God and the problem of evil solved

[sotrktiv]

What does the Bible actually say about God and Evil?

(1) God created both good and evil, and is responsible for the existence of all things including evil, but He does not entice man to commit sin, nor can He commit sin Himself.
(2) In the Old Testament when God told Israel to commit "genocide", Israel was acting as a "police force" enacting judgment upon the guilty. In fact, it was God who punished these people by taking their lives using Israel to enact this judgment. (He was just in his judgments knowing all things before He acted.)
(3) The death of children or women or the innocent mean a lot to us, but God who has the power to raise the dead, sees death as a non issue and something easily resolved.
(4) Our reality and life is not ultimate reality and life, so anything that goes on here can be reversed and or made to have never been (making all evil ever experienced a small matter to correct for God when He chooses to do so).
(5) Human evil is a result of human will (self-will). God has two Wills, a permissive and direct. His permissive will allows evil to occur (this due to permitting human freedom etc), but His direct will is that evil wouldn't occur (As He teaches). Both wills are part of Him, and show His merciful attributes giving men freedom to act, this even in a way that is hostile to Him).
(6) God created man for a greater purpose, and evil can be used to teach him the value of good opposed to bad, or right opposed to wrong (in an ultimate sense).

Therefore, God is not evil for allowing humans to be free. God is not evil for allowing people to die (He can resurrect the dead like turning on a light). He is not evil for enacting punishment upon impure people, men women and or children (children are men in stasis, and will grow into evil men). And God is not evil because He has not destroyed everyone already for being wicked on a daily basis, or being unthankful towards participation in His reality (though He would be perfectly innocent is doing so).

[IronRooster2]

The problem then is that we would then live in a world of nihilism without good or evil. We're all meaningless little computer people living in his simulation just for the purpose of augmenting His pornography collection.

In other words, this argument is tautology.

[sotrktiv]

The problem then is that we would then live in a world of nihilism without good or evil. We're all meaningless little computer people living in his simulation just for the purpose of augmenting His pornography collection.

In other words, this argument is tautology.

Do you care to explain yourself better? How do you come to your conclusions?

[Equinox117]

What does the Bible actually say about God and Evil?

(1) God created both good and evil, and is responsible for the existence of all things including evil, but He does not entice man to commit sin, nor can He commit sin Himself.


Sin is a product of his creation. Which makes it his fault.


(2) In the Old Testament when God told Israel to commit "genocide", Israel was acting as a "police force" enacting judgment upon the guilty. In fact, it was God who punished these people by taking their lives using Israel to enact this judgment. (He was just in his judgments knowing all things before He acted.)


Could have avoided creating people needing punishment in the first place.


(3) The death of children or women or the innocent mean a lot to us, but God who has the power to raise the dead, sees death as a non issue and something easily resolved.

He should see it as an issue because it affects us majorly. A "father figure" that most Christians like to describe God as should know how we feel. Viewing death as nothing is rather cruel for a God who is supposed to love mankind.


(4) Our reality and life is not ultimate reality and life, so anything that goes on here can be reversed and or made to have never been (making all evil ever experienced a small matter to correct for God when He chooses to do so).


What is taking him so long? Why doesn't he do it now to save all the suffering in this world?


(5) Human evil is a result of human will (self-will). God has two Wills, a permissive and direct. His permissive will allows evil to occur (this due to permitting human freedom etc), but His direct will is that evil wouldn't occur (As He teaches). Both wills are part of Him, and show His merciful attributes giving men freedom to act, this even in a way that is hostile to Him).


Again, Human evil came from God since he created evil.


(6) God created man for a greater purpose, and evil can be used to teach him the value of good opposed to bad, or right opposed to wrong (in an ultimate sense).

What is this higher purpose you speak of? What is the point of creating evil to teach us a lesson when God can easily program us with the required knowledge in the first place?

I guess God used evil to teach a child of good who was brutally murdered and put into the microwave.

Therefore, God is not evil for allowing humans to be free. God is not evil for allowing people to die (He can resurrect the dead like turning on a light). He is not evil for enacting punishment upon impure people, men women and or children (children are men in stasis, and will grow into evil men). And God is not evil because He has not destroyed everyone already for being wicked on a daily basis, or thankful towards participation in His reality (though He would be perfectly innocent is doing so).

[Athanasius90]

Actually, the theist bears no real burden here. The atheist has to show there is a true incommensurability between God and the existence of evil.

[IronRooster2]

Do you care to explain yourself better?

Basically your claim is that evil doesn't exist since Yahweh and His perspective determines what evil is. Ergo you're rejecting the point of the Problem of Evil by saying there is no problem.

The atheist has to show there is a true incommensurability between God and the existence of evil.

The atheist doesn't care about the problem of evil nor is it meant to disprove the existence of a deity.

The entire point is to point out to believers

A) Their god is not a nice, loving fellow

or

B) Their god is not all powerful

This is an argument to appeal to emotion. If logical ones were effective, the person wouldn't believe to begin with.

You have to literally believe someone went back in time or altered reality in such a way that the events of Exodus appear completely made up in the historical record. From the beginning root premise of Egyptian Israelite slaves, to even start to accept Yahweh as real. Since Exodus is supposedly the only reason we even know Yahweh exists.

[Athanasius90]

Why appeal to emotion? That's fallacious.

[IronRooster2]

Why appeal to emotion? That's fallacious.

I meant appeal in the form of "the power or ability to attract, interest, amuse, or stimulate the mind or emotions" not as a synonym for "argument". Guess I made a typo of omission. The argument of evil is not fallacious.

It's popular because the subjects involved are emotional. God is your dad. Evil is bad. Why does dad let evil happen? He is either a weak or evil dad. That **** hits someone in the feels. It shows contradictions in two separate beliefs they hold dear.

Versus the more clinical stuff, like "Hey, there's no evidence of any of this stuff being real in all of recorded history." When I ask people to teach me how to cast Sticks to Snakes (which would be a really cool lv.2 Clerical spell to have), they uh... they don't care. And quickly forget.

But I care. A whole lot. I want to create some war snakes, damnit.

[sotrktiv]

Sin is a product of his creation. Which makes it his fault.

Like I said, His permissive will allows sin to exist in order for men to have freedom. The fact that He isn't committing these sins directly doesn't make Him the perpetrator of those actions (and therefore is not guilty of them). There is a difference however slight it may seem.

Could have avoided creating people needing punishment in the first place.

But this would not be in alignment with His desires to make man in the first place, ie., to have beings made in His image that would understand good and evil and eventually become immaterial. Also such a perfect human wouldn't know by experience why God is good without having the opportunity to understand the opposite.

He should see it as an issue because it affects us majorly. A "father figure" that most Christians like to describe God as should know how we feel. Viewing death as nothing is rather cruel for a God who is supposed to love mankind.

Cruel by the definition of one who sees life as something that ends and is completely over, or cruel to one who sees life as something that continues after death? I don't find it cruel at all.

What is taking him so long? Why doesn't he do it now to save all the suffering in this world?

Because He works in processes. Everything that is happening now has a purpose, some will benefit from it while others will not. This makes it necessary to be.

Again, Human evil came from God since he created evil.

You are mistaking cause with effect, the cause (God) started life and permitted evil as a sign of goodness/granting freedom, but sin (effect) came from men expressing their freedom (which actually assaults God's goodness).

What is this higher purpose you speak of? What is the point of creating evil to teach us a lesson when God can easily program us with the required knowledge in the first place?

Experiential knowledge has a value, see answer above.

I guess God used evil to teach a child of good who was brutally murdered and put into the microwave.

The brutality of a murder is only mourned by those who live. Death is death apart from how agonizing or brutal it is. Also, when a thing is dead said agony is gone, so why use such an example as though it holds greater weight than any other? the answer remains the same.

Basically your claim is that evil doesn't exist since Yahweh and His perspective determines what evil is. Ergo you're rejecting the point of the Problem of Evil by saying there is no problem.

I don't claim that evil doesn't exist at all, and I don't see how your redefinition of what I've said makes your statement correct.

[IronRooster2]

I don't claim that evil doesn't exist at all

Then Yahweh must be capable of evil.

[sotrktiv]

Then Yahweh must be capable of evil.

Yes He is, but this doesn't make it sin. All evil does not equate to breaking of a holy moral character. Also, what we consider evil may be different from what He does. His opinion supersedes ours.

[Athanasius90]

I meant appeal in the form of "the power or ability to attract, interest, amuse, or stimulate the mind or emotions" not as a synonym for "argument". Guess I made a typo of omission. The argument of evil is not fallacious.

It's popular because the subjects involved are emotional. God is your dad. Evil is bad. Why does dad let evil happen? He is either a weak or evil dad. That **** hits someone in the feels. It shows contradictions in two separate beliefs they hold dear.

Versus the more clinical stuff, like "Hey, there's no evidence of any of this stuff being real in all of recorded history." When I ask people to teach me how to cast Sticks to Snakes (which would be a really cool lv.2 Clerical spell to have), they uh... they don't care. And quickly forget.

But I care. A whole lot. I want to create some war snakes, damnit.

The argument from evil is not fallacious, but it's a near unsustainable burden. you need to derive some sort of contradiction.

[GreatOldOne]

Logically speaking, there is always some implausible reason why God creates/sustain occurrences of evil.

But it's more likely than not that God is actually evil.

There is no reason to make up counter-intuitive explanations for the poor behavior of His Darkness.

[Harbinger]

There is no reason to make up counter-intuitive explanations for the poor behavior of His Darkness.

The devil is in the details!

[sotrktiv]

Logically speaking, there is always some implausible reason why God creates/sustain occurrences of evil.

But it's more likely than not that God is actually evil.

There is no reason to make up counter-intuitive explanations for the poor behavior of His Darkness.

We have already been through this no? The evil you speak of is human based. When human emotion is erected as the grand idol in the center of the solar system, maybe this is when what you say becomes relevant... But as long as man is viewed as chance matter that has somehow developed consciousness from nothing over millions of years, it being nothing more than an advanced animal (who cannot trust it's own notions of truth due to its unstable origins/development), than all you have to say becomes irrelevant. God is perfectly good and innocent in all that He chooses to do. Maybe refute a point instead.

[GreatOldOne]

We have already been through this no? The evil you speak of is human based. When human emotion is erected as the grand idol in the center of the solar system, maybe this is when what you say becomes relevant... But as long as man is viewed as chance matter that has somehow developed consciousness from nothing over millions of years, it being nothing more than an advanced animal (who cannot trust it's own notions of truth due to its unstable origins/development), than all you have to say becomes irrelevant. God is perfectly good and innocent in all that He chooses to do. Maybe refute a point instead.

Human based + cosmic based. The nature of existence to be aware of suffering and loss, including natural disasters, the ending of planets, all life in the universe, etc, etc...

Omnipotence and omniscience also encapsulate the entirety of the human experience. God is not innocent in anything human based nor otherwise existing, as the creator/sustainer of all things...not just the things you like.

We have been through this before, so I will leave it at that.

[sotrktiv]

Human based + cosmic based. The nature of existence to be aware of suffering and loss, including natural disasters, the ending of planets, all life in the universe, etc, etc...

Omnipotence and omniscience also encapsulate the entirety of the human experience. God is not innocent in anything human based nor otherwise existing, as the creator/sustainer of all things...not just the things you like.

We have been through this before, so I will leave it at that.

Yes, leaving is a thing you are used to doing I've noticed... But you side step my arguments to say that because humans suffer this makes God evil? But through similar logic seeing that humans live an 80 est years, ending in non existence, how does what they'd experience have any bearing on the goodness or wickedness of a being who had created them? If man is the center of meaning, and man has an end, this means that all evil or good ever experienced by men is equated to nothing, this is because no simple man is eternal.

[Fiyero]

Sorry, no one has ever or will ever be able to explain theodicy. It's the 2nd oldest question after does God exist?.

[sotrktiv]

Sorry, no one has ever or will ever be able to explain theodicy. It's the 2nd oldest question after does God exist?.

I disagree, it's just that people fail to use the scriptures correctly.

[magog704]

and God is not evil because He has not destroyed everyone already for being wicked on a daily basis, or thankful towards participation in His reality (though He would be perfectly innocent is doing so).

lol i would be a 10x better god than god

[sotrktiv]

lol i would be a 10x better god than god

I doubt it, I've seen your posts.

[Harbinger]

lol i would be a 10x better god than god

Who wouldn't be?

[GreatOldOne]

Yes, leaving is a thing you are used to doing I've noticed...

How have you noticed that? I typically respond to everything ad nauseum. Since we had been through this before and you mentioned that yourself I figured you didn't want to do it again but suit yourself.

But you side step my arguments to say that because humans suffer this makes God evil?

Your argument is aiming to separate mankind from God which doesn't work as I mentioned.

Omnipotence and omniscience also encapsulate the entirety of the human experience. God is not innocent in anything human based nor otherwise existing, as the creator/sustainer of all things...not just the things you like.

In the respect man is evil and suffering that belongs to God and is also on his tab, like everything else.

But through similar logic seeing that humans live an 80 est years, ending in non existence, how does what they'd experience have any bearing on the goodness or wickedness of a being who had created them?

Not just 'created' but realized. Human experience contains information and knowledge, and human action displays will/power. Those are all things an omnipotent/omniscient God needs to have and be doing personally.

If man is the center of meaning, and man has an end, this means that all evil or good ever experienced by men is equated to nothing, this is because no simple man is eternal.

I didn't suggest man is the center of meaning. This nevertheless a good point you're raising regarding equating to nothing (nothing is lost). That doesn't work because the end of goods are evils. If there is no amount of good there is to live then in privation constitutes something bad.

You can think of it like evil will always win because destruction comes second. No matter what good is experienced in life at it's end is erased constituting an evil. Any evil generated/experienced during life is pure gravy for a His Darkness.

[Fiyero]

I disagree, it's just that people fail to use the scriptures correctly.

So you think you've solved what philosophers for thousands of years haven't been able to? Job is the primary story related to the problem of evil in the Bible and it's a pretty unsatisfying answer to it.

Let's take an example. Presumably, there were some 20 assassination attempts made on Hitler and every one failed. Had one of them succeeded, the holocaust may have never happened and millions of people wouldn't have been exterminated.

How would allowing one of those attempts to succeed in anyway remove Hitler's free will?

[sotrktiv]

How have you noticed that? I typically respond to everything ad nauseum. Since we had been through this before and you mentioned that yourself I figured you didn't want to do it again but suit yourself.



Your argument is aiming to separate mankind from God which doesn't work as I mentioned.



In the respect man is evil and suffering that belongs to God and is also on his tab, like everything else.



Not just 'created' but realized. Human experience contains information and knowledge, and human action displays will/power. Those are all things an omnipotent/omniscient God needs to have and be doing personally.



I didn't suggest man is the center of meaning. This nevertheless a good point you're raising regarding equating to nothing (nothing is lost). That doesn't work because the end of goods are evils. If there is no amount of good there is to live then in privation constitutes something bad.

You can think of it like evil will always win because destruction comes second. No matter what good is experienced in life at it's end is erased constituting an evil. Any evil generated/experienced during life is pure gravy for a His Darkness.

I don't understand anything you've just written in a complete way... but what I take from it is not good enough to prove that God is evil. Like I said before, taking the atheistic, naturalistic perspective into account, if man has come into existence as theorized, and he lives, experiences, then dies (entering into non existence), how has anything he experienced remain meaningful? The only way evil and good can exist is if their is a consciousness that substantes it... and if No God exists, this means no consciousness exists beyond mans, which makes all emotions and excrescences from a humankind perspective equal to nothing.

But if God is the very consciousness that gives everything meaning (because He is always perceiving), and man has the ability to enter into this eternal/true consciousness (this being God's actual nature), then the evils experienced in life would hold new meaning. But even with this being said, said evils would be past tense and superseded by eternal good, this validating the "harsh" experience as perceived (with also gaining full knowledge of why said hardships occurred, and acknowledging that human life was simply a stair towards truer nature).

If you say God is responsible for human suffering, and He partakes/has a hand in that suffering because He gives all things life, than I would say that you are correct... but, just because He has created a world that allows suffering, doesn't make Him evil. And maybe according to mans definition this makes Him guilty for permitting of evil, but this doesn't make Him evil in and of Himself (because He knows things man doesn't, and He is the source of purpose itself). Besides this, no Christian thinks God is evil, so this just shows how your idea is not a widely held one anyway.

[GreatOldOne]

So you think you've solved with philosophers for thousands of years haven't been able to? Job is the primary story related to the problem of evil in the Bible and it's a pretty unsatisfying answer to it.

Job and Ecclesiastes together suggest eschewing life/reality and to come into submission with the forces of nature/existence/evil which will eventually bring you to nothing.

Eat chit and smile.

Now in this metaphor you're going to eat it one way or the other, but there's no reason to be dishonest about what is happening. In general imo Christianity does a very bad job of that.

[sotrktiv]

So you think you've solved what philosophers for thousands of years haven't been able to? Job is the primary story related to the problem of evil in the Bible and it's a pretty unsatisfying answer to it.

Let's take an example. Presumably, there were some 20 assassination attempts made on Hitler and every one failed. Had one of them succeeded, the holocaust may have never happened and millions of people wouldn't have been exterminated.

How would allowing one of those attempts to succeed in anyway remove Hitler's free will?

I don't see how someone assassinating Hitler has anything to do with him expressing his free will. If you mean God permitting his early death to stop him from killing, and then if you're asking how this would hinder Hitlers future will to kill, I would then say that it doesn't at all. Human's don't have free will, they have self-will. Free will means that a will exists without God having control over it, which is not possible. But self-will means to will contrary to God. Only God's will is free in the truest sense. And if God decided Hitler died early, this would be the same freedom as Hitler dying later (God has power over life and death, and man's freedom is not considered in this regard).

[sotrktiv]

If you guys don't take the Bible in its entirety, and if you don't understand it devoid of traditional errors, you will never see the clear picture. And this is the problem. Ecclesiastes, Job all end with what? Love God because He is the final solution. This answer is orders of magnitude better then live, eat, experience pleasure, suffer, die, life is meaningless the end.

[GreatOldOne]

I don't understand anything you've just written in a complete way... but what I take from it is not good enough to prove that God is evil.

You don't logically 100% absolutely and scientifically with all possible best evidence and agreement show God to be evil.

It just shows that God is more reasonably described as evil than not. There is always some counter-intuitive excuse/explanation where God gets to 'make up for evil later', but that will never remove the value of evil we know now nor alter the conclusion that given what we do know God is probably evil.

Like I said before, taking the atheistic, naturalistic perspective into account, if man has come into existence as theorized, and he lives, experiences, then dies (entering into non existence), how has anything he experienced remain meaningful? The only way evil and good can exist is if their is a consciousness that substantes it... and if No God exists, this means no consciousness exists beyond mans, which makes all emotions and excrescences from a humankind perspective equal to nothing.

So this means that the truth of an evil becomes erased once consciousness is gone from existence and God goes back to moving rocks around dead suns again? If you have truth you don't get to erase it, but you might get to forget about it. There's a difference. And that doesn't get God off of the hook.

But if God is the very consciousness that gives everything meaning (because He is always perceiving), and man has the ability to enter into this eternal/true consciousness (this being God's actual nature), then the evils experienced in life would hold new meaning. But even with this being said, said evils would be past tense and superseded by eternal good, this validating the "harsh" experience as perceived (with also gaining full knowledge of why said hardships occurred, and acknowledging that human life was simply a stair towards truer nature).

God as sadomasochist. 'Validation' becomes irrelevant or at least relative, and you're left with the good and evil experiences. If you were honest you would call this situation depraved at least. But in a way it is understandable, if not excusable. If you lived forever at some point you'd want to know what it was like to be on fire or a child scared and suffering, dying from cancer or seeing their parents cruelly killed by wild animals or in war...to see the tidal wave approach and know you're about to die.

God would be quite a thrill-seeker. No limits. A sadomasochist with no safe word.

In a way Eastern religions as I'm learning about them treat this as a universal principle of love. So it could be true that the universe is filled with a boundless love but it's entirely selfish. This makes it inevitable from a limited vantage point the conclusion is reached that it is evil/self-centered.

If you say God is responsible for human suffering, and He partakes/has a hand in that suffering because He gives all things life, than I would say that you are correct... but, just because He has created a world that allows suffering, doesn't make Him evil. And maybe according to mans definition this makes Him guilty for permitting of evil, but this doesn't make Him evil in and of Himself (because He knows things man doesn't, and He is the source of purpose itself). Besides this, no Christian thinks God is evil, so this just shows how your idea is not a widely held one anyway.

People have strong self-defense mechanisms shielding their awareness from painful truths, and in the way we're discussing God it stands to reason God also has these in order to further His malevolently thrill-seeking purposes.

[SteadyWayfarer]

If you guys don't take the Bible in its entirety, and if you don't understand it devoid of traditional errors, you will never see the clear picture. And this is the problem. Ecclesiastes, Job all end with what? Love God because He is the final solution. This answer is orders of magnitude better then live, eat, experience pleasure, suffer, die, life is meaningless the end.

1.) Why are you appealing to emotion. Your final sentence reaks one of "give me a comforting lie rather than the bare truth". Santa Claus providing every child with presents and riding with raindeer, sliding down chimneys and helping his elves in the North pole sounds magnitudes better than my family spending their hard earned money to pay for my gifts.

2.) Haven't read Ecclesiates yet, but you can't possibly condone the book of Job. How is "loving" God working alongside his evil buddy Satan in order to punish one of his greatest servants, Job, and killing off his innocent family commendable? Even worse, it was all for a pointless bet him and Satan made. Why didn't God kill Satan right there? How do you even justify this book of Job lol?

3.) Even if this God happens to exist, which takes a huge assumption, how is he worth worshiping and how can you even trust him?