Why does God permit evil????

@xris,

xris;121955 wrote:

Rightly so Alan, you cant have a god of contradictions. In my opinion if you want to believe in god he has to be logical. One of those three that describe this god has to be wrong. It might be how we describe god , or evil or that god is not as all powerful as we imagine. The question needs to be refined.

XRIS I wrote this brief article a few years ago during my ever struggle to find "God the Illusive One"

Perhaps god is a duality 1(evil) below dominance of death in nature

Life is sustained by death (evil god)

The main piece of evidence here is biological matter and the food chain. All life dies biological life decays, erodes, fades, and becomes diseased and ill if it does not sustain itself. To sustain itself nearly all life, except the least living elements of life, kills and eats other life. If not this, then it consumes biological matter at the expense of other living beings; the fight for food is also a case of living beings being required to outdo each other merely to survive.

If life was created, and not simply the result of undirected unconscious evolution (as seems sensible), this is surely the worst possible way to have created life. It appears very much that life cannot survive without causing suffering for other life.

A god could not have created a more vicious cycle if it tried: tying the very existence of life with the necessary killing of other life is the work of an evil genius, not of an all-powerful and all-loving god, that could choose if it wanted to sustain all life immediately and forever with manna from heaven. However, it seems such an all-powerful good god does not exist

"A god could not have created a more vicious cycle if it tried: tying the very existence of life with the necessary killing of other life is the work of an evil genius, not of an all-powerful and all-loving god "(maybe?)

Or

Alternatively, a good God created evil for a purpose we cannot comprehend.

On the other hand, evil comes from the creation (us) and not the creator. .I can't buy this as it makes god out as a imperfect fallible creator

On the other hand, there could be two fundamental gods. 1. = Evil dark hating vengeful unforgiving author of death (maybe called Satan or Devil.).

The God of my understanding should be a god of, goodness, mercy, forgiveness light hope and infinite love

On transgression or evil call it what you will, I definitely differentiate here. For example, a poor boy steals a loaf of bread for his starving family equated to the evil of a Hitler. Surely, a merciful God cannot view the consequences for these two transgressions in the same light.

Regards

Alan

1 Reply

@Amperage,

Amperage;121937 wrote:

I would say God allows the pain because of necessity. Also, I will point out that, no, pain is not intrinsically bad. Pain is intrinsically null/void at worst and good at best. When a lion kills and eats a zebra we do not say that the lion is evil or bad or any other negative connotation. There is no value to connotate to the situation at worst and it's a positive at best.

Not to mention that from our frame of reference we cannot know the scope of any given incident or situation. What may seem morally questionable in our frame of reference need not be so given a larger scope of the ramifications. (Think butterfly effect/chaos theory)

Here's a quote from another member of this site

Pain is intrinsically bad. It hurts! Anyone who could get the benefits (if any) that pain has, but without the pain, would choose to get the benefits without the pain. So if pain has any value, it is because of its extrinsic consequences. It itself, it hurts!

But I agree that it might be logically impossible for there to be the benefits of pain without pain. And that is why it is logically possible for a good and all powerful God to allow pain. And that is the answer to the logical problem of evil. But (a big "But") whether over and above being logically possible, it is even plausible that all evil is logically necessary evil, is a very different issue. What is just possible need not be true, nor even plausible. And that is the metaphysical problem of evil. Even if it is possible, is it true?

You have to distinguish between what is possible and what is actual.

1 Reply

@Alan McDougall,

They are nice thoughts Alan ,giving god the benefit of limited power but we are promised the end of evil ,when he will overcome its power. We have to then say, why then and not now? Is he certain minor god or is he the creator of everything?

I dont think we need concern ourselves with trying to describe this possible god, we might not need him or we might be god as an individual part of his consciousness. If we are , we have no need to examine the why and for what. It might all be our choice to live and experience. I often ask why do we need, why do we search for this illusive god ?

---------- Post added 01-23-2010 at 10:34 AM ----------

kennethamy;121978 wrote:

Pain is intrinsically bad. It hurts! Anyone who could get the benefits (if any) that pain has, but without the pain, would choose to get the benefits without the pain. So if pain has any value, it is because of its extrinsic consequences. It itself, it hurts!

But I agree that it might be logically impossible for there to be the benefits of pain without pain. And that is why it is logically possible for a good and all powerful God to allow pain. And that is the answer to the logical problem of evil. But (a big "But") whether over and above being logically possible, it is even plausible that all evil is logically necessary evil, is a very different issue. What is just possible need not be true, nor even plausible. And that is the metaphysical problem of evil. Even if it is possible, is it true?

You have to distinguish between what is possible and what is actual.

If it aint possible, stop calling it all powerful, either he is or he aint.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;121980 wrote:

They are nice thoughts Alan ,giving god the benefit of limited power but we are promised the end of evil ,when he will overcome its power. We have to then say, why then and not now? Is he certain minor god or is he the creator of everything?

I dont think we need concern ourselves with trying to describe this possible god, we might not need him or we might be god as an individual part of his consciousness. If we are , we have no need to examine the why and for what. It might all be our choice to live and experience. I often ask why do we need, why do we search for this illusive god ?

---------- Post added 01-23-2010 at 10:34 AM ----------

If it aint possible, stop calling it all powerful, either he is or he aint.

And you have to distinguish between what is logically possible and what is really possible. God cannot know that 2+5 =8. But that is not because his power to know is limited. It is because: (1) 2+5 does not equal 8, and (2) it is impossible to know what is false. The fact that it is impossible to know what is false does not limit God's power to know that 2+5=8. That 2+5=8 is not something that can possibly be known, since it is false. Ask yourself, why no one, not God, can know that 2+5=8. And give me the answer.

2 Replies

@kennethamy,

[CENTER] [/CENTER]

If God is omni benevolent and all-powerful, why is there evil and suffering?

If God is omnipotent (all-powerful, able to do anything), omni- benevolent (all loving) and omniscient (all knowing).

The problem is this: our world contains vast amounts of suffering, much of which seems either entirely unnecessary or unnecessarily severe. Although some of this is the result of evil human action, and thus may be seen as an inevitable consequence of human free will, much is not.

Plagues floods and famines and is not all the result of human action. Even the idea that human free will explains the existence of much suffering is hard to accept, since

God, if all-powerful, could He not have limited our capacity to harm others?
So why is there all this suffering? If God cannot prevent it, it would seem he is not all-powerful. If God does not want to stop it, it would seem he is not all loving. If God does not know about it, he cannot be all knowing.

Is God constrained by his goodness?

If God is omnipotent (all-powerful, able to do anything), omni- benevolent (all loving) and a perfectly free agent (Sovereign).
God could choose whatever he wants. Nothing could stop this because God is omnipotent. Nevertheless, if God is also all-loving. It seems that such a God could never choose to do something, which is unloving. It is not that God just chooses not to do such things, rather that God's nature as omni- benevolent constrains what he can do. In other words,

God does not have the freedom and/or the power to do something unloving, an if this is the case he can not be Sovereign

One possible response is that God is not necessarily omni- benevolent, but, in fact, since he never chooses to do something, which is unloving. However, if this is true, then how omni- benevolence can be a necessary characteristic of a God. Perhaps God can do literally anything. (Sovereign)

God the sustainer?

Is God the sustainer of all that is? This means that if God ceased to exist so would everything else.

It hard to model God on our universe. The laws of physics do not seem to require that the universe have anything outside of itself to continue to exist. Therefore, they can't quite see what kind of evidence it would be possible to point to in order to come to the belief that God is required for the universe to continue.

When they have previously confronted this problem, it has been suggested that a lawgiver or law-enforcer is required in order to sustain the laws of physics. But, this response seems to rest on a misunderstanding of the nature of physical laws.

Laws in the legal sense do require lawgivers and law-enforcers. Nevertheless, physical laws are simply descriptions of the nature of reality. Therefore, the idea that a lawgiver is needed to sustain the rules of physics seems to confuse the legal and scientific senses of laws.

The personal God

It is hard to understand how, God, one can have a personal relationship with him.
Personal relationships appear to depend on a number of things. Sufficient similarity between the persons in the relationship is one. Another is that both are persons or are, at least, person-like as some higher primates, for example appear to be. The problem is that in our universe there seem to be no genuine personal relationships between things of great difference. God is vastly different from human beings.

People can have feelings for things, which are similar to those, they have toward people. Affection or love for places or objects, for example, is common. However, this is not the same as having a personal relationship with them. In a similar way, people have relationships with animals, maybe a cat. Nevertheless, this does not seem to be the same as a personal relationship, because of the great difference in the way the person relates to the animal and the way the animal relates to the person. Perhaps this is the kind of relationship envisaged with God

Can God do the illogical?

What does one mean when they say God is able to do anything?
In the model, can God to make 2 + 2 = 5? (Where all the terms hold their common meanings). He could not do so and the model broke down. It seems that no being can ever do what is logically impossible. It is not just beyond the wit of humanity to make 2 + 2 = 5, such a thing is a contradiction in terms.

So to understand that an all-powerful that God can do anything is illogical. Before accepting this, however, you should understand that by accepting the limits of logical possibility on God, one must leave open the possibility that, if some characteristics attributed to God turn out to entail logical contradictions, it means, in effect, accepting that rationality is a constraint on God The bible says nothing is impossible with God. Could God destroy himself or could God make a rock too heavy for him to lift as examples?

Why did God create our universe?

If God is omnipotent (all-powerful, able to do anything), omni_ benevolent (all loving), omniscient (all knowing) and the creator of all that exists we run into a problem.

When your God created the universe, being all-knowing, he must have known about all the suffering there would be in this world. Yet God still created it, as it is. He did not create a more benign version of the universe, or simply choose not to create the universe. Why is this?

It could be that God did not know about all the suffering, which would occur. Nevertheless, that would make God not all knowing. It could be that God does not mind all the suffering, but that would make him less than all loving. It could be that God could not have created a more benign world than this one. However, that would seem to make God less than all-powerful. The only way we can resolve this problem is to conclude that God can only do what is possible and that this really is the best of all possible worlds.

The bible says nothing is impossible with God and I have approached these vexing problems with my own puny finite mind.

God exists eternally.

God exists through all space and time. However, according to our best physics, space and time exist only within the confines of a universe. This would seem to constrain God's existence to within a universe.

Maybe God exists "outside" space and time. It hard to understand what is meant by "eternally", if that is the case. The concept "eternally" requires some notion of time to make sense. I remain puzzled over these issues.

"Whatever our belief in God he must be infinitely smarter than the little microbes who live on a tiny dust particle in an unimportant part of the universe that call themselves humanity"

1 Reply

@Alan McDougall,

Alan McDougall;121990 wrote:

"Whatever our belief in God he must be infinitely smarter than the little microbes who live on a tiny dust particle in an unimportant part of the universe that call themselves humanity"

Now there's a really profound thought.
But, speak for yourself. I'm not a microbe.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;121983 wrote:

And you have to distinguish between what is logically possible and what is really possible. God cannot know that 2+5 =8. But that is not because his power to know is limited. It is because: (1) 2+5 does not equal 8, and (2) it is impossible to know what is false. The fact that it is impossible to know what is false does not limit God's power to know that 2+5=8. That 2+5=8 is not something that can possibly be known, since it is false. Ask yourself, why no one, not God, can know that 2+5=8. And give me the answer.

Do you suffer with verbal hiccups? How do you propose giving me additions that dont add up correctly give you any reason to believe that all powerful is not all powerful. You dont have to do silly sums to show me an all powerful god is an impossibility, just agree with me.

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;121995 wrote:

Now there's a really profound thought.
But, speak for yourself. I'm not a microbe.

You most definitely are when you compare yourself to the unimaginable vastness of the universe/God

0 Replies

@xris,

xris;122002 wrote:

Do you suffer with verbal hiccups? How do you propose giving me additions that dont add up correctly give you any reason to believe that all powerful is not all powerful. You dont have to do silly sums to show me an all powerful god is an impossibility, just agree with me.

No, I was proving something to you. But, I guess you don't understand the argument. It is logically impossible for God to know what is false; but that does not show that God is not all-powerful. So, the fact that God cannot do the logically impossible, does not show He is not all-powerful. QED.

1 Reply

@Alan McDougall,

Well in boxing a circle (ring) is a square

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;121978 wrote:

Pain is intrinsically bad. It hurts! Anyone who could get the benefits (if any) that pain has, but without the pain, would choose to get the benefits without the pain. So if pain has any value, it is because of its extrinsic consequences. It itself, it hurts!

But I agree that it might be logically impossible for there to be the benefits of pain without pain. And that is why it is logically possible for a good and all powerful God to allow pain. And that is the answer to the logical problem of evil. But (a big "But") whether over and above being logically possible, it is even plausible that all evil is logically necessary evil, is a very different issue. What is just possible need not be true, nor even plausible. And that is the metaphysical problem of evil. Even if it is possible, is it true?

You have to distinguish between what is possible and what is actual.

well I think that is not only logical it's probable. As I stated God created all things so that all things could know God. I can easily envision that in world with no suffering or hardship that less people would come to know God than in the one we live in.
Then if we compare that to the fact that the longer eternity lasts the less significant anything that happens here becomes. And the fact that if God's plan is to have creation know Him, that knowing Him becomes the fulfillment of life. Combining these things and using one of the tons of reasons why I think that God really does exist. I think it's not only logical but probable

1 Reply

@Amperage,

Amperage;122008 wrote:

well I think that is not only logical it's probable. As I stated God created all things so that all things could know God. I can easily envision that in world with no suffering or hardship that less people would come to know God than in the one we live in.
Then if we compare that to the fact that the longer eternity lasts the less significant anything that happens here becomes. And the fact that if God's plan is to have creation know Him, that knowing Him becomes the fulfillment of life. Combining these things and using one of the tons of reasons why I think that God really does exist. I think it's not only logical but probable

Probability is a function of evidence. What is the evidence?

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;122014 wrote:

Probability is a function of evidence. What is the evidence?

I could give numerous examples that shows that countries who endure the most suffering also have the biggest evangelical revolutions when compared to countries that don't.

1 Reply

@Amperage,

Amperage;122016 wrote:

I could give numerous examples that shows that countries who endure the most suffering also have the biggest evangelical revolutions when compared to countries that don't.

And what is that supposed to show?

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;122017 wrote:

And what is that supposed to show?

that if the purpose of life is to know God then more people will come to a knowledge of God through suffering than they would without it.

1 Reply

@Amperage,

Amperage;122018 wrote:

that if the purpose of life is to know God then more people will come to a knowledge of God through suffering than they would without it.

What if....... But what if not?

1 Reply

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;122020 wrote:

What if....... But what if not?

what else could there be? The greatest fulfillment(or positive) I can think of is knowledge of God thus the person who has knowledge of God can indeed say that God is good despite any external situation.

If one believes that God is indeed real. And logically it's possible. Then if one were to live the greatest worldly life of all time but lack a knowledge of God then the negatives of never knowing God or rejecting God would outweigh anything that could possibly be achieved in this life. And conversely if one were to live the roughest pain-riddled life possible but had a knowledge of God and lived in favor with God, then in comparison to eternity with God, any hardships on earth become infinitesimally small

0 Replies

@kennethamy,

kennethamy;122005 wrote:

No, I was proving something to you. But, I guess you don't understand the argument. It is logically impossible for God to know what is false; but that does not show that God is not all-powerful. So, the fact that God cannot do the logically impossible, does not show He is not all-powerful. QED.

You just dont get it do you....All powerful is a statement of fact, not to be diluted by supposed meaning...If you restricts ability then its not all powerful...Its not a powerful god or car that has limitations, its ALL POWERFUL.....

2 Replies

@xris,

xris;122023 wrote:

You just dont get it do you....All powerful is a statement of fact, not to be diluted by supposed meaning...If you restricts ability then its not all powerful...Its not a powerful god or car that has limitations, its ALL POWERFUL.....

well then if you want to say that God not being able to do what is logically impossible means He is not omnipotent then by your definition He is not omnipotent.
However I think you are missing the fundamental difference between between being able to do everything that can logically be done and things which cannot logically be done. God can do everything that can be done. However there are things that cannot be done. If you choose to take that to mean that God is not omnipotent then fine. I simply say God is omnipotent because He can do anything that can logically be done.

1 Reply

@xris,

xris;122023 wrote:

You just dont get it do you....All powerful is a statement of fact, not to be diluted by supposed meaning...If you restricts ability then its not all powerful...Its not a powerful god or car that has limitations, its ALL POWERFUL.....

Logical impossibility is not a limitation. Why cannot God know what is false? Is it that God is not smart enough? You have still to reply to that question. Try it. You might like it. At least, don't continue to repeat what has already been refuted. "All powerful" (even if you spell it with all caps) still means, "can do whatever can be done". It does not mean, "can do even what cannot be done". Make the distinction between what can be done, and what cannot be done, and you will be close to understanding what you do not understand.

0 Replies

Why does God permit evil????

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know