Why does God permit evil????

The concept of god does not describe a particular god, there are thousands of descriptions. We are not debating a god who is bad or is not all powerful, we are debating a god who is all powerful, good but allows evil. This to me is illogical, this invention of a particular god is not logical....If he was all powerful he could invent a world where evil is not a necessity ,where we are all perfect. We could all go straight to heaven with the installation of these lessons incorporated into our psyche. To have an all powerful god , good and permitting evil is not logical.

---------- Post added 01-16-2010 at 10:51 AM ----------

You have to contradict yourself to qualify this statement.

I though we were talking about the concept of God, not of gods. Namely the particular concept of God of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. And you keep on saying that a good and powerful God who allows evil is contradictory, when I have shown you that it is not contradictory.

You have to contradict yourself to qualify this statement.

What do you mean by that? You are sometimes very mysterious. What is the "contradiction" now (sigh). You see contradictions the way other people see ghosts.

you are starting to understand my reasoning, you are becoming aware of the invented god we are debating.

Imagine your this god..good ..benevolent ...all powerful...Now just try creating an existance without evil. If you cant, I can. Remember you can do exactly what you wish, you are good and you have limitless power.

I never asserted that God existed, if that is what you mean. But, on the other hand, neither have I asserted that God does not exist. So, I don't know whether or not God is, as you call Him, "invented".

Yes, I suppose you mean by "your god" "you're god" (am I right)? Anyway, I can imagine I am God, and I, indeed can created a world without evil. However, it is impossible for me to create a maximally good world without evil. So, the question before me is whether to create a world without evil, or whether to create a maximally good world with evil. And, as a good God, I would create the maximally good world which has evil in it, rather than a world less good with no evil in it. What I could not do, however, is to create a maximally good world without any evil. For that would be "illogical", and God cannot create the "illogical".

Please stop waffling and get down to the task I set you. If you cant do it just accept it.

What task is that? If I were God, could a make a world without evil? Yes I could. Could I make a world without evil which is as good a world as a world with evil? No I couldn't. No waffle, or even pancakes.

I never asserted that God existed, if that is what you mean. But, on the other hand, neither have I asserted that God does not exist. So, I don't know whether or not God is, as you call Him, "invented".

Yes, I suppose you mean by "your god" "you're god" (am I right)? Anyway, I can imagine I am God, and I, indeed can created a world without evil. However, it is impossible for me to create a maximally good world without evil. So, the question before me is whether to create a world without evil, or whether to create a maximally good world with evil. And, as a good God, I would create the maximally good world which has evil in it, rather than a world less good with no evil in it. What I could not do, however, is to create a maximally good world without any evil. For that would be "illogical", and God cannot create the "illogical".

So you are saying you cant or you have not enough power? just a world without evil, no comparisons...

What do you believe a "Maximally good world" is?

No, God can create a world without evil. (I have said that twice) but to do so would conflict with His goodness. If you want me to say it a fourth time, here is goes. God can create a world without evil, but then He would not be all-good. And the reason for that is that he could create a better world which would contain evil. Got it now? Therefore, it would be "illogical" (as you would say) for an all good, and all powerful God to create a world without evil. Any questions?

A world with as much good in it compatible with the minimal amount of evil. Liebniz (along with Newton) invented the calculus. In calculus there is something called a minimax problem. Leibniz's solution to the problem of evil takes the form of a solution to a minimax problem: what is the greatest amount of good possible with the minimum amount of evil possible? God, the great mathematician, can give a solution to this greatest of all minimax problems. And, His solution is the actual world, since any other possible world would contain less good than necessary, or more evil then necessary. Therefore, this world is the best of all possible worlds. The maximally best possible world.

Then you are admitting your failings, not a god who can create a world that has no evil and is good. A good god would provide a world that is perfect for his creation. Im not talking of your imperfect reasoning but a god who can do anything, create a world that satisfies my logic not your doubts about what is possible.

But even God cannot do what is logically impossible, so He cannot create a world as good as the actual world without the world containing evil necessary for the best of all possible worlds. You see, a perfect world is not a world without evil. A perfect world is a world with the least amount of evil necessary for the greatest amount of good. And that is this world. You must stop believing that a perfect world would be a world without any evil in it.

As I said you admit your failings not a perfect gods. if it conceivable by I, then Im sure it is for this god.

I cannot understand that sentence. What does it mean? It is certainly not English.

If you cant conceive of this god then its not logical. You have informed yourself.

A world with as much good in it compatible with the minimal amount of evil. Leibniz (along with Newton) invented the calculus. In calculus there is something called a minimax problem. Leibniz's solution to the problem of evil takes the form of a solution to a minimax problem: what is the greatest amount of good possible with the minimum amount of evil possible? God, the great mathematician, can give a solution to this greatest of all minimax problems. And, His solution is the actual world, since any other possible world would contain less good than necessary, or more evil then necessary. Therefore, this world is the best of all possible worlds. The maximally best possible world.

This raises all sorts of questions:

1. How does one quantify good and evil? Is the extreme suffering of one person more or less evil than the mild suffering of a hundred people? Are good and evil commensurable?

2. Is it rational to aggregate the pleasure and/or pain of different people, given that an individual can only experience his/her own pleasure or pain?

3. Can it be proved that eliminating evil entirely would reduce the amount of good? Or is this just an assumption? And even if it would reduce it, why does that matter? Shouldn't the elimination of evil be the top priority? To my mind, "perfect" means "flawless", so God should get rid of the flaws at all costs. If this reduces the total amount of goodness (whatever that may mean), so be it. A wonderfully good world where hardly anyone is in pain will be no good to you if you're one of the few in pain.

You are raising a different issue. You are raising the issue of whether it is in fact true that this is the best of all possible worlds. That is a metaphysical question. I really don't know what the answer is, but I suspect it is, no. But, as I have argued over and over again, that is not the question. The question is whether it is logically possible that an all good and powerful God has created the best of all possible worlds, namely this one. And, it seems the answer is, yes. It is logically possible.

What god can I not conceive of? Sorry, still have no idea what you are talking about. Take a breath, and start again. (What does "you have informed yourself" mean?)

Is it logically possible?
Without death there would be no appreciation for life?
Without sickness there would be no appreciation for health?
Without hunger no appreciation for plenty?
Without cold no appreciation for warmth?
Yes it is logically possible that a world with no suffering and no evil might be less "good" or at least meaningful overall than a world with such contrasts.
This is similar to the discussion one gets about the nature of "heaven".

Is it comprehensible to humans that
The millions who have died from pestilence, famine, and war were necessary to produce this appreciation for the "good" or to give "meaning" in the struggle to exist.
I submit it is not.

The religious problem (the metaphysical problem if you prefer) is to formulate a conception of god that is not in conflict with science and not in conflict with our experience of "evil and suffering" in the world. The problem of Evil and suffering is ancient. The most direct Biblical discussion of evil is the Book of Job. The philosophical solution to the formal problem of evil as promoted by Kennemathy is the Leibniz offering. The problem of science is in religious terms relatively recent.

I submit the conception of god developed by the medieval scholastics a fusion of Greek philosophy notions of perfection (eternal, changeless, omnipotence, omniscient and omnipresence) and of Hebrew notions of deity (ruler, lawgiver, judge, anthropomorphic and personal) is not adequate to both what science tells us about the world and to the extent of evil and suffering in the world in the age of modern technological warfare.

When the common conception was of a young earth, special creation, fixity of species, a three story universe (heaven, earth, the underworld), the earth as the center of the universe, man as the crown of creation, the entire universe as the stage for the cosmic drama of creation, fall and redemption; the traditional orthodox conception of a supernatural, anthropomorphic god might have been coherent with the overall worldview. I submit that in the modern age the traditional problem of evil fairly misses the point that the traditional (omnipotent, omniscient, anthropomorphic, supernatural) god of the traditional problem of evil is no longer coherent with our modern worldview to start with. The current problem is not the ancient problem and the solutions of both Job and Leibniz fail to solve the real dilemma of god and evil in the modern age. The problem of evil is not merely a problem in logic it is a religious problem regarding a coherent vision of god in the age of reason, enlightenment, and science.

God does not "permit" evil, the question arises from a failed and flawed conception of what god is and how god acts in the first place. The notion that god "saves" some and "forsakes others", that god "permits" The world wars, the holocaust, the child with leukemia is a flawed and dangerous religious conception best abandoned entirely.
.

I
God does not "permit" evil, the question arises from a failed and flawed conception of what god is and how god acts in the first place.
.