The problem with term "evil" is that it can be looked from different perspective. When planes crashed to WTC literally hundreds of millions of people were celebrating in joy because "evil" was struck in its heart. For us "evil" struck us without apparent reason. I dont use term evil because it severly depends on the point of view. This is absolutely clear.
When one thinks about how harsh jungle environment works and one knows a bit about biology - pure torment is happening every instant.
God is Spirit Virtue.He was never Spirit without Virtue or Virtue without Spirit.If any man has a virtue or a attribute outside of God's Virtue or attribute God is suspended and his self existing Life has ceased.God has created evil by knowledge not to give morality but Christ superior to all morality.Hence, God is not moral but fruit of the Spirit Virtue.Christ satisfied more than law when dying but the goodness of God to be imputed.
If you understand what evil and good really are, then you'll understand the quote more fully. Since evil and good are derivatives of function, the only sensible thing to say is that if one creates anything, he has created good and evil simultaneously. i.e.- I create a knife to cut bread with (good), but I use it to kill my neighbor (evil). See? the moment I create, I've created every possibility that my creation can assume.
God is not forced to be good; his omnipotence allows him to strip us of our free-will; his benevolence enables him to allow us freedom to be thinking things like he is a thinking thing. He wants us to be like him; he doesn't want to think for us.
I don't quite understand--is your argument "The christian god causes millions of people to starve to death in Ethiopia in order to cause the number of protestants to grow from 0.8 to 13 percent of the population---therefore there is no problem of evil?" For me, the existence of evil posses no problem for the existence of God, it just poses a problem for the existence of a non-evil God. (cont)
(cont, to telemantros) For example, if a king wanted to imposes worship of himself on some country, and he managed to starve and kill enough people in that country that they finally surrendered and started worshiping him, would that indicate that the Kind was good or was evil? So why wouldn't we hold an omnipotent God to an even higher moral standard?
Don't you think there's a difference between God's permitting an action and God's causing an action? There seems to be a clear difference between the two.
Hi legodesi, think about it this way: suppose my son starts beating my daughter. I'm strong enough to stop my son, but don't, I just let him keep beating my daughter. Eventually, my son beats my daughter to death, while I'm there just watching. Now, am I 100% guilt free of my daughter's death? Can I just say that there is a clear difference between permitting an action and causing an action, therefore, I'm still a righteous parent? Of course not, (cont)
(cont, to legodesi) So if I, as a sinful human, know that I should intervene to stop my son from killing my daughter, why shouldn't god know that he should keep his children from killing each other too? I don't understand how God could be just and let the stuff happen here that he does.
Randy, suppose God did do that for every occasion someone hits another person. Suppose, in fact, that he intervened before any event of evil took place. Is it enough to prevent us from acting on evil, but allow us to think evil thoughts? No, because that would still leave plenty evil in the world, in people's minds. So God would have to prevent every evil thought from occurring as well. It's not just preventing children from killing each other. It's either everything or nothing, right?
Which is more desirable: God inviting us to follow him and enabling us by his Spirit to live better and freer lives but allowing people to do what they want ultimately and make their own choices, or God preventing every occurence of evil from happening, including those evils that come in the form of ideas and concepts?
Hi legodesi, Yes, when it comes to God, its everything or nothing. God should prevent all the evil he can prevent, just the same as I should prevent all the evil I can prevent. When it comes to thoughts, I don't understand what you mean: are you saying that God can't control our thoughts (in which case, God is not omnipotent) or that God just lets us think evil thoughts (in which case he is guilty of letting evil exist).
Yes, I think God is capable of controlling our thoughts. I only asked if this is desirable to you. The Christian believes that free-will is in and of itself a moral virtue; it empowers an individual to make meaningful choices. Enabling us to make moral choices is morally good. That is why we think God permits all, because the best possible world is one which includes free-will, such that the best possible world is one which includes the possibility of evil.
Hi leogesi, yes, its desirable to me that God would use his control of the thoughts of criminals to prevent them from hurting me!! What's more, it would be great if God would help me control my own evil thoughts, when I was a christian I prayed all the time that he would, and I'll bet you do too. As for whether free will is a moral virtue or not, I'd just point out that most christians since augustine have held that it is not. Free-will defenses of God are relatively recent, (cont)
(cont, to leogesi) and I don't really think they work. First of all, if it really is morally good that God lets us exercise free will, that means that god (being morally good) is incapable of preventing us from exercising our free will. Otherwise, we're back to an evil god again. So suppose we have a good God, who lets us exercise our free will. Then we do not have an omnipotent god--god is literally powerless to help us against the murderers and rapists, because god would be (cont)
(cont, to leogesi) God would be sinning if he prevented a murderer from freely choosing to kill me. So we have a good god which is powerless to help us. The problem of evil isn't how can we have a good god and a world of evil, the problem of evil is how can we have an omnipotent god who is also a good god? We have to choose either a good god who is powerless to help, or a god who is strong enough to help but who is evil and does bad things to us.
God doesn't intervene because of a lack of omnipotence on his part. He doesn't intervene because he desires the best possible world for us, and that world is one that allows us to make meaningful choices.
Even if the person who doesn't perform his intentions will be stopped from thinking those thoughts. I suppose then we just have to disagree at that point. I think it's a good thing that we can make meaningful choices and not be dominated by God.
More accrately, I'm saying that the best of possible worlds is one in which we make choices that we are responsible for. It is overall better that we make good choices and be rewarded for them than only do them because God made us do them.
See video (2) for the logical consistency between a benevolent God and evil.
My point about the influx of belief amid evil is that it seems that far from squelching belief as some would purport, evil increases belief and trust (this being dependent on the reaction of the particular people).
In other words as I said in the video, "Christian theology entails doctrines that increase the probability of coexisting evil and a creator God." Remember we are talking probability in this video.
Hi telemantros, I'm not (here anyways) saying that evil is inconsistent with a god, what I'm trying to do is understand your argument. Christian doctrines do more than increase the probability of evil coexisting with God-- if christian doctrines are true, then the probability of God coexisting with evil is 100%. But so what? If I don't think that an omnipotent good god would let evil exist in the world, why shouldn't I just say this proves that christian doctrine is wrong?
Hey randy. I fee like this sentence is of importance: "If I don't think that an omnipotent good god would let evil exist in the world, why shouldn't I just say this proves that christian doctrine is wrong?"
In order to make sure I'm understanding it correctly you aren't suggesting a logical inconsistency here? I suppose it could be a evidentialist argument, but saying a good and powerful God wouldn't allow evil to exist seems a lot more like the argument against god's nature. Peace.
Well telemantros, the contradiction lies in that these three concepts are mutually exlusive: (1) an all-powerful god, a god that can do anything, (2) a righteous god, one which does not do evil, either through commission or omission, and (3) the existence of evil. Number (3) clearly holds, so you have to give up on (1) or (2). (cont)
(cont, to telemantros) Either God is all powerful (in which case he SHOULD prevent evil, just like I should prevent the evil which I can prevent) or he is evil (just like I would be evil if I let somebody die if I could have prevented it). Really, there's no escaping it, either God is not all powerful, or he is evil.
Ok this clarifies your position for me thank you. I've answered this objection in video 2 "The Problem of Evil: Logical Inconsistency."
This video is dealing with the probability argument and wasn't addressing the forseen logical inconsistency that you raise. See video 2 friend, peace.
No, you turn this around. I suspect (I'm not sure) that wishfull thinking lead to this full picture of evidence. Remember, you are still talking about things that can't be tested, and that opens the door for a whole lot of religious bs. The human mind is capable of believing almost anything; just look around and realise that you are human too.
I'd argue that it's not wishful thinking jnoort but the proper way to come to a accurate probability as I explained in my example about rain and drought in the video.
We have suggested evidences via logical deduction which necessarily follow from the premises. These can be therefore, proven via logic if their are sound.
Look, it's not something I can prove. It's just the way I look at this as a nonbeliever.
I too am human, and I am interested in God and religion, simply because I am human. The problem is that when you allow your mind to be open for things that you can't be 100% certain about, it opens the door for all kinds of things. And that's where you have to be careful. That's where you start talking in terms of probabilities that I really don't get.
The problem with term "evil" is that it can be looked from different perspective. When planes crashed to WTC literally hundreds of millions of people were celebrating in joy because "evil" was struck in its heart. For us "evil" struck us without apparent reason. I dont use term evil because it severly depends on the point of view. This is absolutely clear.
When one thinks about how harsh jungle environment works and one knows a bit about biology - pure torment is happening every instant.
J0EH3AD 1 year ago
God is Spirit Virtue.He was never Spirit without Virtue or Virtue without Spirit.If any man has a virtue or a attribute outside of God's Virtue or attribute God is suspended and his self existing Life has ceased.God has created evil by knowledge not to give morality but Christ superior to all morality.Hence, God is not moral but fruit of the Spirit Virtue.Christ satisfied more than law when dying but the goodness of God to be imputed.
polopowers1 2 years ago
@polopowers1 Blessed are weakminded for theirs is kingdom of heaven. You are truly blessed.
J0EH3AD 1 year ago
I bet you didn't know about this verse:
Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.
Perrine234 2 years ago
If you understand what evil and good really are, then you'll understand the quote more fully. Since evil and good are derivatives of function, the only sensible thing to say is that if one creates anything, he has created good and evil simultaneously. i.e.- I create a knife to cut bread with (good), but I use it to kill my neighbor (evil). See? the moment I create, I've created every possibility that my creation can assume.
gambleor 2 years ago 2
God is not forced to be good; his omnipotence allows him to strip us of our free-will; his benevolence enables him to allow us freedom to be thinking things like he is a thinking thing. He wants us to be like him; he doesn't want to think for us.
legodesi 2 years ago
thanx for this! You're awesome!
lamase24 2 years ago
I don't quite understand--is your argument "The christian god causes millions of people to starve to death in Ethiopia in order to cause the number of protestants to grow from 0.8 to 13 percent of the population---therefore there is no problem of evil?" For me, the existence of evil posses no problem for the existence of God, it just poses a problem for the existence of a non-evil God. (cont)
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
(cont, to telemantros) For example, if a king wanted to imposes worship of himself on some country, and he managed to starve and kill enough people in that country that they finally surrendered and started worshiping him, would that indicate that the Kind was good or was evil? So why wouldn't we hold an omnipotent God to an even higher moral standard?
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
Don't you think there's a difference between God's permitting an action and God's causing an action? There seems to be a clear difference between the two.
legodesi 2 years ago
Hi legodesi, think about it this way: suppose my son starts beating my daughter. I'm strong enough to stop my son, but don't, I just let him keep beating my daughter. Eventually, my son beats my daughter to death, while I'm there just watching. Now, am I 100% guilt free of my daughter's death? Can I just say that there is a clear difference between permitting an action and causing an action, therefore, I'm still a righteous parent? Of course not, (cont)
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
(cont, to legodesi) So if I, as a sinful human, know that I should intervene to stop my son from killing my daughter, why shouldn't god know that he should keep his children from killing each other too? I don't understand how God could be just and let the stuff happen here that he does.
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
Randy, suppose God did do that for every occasion someone hits another person. Suppose, in fact, that he intervened before any event of evil took place. Is it enough to prevent us from acting on evil, but allow us to think evil thoughts? No, because that would still leave plenty evil in the world, in people's minds. So God would have to prevent every evil thought from occurring as well. It's not just preventing children from killing each other. It's either everything or nothing, right?
legodesi 2 years ago
Which is more desirable: God inviting us to follow him and enabling us by his Spirit to live better and freer lives but allowing people to do what they want ultimately and make their own choices, or God preventing every occurence of evil from happening, including those evils that come in the form of ideas and concepts?
legodesi 2 years ago
Hi legodesi, Yes, when it comes to God, its everything or nothing. God should prevent all the evil he can prevent, just the same as I should prevent all the evil I can prevent. When it comes to thoughts, I don't understand what you mean: are you saying that God can't control our thoughts (in which case, God is not omnipotent) or that God just lets us think evil thoughts (in which case he is guilty of letting evil exist).
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
Yes, I think God is capable of controlling our thoughts. I only asked if this is desirable to you. The Christian believes that free-will is in and of itself a moral virtue; it empowers an individual to make meaningful choices. Enabling us to make moral choices is morally good. That is why we think God permits all, because the best possible world is one which includes free-will, such that the best possible world is one which includes the possibility of evil.
legodesi 2 years ago
Hi leogesi, yes, its desirable to me that God would use his control of the thoughts of criminals to prevent them from hurting me!! What's more, it would be great if God would help me control my own evil thoughts, when I was a christian I prayed all the time that he would, and I'll bet you do too. As for whether free will is a moral virtue or not, I'd just point out that most christians since augustine have held that it is not. Free-will defenses of God are relatively recent, (cont)
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
(cont, to leogesi) and I don't really think they work. First of all, if it really is morally good that God lets us exercise free will, that means that god (being morally good) is incapable of preventing us from exercising our free will. Otherwise, we're back to an evil god again. So suppose we have a good God, who lets us exercise our free will. Then we do not have an omnipotent god--god is literally powerless to help us against the murderers and rapists, because god would be (cont)
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
(cont, to leogesi) God would be sinning if he prevented a murderer from freely choosing to kill me. So we have a good god which is powerless to help us. The problem of evil isn't how can we have a good god and a world of evil, the problem of evil is how can we have an omnipotent god who is also a good god? We have to choose either a good god who is powerless to help, or a god who is strong enough to help but who is evil and does bad things to us.
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
God doesn't intervene because of a lack of omnipotence on his part. He doesn't intervene because he desires the best possible world for us, and that world is one that allows us to make meaningful choices.
Even if the person who doesn't perform his intentions will be stopped from thinking those thoughts. I suppose then we just have to disagree at that point. I think it's a good thing that we can make meaningful choices and not be dominated by God.
legodesi 2 years ago
Hi legodesi, I don't get it. Are you saying that because God doesn't want to control our thoughts, he might as well let us kill each other?
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
More accrately, I'm saying that the best of possible worlds is one in which we make choices that we are responsible for. It is overall better that we make good choices and be rewarded for them than only do them because God made us do them.
legodesi 2 years ago
Do you really believe that we are living in the best of all possible worlds???
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
See video (2) for the logical consistency between a benevolent God and evil.
My point about the influx of belief amid evil is that it seems that far from squelching belief as some would purport, evil increases belief and trust (this being dependent on the reaction of the particular people).
In other words as I said in the video, "Christian theology entails doctrines that increase the probability of coexisting evil and a creator God." Remember we are talking probability in this video.
telemantros 2 years ago
Hi telemantros, I'm not (here anyways) saying that evil is inconsistent with a god, what I'm trying to do is understand your argument. Christian doctrines do more than increase the probability of evil coexisting with God-- if christian doctrines are true, then the probability of God coexisting with evil is 100%. But so what? If I don't think that an omnipotent good god would let evil exist in the world, why shouldn't I just say this proves that christian doctrine is wrong?
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
Hey randy. I fee like this sentence is of importance: "If I don't think that an omnipotent good god would let evil exist in the world, why shouldn't I just say this proves that christian doctrine is wrong?"
In order to make sure I'm understanding it correctly you aren't suggesting a logical inconsistency here? I suppose it could be a evidentialist argument, but saying a good and powerful God wouldn't allow evil to exist seems a lot more like the argument against god's nature. Peace.
telemantros 2 years ago
Well telemantros, the contradiction lies in that these three concepts are mutually exlusive: (1) an all-powerful god, a god that can do anything, (2) a righteous god, one which does not do evil, either through commission or omission, and (3) the existence of evil. Number (3) clearly holds, so you have to give up on (1) or (2). (cont)
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
(cont, to telemantros) Either God is all powerful (in which case he SHOULD prevent evil, just like I should prevent the evil which I can prevent) or he is evil (just like I would be evil if I let somebody die if I could have prevented it). Really, there's no escaping it, either God is not all powerful, or he is evil.
randyhelzerman 2 years ago
Ok this clarifies your position for me thank you. I've answered this objection in video 2 "The Problem of Evil: Logical Inconsistency."
This video is dealing with the probability argument and wasn't addressing the forseen logical inconsistency that you raise. See video 2 friend, peace.
telemantros 2 years ago
If there wwere no hardships there would be no need for God. Thank you.
hellavadeal 2 years ago
God and evil, in the objective sense, can only exist if there IS a God.
BassP86 2 years ago
Sounds to me like a bunch of wishful thinking.
jnoort 2 years ago
Jnoort, to avoid a assertion on your part, in what does taking into account the full picture of evidence (let's call it the context)
lead to 'wishful thinking'?
telemantros 2 years ago
No, you turn this around. I suspect (I'm not sure) that wishfull thinking lead to this full picture of evidence. Remember, you are still talking about things that can't be tested, and that opens the door for a whole lot of religious bs. The human mind is capable of believing almost anything; just look around and realise that you are human too.
jnoort 2 years ago
I'd argue that it's not wishful thinking jnoort but the proper way to come to a accurate probability as I explained in my example about rain and drought in the video.
We have suggested evidences via logical deduction which necessarily follow from the premises. These can be therefore, proven via logic if their are sound.
telemantros 2 years ago
Look, it's not something I can prove. It's just the way I look at this as a nonbeliever.
I too am human, and I am interested in God and religion, simply because I am human. The problem is that when you allow your mind to be open for things that you can't be 100% certain about, it opens the door for all kinds of things. And that's where you have to be careful. That's where you start talking in terms of probabilities that I really don't get.
jnoort 2 years ago
Well said/done. Made alot of really good points. Can't wait to see the rest.
Xaulted 2 years ago
You da man, Telemantros!
theman77777777232 2 years ago
Wow you went all out with this series!
Veritas48 2 years ago 3