cup of Surge, or a cup of cat urine. If you always choose Surge does that mean you do not have free will in this decision? Are you saying it is impossible for someone to always choose good? If God created us with free will and the strength to always resist temptation, we still have free will.
[/quote]
You also forget that with the fall of Man our nature to do good would of changed. We would now desire to do Evil. While you may being able to make sound choices, try to get a youth to make good choices. once they mess up that would be it. Their nature would of changed because of origional sin. Resisting temptation is only given once we are converted.

I thought I posted God put Himself under certain Laws too. One of those is we are allowed choice. God could take it away at anytime. So He does have that power over all. So even us having free will is within His power. While He may not make us make our choices, it is a subset that is under His power. If revelation 20 and 21 do come true, then free will might be removed. We become like the Angels, and we are there to worship God.

[quote]ToShinDo wrote:
You only think it contradicts itself. If it is logically consistent that you choose good on several occasions, why is it not logically consistent that you choose good on all occasions? [/quote]

Because when I wake up in the morning, my thoughts are not always, “I am going to only do good at all times”. I may feel bad one morning and kick the neighbor’s cat. I may want to have sex with a chick I saw at the club and NOT call her back afterwards. Your logic sucks ass. We have free will. Making us to ONLY choose good would mean we do not have free will and would make us robots in the face of daily decisions. I am not a robot. I have feelings and often my decisions in life are based on these emotions. Surge and cat piss? That is the extent that you can view decision making? What if I am late to work and I DECIDE to speed on the freeway? You are saying God should have made us so that no matter what, whether it be driving fast because your wife is about to have a baby or because the mall closes at 8pm that we should have been made to ONLY see driving the speed limit at all times? Please. Come with better logic than this. Thank GOD that GOD does not think like you.

[quote]ToShinDo wrote:
randman wrote:
You are declaring God to be pure Good, but also declaring that pure evil exists. So, for the second time in your post you have denied god’s omnipotence – he can’t be all good and all powerful if evil exists.

Correct. God made Satan. Therefore evil exists. God ALLOWS evil to exist. So therefore God is still omnipotent in the presence of evil. Dude, I don’t care if you don’t believe but the logic your using is pretty weak.

I believe his point is that God is not all good if he allows evil to exist.

[/quote]

Wrong. He gave us choice, including Satan. We can choose good or evil. God is all good and wants us to be as well, but we have the choice and are unfortunately imperfect and do make the wrong choices sometimes.

[quote]Right Side Up wrote:

(1) OMNISCIENCE – This means God is “all-knowing.” It is believed that God knows everything, quite simply, regardless of the boundaries of space time. He knows EVERYTHING.
[/quote]

GOD’s knowledge must be bounded by space-time or there is no such thing as free-will for humans…if GOD knows what we will do in the future then our actions are pre-destined and not truly acts of free-will…GOD knows everything there is to know up to this moment, but not passed.

GOD’s abilities are bound by logic…GOD in all HIS amazing abilities cannot make 2+2=3 once mathmatical definitions have been set in place…GOD can only do that which is logically consistent.

[quote] RSU wrote:

The Problem of Evil can now be outlined logically:
Given Premise 1: God is all-knowing
Given Premise 2: God is all-powerful
Given Premise 3: God is all-good
Observed Premise 4: But, Evil exists

Conclusion 1: Therefore, God cannot simultaneously possess all three of the given characteristics.

For those that don’t see the deduction clearly, I’ll explain further.

If God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good, then he MUST know what good is at all times, he MUST be able to have good at all times and he MUST want nothing but good at all times. However, there isn’t good at all times. This means that at least one of the three aforementioned attributes is wrong to some degree. Perhaps he is two of the three. Perhaps less. Perhaps he is MOSTLY good, or SOMEWHAT powerful, or FAIRLY knowledgeable, for example, but not “OMNI…” [/quote]

There is an underlying assumption in this argument: namely, that we, being non-omniscient, can enforce a definition of “good”, and demand it apply.

If you go back and get into the actual differences among the protestant sects, you will come upon a lot of stuff written about the “free will” connundrum. For instance, Calvinists believe in pre-destination, and thus that there is no actual “free will” per se. God, being omniscient, knows how you will choose before you are even created, so there is no actual choice being made. However, other sects, such as the Presbyterians, believe there is free will – even if an omniscient God knows how we will choose, he is not enforcing a choice - he simply knows how the choice will turn out. I’m sure I’m horribly simplifying it, but that’s it in a nutshell (provided my memory is working properly). If the Calvinists are correct, I can see where Doogie is coming from…

Now, you may think that’s off topic, but I don’t. I think the analysis of this problem is similar, although the above only hits on the omniscience aspect.

Let’s re-state our problem in more everyday language. The idea is that if you want something, and have the power to make it so, you must make it so – is that the idea?

However, if God did indeed grant free will, he could know what is good, want what is good, and even know when good will not be chosen, yet choose not to intercede to enforce his preferred outcome. I don’t pretend to know why God would choose to do so – but if he is omnipotent, I would think it would fall within the powers of that omnipotence to choose to grant other than his preferred outcome in a particular situation.

And this circles back to our attempt to impose a definition on “good.” As I said, I am not at all pretending to know why it would be good to allow evil to exist for a set period of time – but then again, I’m not omniscient. If we do go with our original 3 premises, that God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibeneficent, and if evil does exist, then an acceptable assumption would be that somehow allowing evil to exist is part of an overall plan for good. That would solve the logical connundrum, even if that assumption seems counter-intuitive to us non-omniscients.

Oooh… religious arguments. Always fun.

I used to think that God’s (alleged) omniscience would remove the possibility of free will. However, this site: Foreknowledge and Free Will (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Convinced me that this belief is by no means an essential one. It’s neither an atheist nor apologetic essay as far as I could make out, but it presents some very interesting philosophical arguments on both sides of the issue.

The version of the “problem of evil” that I subsribe to is roughly as follows:

God is perfect, and nothing about God is evil.

Initially (whatever this means; if this is contentious, just replace it with “before the universe was created”), there was just God.

As God could see all that would happen on Earth, he knew that men would do evil, yet he created the Earth anyway. Therefore, he knowingly and willingly was responsible for the appearance of evil.

Note that it’s not a matter of God “making us” do evil; the argument just relies on the fact that God “knew” that his actions would lead to evil, which is not something that an all-powerful being would allow.

[quote]Grey Area wrote:

Note that it’s not a matter of God “making us” do evil; the argument just relies on the fact that God “knew” that his actions would lead to evil, which is not something that an all-powerful being would allow.

[/quote]

Unless the entire presence of evil was necessary for our reality to exist in the first place. Clearly, due to the actions by us when presented with an environment of innocence bordered by evil, our choices indicate that he was right (Adam and Eve). Human nature requires the presence of evil. The duality of our own nature requires it or else we would be robots. Therefore, the conception of an angel that made the choice to go against God was necessary for our very existance. Thusly, those of us who make the choice to see this duality and CHOOSE God are rewarded with access to the next level. That isn’t cruel…unless you make the wrong choice. Clearly this is a problem for many who choose to ignore God as an option. It isn’t one for me. I am not perfect and I do much wrong, but I choose God.

I disagree with both of your assumptions. It’s not necessary for us to exist. By creating us, God has erred. Also, the existence of evil is most definitely not the same as free will. Why not make it phyiscally impossible for us to do evil? How would this remove our “free will”? There are plenty of things I currently can’t do… why not make “doing evil” one of them?

Not the same argument, but something equally as important, and something that’s always bugged me: why are humans made to suffer through disease and natural disasters? This has nothing at all to do with free will, and also clearly doesn’t discourage us from doing evil, so serves no purpose other than to make us suffer. Hardly something that a benevolent God would do.

[quote]Grey Area wrote:
I disagree with both of your assumptions. It’s not necessary for us to exist. By creating us, God has erred. Also, the existence of evil is most definitely not the same as free will. Why not make it phyiscally impossible for us to do evil? How would this remove our “free will”? There are plenty of things I currently can’t do… why not make “doing evil” one of them?

Not the same argument, but something equally as important, and something that’s always bugged me: why are humans made to suffer through disease and natural disasters? This has nothing at all to do with free will, and also clearly doesn’t discourage us from doing evil, so serves no purpose other than to make us suffer. Hardly something that a benevolent God would do. [/quote]

The image of God you are protraying is that our God is MAKING us suffer through disease and natural disasters. My view is vastly different in that God chooses not to have his hand in every little detail of what happens in the world creating chaos where he sees fit. He created the universe and everything in it. There are still physical laws that govern our universe. He doesn’t make disasters and disease happen; they just happen.

The point is when you think that all there is in life is THIS life than these distasters are insurmountable in your mind and you start thinking what is the point of life and how can a benevolent God let this happen. I think believers can find comfort in worldy chaos when you know that there is a much better, eternal place beyond this one. I agree with Prof X’s challenge to non-believers, read about Job in the bible and it may shed some light on this issue.

[quote]Grey Area wrote:
I disagree with both of your assumptions. It’s not necessary for us to exist. By creating us, God has erred. Also, the existence of evil is most definitely not the same as free will. Why not make it phyiscally impossible for us to do evil? How would this remove our “free will”? There are plenty of things I currently can’t do… why not make “doing evil” one of them?
[/quote]

Removing Sin would mean we are forced to stay with in God’s will. Rather than give us the choice. Christ was given the opportunity to violate His divine nature and Sin. Instead He chose to not Sin. Why because it showed obedience to the Father. Meaning He chose God rather than evil. Which is what GOd gave adam the choice to do.

[quote]
Not the same argument, but something equally as important, and something that’s always bugged me: why are humans made to suffer through disease and natural disasters? This has nothing at all to do with free will, and also clearly doesn’t discourage us from doing evil, so serves no purpose other than to make us suffer. Hardly something that a benevolent God would do. [/quote]

Well what is evil? The Biblical definition is anything that goes against God’s will.

Death and disease came into the world by Adam it is part of the punishment. The earth and everything in it are set to be destroyed.

You are right God could of chose to not create us, problem is It was His will to do so. So If God’s will is to create mankind knowing that we will sin that is not His error that is His will.

Now I know this will kick up a whole lot of stuff.

Romans 9:19-21

19One of you will say to me: ?Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?? 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? ?Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ?Why did you make me like this?? ?[h] 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

If you want to look up the whole chapter that is fine, but please find out how to interpret the Bible before you post comments on it. Otherwise many people will be confused.

If you take it literal it is pretty clear. Who are we the created to ask God what is fair. I am not saying the questions raised are wrong, but it is a very tough thing for the finite to try and explain the infinite. It is like asking a child to explain why a 32 year old parent won’t let them do everything they want. Until you are the 32 year old parent you cannot explain the parents reasoning.

[quote]Right Side Up wrote:

I’ll bite, in spite of the reference to the Bible which is completely irrelevant to the subject of the thread…um…did you just say God is responsible for Satan’s actions? Yessir, you did. That seems to be the most blatant rejection of God’s omnibenevolence available!
[/quote]

To say that the bible is irrevelevant of this discussion strikes me as ludicrous. You are speaking of the Christian God, and all that is said and believed about the Christian God stems from what is written in the bible. Put simply, the bible is the prime source about the Christian God. This makes the bible a prime source for a logical counter arguement against what you say, because it is one of the best citable sources that speak of the Christian God. So, by calling the bible irrelevant, you appear to have no true understanding of the Christian God, which gives you no foreground to argue against what is believed about that God. In short, you undermine yourself. To make a good arguement, you must be able to understand and argue the opposing side aswell, and by calling one of the prime sources for a counter-arguement irrelevant, you appear as not having the ability to do that. Even if you did not come up with the original concept, you are still arguing it, and thus, it is your responsibility to be able to argue it properly, and that includes understanding of the other side. By calling the bible irrelevant, you have not lived up to that responsibility.

[quote]Grey Area wrote:
I disagree with both of your assumptions. It’s not necessary for us to exist. By creating us, God has erred. Also, the existence of evil is most definitely not the same as free will. Why not make it phyiscally impossible for us to do evil? How would this remove our “free will”? There are plenty of things I currently can’t do… why not make “doing evil” one of them? [/quote]

No, it is not “necessary” for us to exist. I made an ashtray in pre-school for my mother…who doesn’t smoke…and there was no necessity for it in any way, shape, or form. However, do you think it was a fault that it was created? My mother would have said otherwise when she received it and I would have said otherwise when I saw the look on her face. That means it was not necessary, however, it was also not a mistake. It was an act of love. (she still has that ash tray)

[quote]
Not the same argument, but something equally as important, and something that’s always bugged me: why are humans made to suffer through disease and natural disasters? This has nothing at all to do with free will, and also clearly doesn’t discourage us from doing evil, so serves no purpose other than to make us suffer. Hardly something that a benevolent God would do. [/quote]

You’re right, it has nothing to do with free will…and everything to do with the physical laws of this reality. As much as I hate it, The movie The Matrix is our only recent portrayal of this same construct. In the movie, man would not accept a reality where everything was handed to them and there was only good. The dark side of own nature and imperfection required struggle and pain in order to accept peace and joy. It is our nature to need one in order to appreciate the other. That same duality is present in every aspect of our reality. That doesn’t mean that God makes us suffer, but that suffering is a part of our reality because of our own needs as humans to exist. That means pain is here because we are here. If there was no pain, we would not be able to exist in our current state. Again, I asked the one who started this thread to read one book in the Bible that went through this concept. He refuses to read it and I guess everyone else does as well. None of you have presented an argument that has not been heard before and that does not have an answer. It is up to you whether you accept the answer. If you don’t, then you honestly can’t complain about what happens to those who refuse to accept God within that concept. This clearly would ONLY be a problem to those who reject God knowing the consequences. You can’t have it both ways. You either believe and accept God, or choose to not believe anything about God. If you make the second choice, how can you logically be upset about what happens to those who make that choice within that concept? You can’t. Case closed with the problem of Evil.

Okay, haney is saying that angels do not have free will, and randman is saying they do. Which is right?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
ToShinDo wrote:
You only think it contradicts itself. If it is logically consistent that you choose good on several occasions, why is it not logically consistent that you choose good on all occasions?

Because when I wake up in the morning, my thoughts are not always, “I am going to only do good at all times”. [/quote]
Why couldn’t they be?

Where did I say God would MAKE us choose good? I said God could have created us in such a way that we would always freely choose good. Freely. Freely.

I was unaware that you were unfamiliar with analogies, Prof. X. It is a simplified breakdown, Surge representing “Good” and cat urine representing “Evil”. So, I ask again, if you always chose Surge would this mean that you do not have free will?

You can’t see the difference between them? How about murder and killing in self-defense?

Would it matter how good my argument was? You would never accept it, no matter what.

[quote] Thank GOD that GOD does not think like you.
[/quote]

Goody. Insults. I was beginning to feel left out. You know, you and I agree on more topics than you think. More than what haney and I agree on, yet he does not hurl insults. I wonder why?

[quote]Grey Area wrote:

Not the same argument, but something equally as important, and something that’s always bugged me: why are humans made to suffer through disease and natural disasters? This has nothing at all to do with free will, and also clearly doesn’t discourage us from doing evil, so serves no purpose other than to make us suffer. Hardly something that a benevolent God would do. [/quote]

If you would believe the Bible, disease and natural disaster are due to the choices that our ancestors have made. I know it sucks because we are suffereing because of it.

Adam and Eve are the obvious examples. Also I was taught in bible study that before Noah’s flood, there was another layer of water surrounding the earth at the time in addition to the ozone layer. This layer of water served to deflect the Sun’s rays evenly to Earth. As a result, the earth at the time was believed to have subtropical climate all over. The rain from the Noah’s flood came from this layer of water and the earth experienced much more extreme climates without this protective layer.

Also, speaking of Noah’s flood, men did not begin consuming meat until after the flood. I know this goes against the T-man protocol of eating as much meat as we can to grow, but consuming meat in addition to more extreme climate is believed to have contributed to shortening of our life expectancies. But I don’t think this is too far fetched. Just look at all the modern diseases contributed by bad diet.

By the way, good thread and nice discussion by all. Keep it up!

[quote]ToShinDo wrote:

Where did I say God would MAKE us choose good? I said God could have created us in such a way that we would always freely choose good. Freely. Freely.[/quote]

I think I already explained this. Your “analogy” would require only good in the world. We failed at that.

[quote]Goody. Insults. I was beginning to feel left out. You know, you and I agree on more topics than you think. More than what haney and I agree on, yet he does not hurl insults. I wonder why?
[/quote]

Because I choose to.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Again, I asked the one who started this thread to read one book in the Bible that went through this concept. He refuses to read it and I guess everyone else does as well. [/quote]

I don’t. What book did you have in mind?

Job, of course, is the classic on this subject; why don’t we start there?

It seems to me that the definitive characteristic of the Book of Job is the fact that Job is said to behave precisely as he should with respect to everyone - both his fellow human beings and God. And yet he suffers what he suffers. What is your explanation of this tale?

[quote]Ross Hunt wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Again, I asked the one who started this thread to read one book in the Bible that went through this concept. He refuses to read it and I guess everyone else does as well.

I don’t. What book did you have in mind?

Job, of course, is the classic on this subject; why don’t we start there?

It seems to me that the definitive characteristic of the Book of Job is the fact that Job is said to behave precisely as he should with respect to everyone - both his fellow human beings and God. And yet he suffers what he suffers. What is your explanation of this tale?[/quote]

First, I must say that I don’t consider it a “tale” but it describes the place of Satan within the construct of our reality, the hierarchy of his place before God, and our places on the chessboard. It doesn’t need my explanation. A better question might be, what is your understanding of it?

[quote]Right Side Up wrote:
ssong2 wrote:

He chose to give us free will, and many are exercising their free will to create the evil in the world.

One can surely see injustice, bad, pain, “evil,” etc. in the world without having to look at actions that result from the will of humans. The 150,000 + that have already died from the tsunamis might serve as an example. Any other natural disaster or accident serves the same purpose here.

If anything, all the pure evil that exists reaffirms the existence of the pure good - God.

Puzzling statement. You are declaring God to be pure Good, but also declaring that pure evil exists. So, for the second time in your post you have denied god’s omnipotence – he can’t be all good and all powerful if evil exists.[/quote]

You got to understand that God thinks different than you and I. His concept of Good and Evil can be different than that of average human being.

One definition of evil I learned is that evil is when God doesn’t exist in our minds. God would only exist in our mind only when we invite him.

So 1) Is God all knowing? I think so.
2) Is God all powerful? I think so - but our freewill is offlimits even to him. He wanted it that way. This doesn’t really diminish his power
3) Is God all good? I think so - he may allow “evil” to exist but only because we choose “evil” to exist in our minds instead of God. See #2.

BTW, thanks for starting this thread because it is making a lot of people stop and think about these issues. I am actually not that religious. I grew up a Christian (Pastor’s son) but I have been struggling with my faith for years because I have seen so much “evil” that exists even within church.

[quote]doogie wrote:
ssong2 wrote:

I think this is really important. God could have made us perfect by his standards, free of evil, etc. But what satisfaction is there in creating something (or someone) perfectly designed to love you and to worship you? I think he prefers that we choose to love him and to worship him. He chose to give us free will, and many are exercising their free will to create the evil in the world. If anything, all the pure evil that exists reaffirms the existence of the pure good - God.

If God is all-knowing, didn’t he know when he was making us how we would turn out? He set up all of the variables in the world. He had to know which of us would love him and which wouldn’t. If he is good, why bother making those of us who wouldn’t love him only to punish us in hell for it later?

If I set up a line of dominos that I created, on a flat surface that I created, in a room that I created, in a universe that I created, wouldn’t I know how they would fall when pushed? Sure I can say that each domino had a chance to fall over or not, but didn’t I already determine how they would fall when I created all of the variables? It just seems cruel and narcissistic to create humans just burn those that don’t love him.

To me, it seems worse for God to punish men (since he controls all of the variables) than it would be for me to kill my ungrateful daughter. She had a choice to love me, but she didn’t. Therefore she should burn.

[/quote]

You know how they say love is blind? I think he knew how we would turn out, but he was “hoping” that we would make the right choice.

And just because you don’t love him, I don’t think he will let you burn in hell. What about those who would never have chance to learn about God? I believe this is why God gave us conscience. We may not be perfect, but we pretty much know whether we are good person or bad person.

On the other hand, wouldn’t you like to believe that the truly evil people like the terrorists will be punished for their deeds?