Free Will and the Problem of Evil

[Straw Dog]

I know the problem of evil has been done to death, but it's one of the strongest arguments against the belief in an all-loving, all-powerful, and all-knowing God. If you don't view God as having all three characteristics then the problem of evil would be nonexistent (see Zoroastrianism). It's also not a problem for me since I don't believe in God. I don't believe is complete free will either, but take a compatibilist position. Regardless, many believers do believe in free will and it's their domain in which I'm debating. This thread is just meant to address the most popular monotheistic solution to the problem of evil. It is argued that God is loving and benevolent, but that evil was a necessary component in order to create free will. Without evil, free will would not be possible.

I would argue that this position is flawed and it can be easily demonstrated to be so using common everyday examples. For instance, we freely make decisions all the time that have nothing to do with evil. We can choose to drink water or tea, we can choose to go to a movie with our friends or stay home and read a book, we can choose to donate blood or work in a soup kitchen for the poor, we can choose to take a walk in a forest or along the beach, etc, etc... and I just framed each of these as if there were only two options.

The point is that there are plenty of possible choices that we can make without the need for evil options to exist at all. Evil is not a necessary component for free will to exist. The question arises then that why wouldn't an all-loving God create the world in such a manner that only good or neutral options were available? If she were all-powerful and all-knowing, then there would be no excuse for allowing the existence of evil in the first place since free will could still be preserved.

And before someone says that it would be an incomplete free will without evil because it would be putting limitations on our options, it would seem that we already always have limitations on our options. I cannot choose to fly. I cannot choose to avoid death forever. I cannot choose to manipulate the laws of physics. I cannot choose a lot of different options due to natural limitations. We don't have totally free will to do anything anyway. Why wouldn't an all-loving God also put a limitation on our ability to make evil choices then? What is the value of evil that such a God would deem worthy of preserving?

 

[Straw Dog]

Hmm... I don't know. Perhaps this topic is boring and unoriginal. :thud:

 

[idav]

Evil would be going against gods will. If we have that ability god would have to allow it to happen which would make him an accomplise. If he wanted robots then we would do whatever he wants at the push of a button or by voice command.

 

[Straw Dog]

Evil would be going against gods will. If we have that ability god would have to allow it to happen which would make him an accomplise. If he wanted robots then we would do whatever he wants at the push of a button or by voice command.

Well, in a way we are biological machines. Why would God have to permit our ability to do evil? How does it prevent free will by limiting our options for evil? We already have many limitations on free will to begin with, why not put limitations that are actually beneficial to us if the God is benevolent?

 

[Pegg]

I would argue that this position is flawed and it can be easily demonstrated to be so using common everyday examples. For instance, we freely make decisions all the time that have nothing to do with evil.

The point is that there are plenty of possible choices that we can make without the need for evil options to exist at all. Evil is not a necessary component for free will to exist. The question arises then that why wouldn't an all-loving God create the world in such a manner that only good or neutral options were available? If she were all-powerful and all-knowing, then there would be no excuse for allowing the existence of evil in the first place since free will could still be preserved.

you are right, evil does not have to exist

if people stopped choosing to act in evil ways, then evil would not exist. But the problem is that mankind are driven to acts of evil by their own selfish desires.


The good news is that God will eventually do something about those people who choose to act in evil ways...he will evict them permanently so that they will not exist...then the problem of evil vanishes.

Psalm 37:10 And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more;
And you will certainly give attention to his place, and he will not be.
11 But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth,
And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace

 

[Chase200mph]

Evil would be going against gods will. If we have that ability god would have to allow it to happen which would make him an accomplise. If he wanted robots then we would do whatever he wants at the push of a button or by voice command.

Evil is stipulating a condition concerning the prospect of a gift of freewill which by nature and in text dictates no conditions and then punishing all for the stipulation of the condition claimed not to have existed in the first place….as it concerns the story of the Garden. Robots wouldn’t know the difference found in the story of creation, but a reasoning man would recognize them as contradiction, wouldn’t he. We’ve been over this already though haven’t we….how are you, best wishes from Jim <Predator> : )

 

[Chase200mph]

you are right, evil does not have to exist

if people stopped choosing to act in evil ways, then evil would not exist. But the problem is that mankind are driven to acts of evil by their own selfish desires.


The good news is that God will eventually do something about those people who choose to act in evil ways...he will evict them permanently so that they will not exist...then the problem of evil vanishes.

Psalm 37:10 And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more;
And you will certainly give attention to his place, and he will not be.
11 But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth,
And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace

The bad news is that some much evil is founded in your good news… shall we list them? For now I will skip the biblical listing and focus on ‘Historically Christianity’ as it is the worst offender concerning atrocities, this would be true of any religion had it been given the opportunities Christianity received mind you. We have the Inquisitions, Crusades, Witch hunts, Nazis, the conquest of the Americas….all this bloodshed, all this good news, all supported by the Church, all supported by the bible with somewhere between 20 and 50 million dead because of the peace and love of the one true god?
This is where most fall back on the apology “they were not real Christians”…. I’ll save anyone using this apology the embarrassment of using it and respond…of course they were! IF they were not, then the Church and creators of your bible are not real Christians as well which ends your faith right here and now. How could your belief in the bible still stand if everything you believe in it came from NOT Real Christians who handed the word and its interpretations down to you?
I’ve already put a lot on the plate, would you like to study the support in anything I claimed so far? If so, tell me what you would like sourced and I will gladly provide it for you….

 

[Straw Dog]

you are right, evil does not have to exist

if people stopped choosing to act in evil ways, then evil would not exist. But the problem is that mankind are driven to acts of evil by their own selfish desires.


The good news is that God will eventually do something about those people who choose to act in evil ways...he will evict them permanently so that they will not exist...then the problem of evil vanishes.

Psalm 37:10 And just a little while longer, and the wicked one will be no more;
And you will certainly give attention to his place, and he will not be.
11 But the meek ones themselves will possess the earth,
And they will indeed find their exquisite delight in the abundance of peace

I don't know about that. I have selfish desires to help other people I care for because it makes me feel good to do so and God is apparently altruistic yet permits natural disasters, diseases, floods, famine, earthquakes, and many more deadly cosmic phenomenon that constantly threatens our very existence and in which we have no control over with our free will.

You still haven't really answered anything in the OP. God has placed many natural limitations on our free will. For example, I cannot will the earth to grow sufficient food for starving people around the world. Permitting this exercise of free will would be a nice way of expressing my ethical convictions, not to mention prevent world hunger. Instead God permits us to commit all acts of evil that harm ourselves and others as well as what might be called "natural evil"? Surely an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving God can create a better testing ground for free will then the one we have with all its harmful limitations and permissible evils. What is the value of evil?

 

[not nom]

The bad news is that some much evil is founded in your good news… shall we list them? For now I will skip the biblical listing and focus on ‘Historically Christianity’

so you list bad things in the good news by skipping that and listing the actions of people who simply do what they do, and make up their excuses for it? and of course you get to define, soup kitches are not in the list.

This is where most fall back on the apology “they were not real Christians”…. I’ll save anyone using this apology the embarrassment of using it and respond…of course they were! IF they were not, then the Church and creators of your bible are not real Christians as well

wait, what? no, the "apology" is that those people didn't act peacefully and weren't meek. yes, by definition. if that makes them "real christians" or is another question, there are a lot of wildly differing definitions of that term.

but what did the *writers* of the bible have to do with it?

How could your belief in the bible still stand if everything you believe in it came from NOT Real Christians who handed the word and its interpretations down to you?

haha?!? so according to the definition in the bible of christians how you see it, NOBODY was a "real christian", so the bible is false -- what does that to your definition of christian, which is based on it?

I’ve already put a lot on the plate,

apart from that utter logic fail, you just repeated the obvious: there is evil. she said that already. yet you think you somehow proved her wrong? nah.

 

[not nom]

Surely an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving God can create a better testing ground for free will then the one we have with all its harmful limitations and permissible evils. What is the value of evil?

what do we know? time hasn't ended yet -- if the net result contains evil or not, we don't know that yet. if it doesn't, it will be as if there never was evil.

maybe it's on the background of that knowledge that god comes across as bragging a bit, and that's also where faith comes in.. god has been good to me, the world may suck in parts but it COULD be much worse, so that's enough for me to not assume malice. and if I can accept god being benevolent towards me, how could I think god would be malicious towards anyone? that doesn't say anything about who or what god really IS, just about how I feel about it. granted, I don't have a billion diseases and pain all my life. maybe it's easy for me to talk that way. but I'm human, I had my sorrows as well, and I still think god is good.

the other perspective is to say it could be better, so god is evil or kind of a looser... but based on what? it's not like there is a better universe somewhere and this one falls short in comparison. it just falls short in comparison with our imagination. so what...

it's not like humans are doing their best, but the world still sucks because god didn't make a better one. so I call BS on blaming god. as someone who loved doing that... "I don't understand this, your books SUCK!". I've mellowed a bit since then ^^

 

[Pegg]

The bad news is that some much evil is founded in your good news… shall we list them? For now I will skip the biblical listing and focus on ‘Historically Christianity’ as it is the worst offender concerning atrocities, this would be true of any religion had it been given the opportunities Christianity received mind you. We have the Inquisitions, Crusades, Witch hunts, Nazis, the conquest of the Americas….all this bloodshed, all this good news, all supported by the Church, all supported by the bible

not quite

the church has not represented the bible when it undertook such atrocities. You wont find anything in the NT which tells any christian to physically punish another, or go to war against enemies, or put people on trial for witchcraft

these are all the acts of people working for themselves...not for God.

IF they were not, then the Church and creators of your bible are not real Christians as well which ends your faith right here and now. How could your belief in the bible still stand if everything you believe in it came from NOT Real Christians who handed the word and its interpretations down to you?
I’ve already put a lot on the plate, would you like to study the support in anything I claimed so far? If so, tell me what you would like sourced and I will gladly provide it for you….

can you provide the references to the Greek scriptures stating that a christian should go on a crusade and kill non christians along the way? a scripture that says you should burn and torture a witch?

Show me where the Christian scriptures teach such things and I'll put the bible down right now and never look at it again.

 

[Straw Dog]

not quite

the church has not represented the bible when it undertook such atrocities. You wont find anything in the NT which tells any christian to physically punish another, or go to war against enemies, or put people on trial for witchcraft

these are all the acts of people working for themselves...not for God.

can you provide the references to the Greek scriptures stating that a christian should go on a crusade and kill non christians along the way? a scripture that says you should burn and torture a witch?

Show me where the Christian scriptures teach such things and I'll put the bible down right now and never look at it again.

Sorry about that other guy. What a meaningless distraction and over-generalization? As if it were actually conducive to the debate and discussion at hand.

 

[Straw Dog]

what do we know? time hasn't ended yet -- if the net result contains evil or not, we don't know that yet. if it doesn't, it will be as if there never was evil.

maybe it's on the background of that knowledge that god comes across as bragging a bit, and that's also where faith comes in.. god has been good to me, the world may suck in parts but it COULD be much worse, so that's enough for me to not assume malice. and if I can accept god being benevolent towards me, how could I think god would be malicious towards anyone? that doesn't say anything about who or what god really IS, just about how I feel about it. granted, I don't have a billion diseases and pain all my life. maybe it's easy for me to talk that way. but I'm human, I had my sorrows as well, and I still think god is good.

the other perspective is to say it could be better, so god is evil or kind of a looser... but based on what? it's not like there is a better universe somewhere and this one falls short in comparison. it just falls short in comparison with our imagination. so what...

it's not like humans are doing their best, but the world still sucks because god didn't make a better one. so I call BS on blaming god. as someone who loved doing that... "I don't understand this, your books SUCK!". I've mellowed a bit since then ^^

I'm not blaming your God. I'm not even a God believer. I'm just illustrating the incompatibility of believing in an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving God with the presence of unjustifiable evil. God could just be all-powerful and all-loving, but not know how to destroy evil. God could be all-knowing and all-loving, but not powerful enough to destroy evil. God could be all-powerful and all-knowing, but not wholly good. I'm also addressing 'evil' as it's commonly conceptualized in Western religions. Personally, I hold a different view of it. Also I'm for the refinement of God beliefs, not their abolition, hence I like to challenge theists.

I appreciate your optimism none the less.

 

[Pegg]

Sorry about that other guy. What a meaningless distraction and over-generalization? As if it were actually conducive to the debate and discussion at hand.

I can see how it does fit into this discussion, but the fact is that just because evil exists, does not mean that God causes it.

There is actually a very good reason why God has 'permitted' evil to occur. He could have stopped it before it began, but he chose not to in order to teach us a very valuable lesson.

 

[not nom]

I'm not blaming your God.

oh that was a bit of general rambling, don't take that personally I used to blame god a lot, and I guess I still tend to do it, and I often get to hear that "your god is evil for reasons X and Y", so those were my thoughts on that. my own answers to my own criticism of god and/or bible if you will, and I have plenty.. but I also try to give the benefit of doubt.

I appreciate your optimism none the less.

cheers, so do I I didn't come by it easily, I used to be.. more than skeptical, I was furious, and even that is a tame way to describe it. I'm still rebellious and investigative.. alas, god seems to be greater than all that. I don't trust easily, not when it comes to something like that, so you could say I had to kick god in the nuts first, several times, before I could begin to believe anything positive of it. too many people, too many doctrines... and the tao that can be spoken is not the true tao, is it

 

[Straw Dog]

...and the tao that can be spoken is not the true tao, is it

No, it isn't. And neither is the god that can be spoken of the one True God.

 

[Straw Dog]

I can see how it does fit into this discussion, but the fact is that just because evil exists, does not mean that God causes it.

There is actually a very good reason why God has 'permitted' evil to occur. He could have stopped it before it began, but he chose not to in order to teach us a very valuable lesson.

What lesson would that be?

 

[TheKnight]

I know the problem of evil has been done to death, but it's one of the strongest arguments against the belief in an all-loving, all-powerful, and all-knowing God. If you don't view God as having all three characteristics then the problem of evil would be nonexistent (see Zoroastrianism). It's also not a problem for me since I don't believe in God. I don't believe is complete free will either, but take a compatibilist position. Regardless, many believers do believe in free will and it's their domain in which I'm debating. This thread is just meant to address the most popular monotheistic solution to the problem of evil. It is argued that God is loving and benevolent, but that evil was a necessary component in order to create free will. Without evil, free will would not be possible.

I would argue that this position is flawed and it can be easily demonstrated to be so using common everyday examples. For instance, we freely make decisions all the time that have nothing to do with evil. We can choose to drink water or tea, we can choose to go to a movie with our friends or stay home and read a book, we can choose to donate blood or work in a soup kitchen for the poor, we can choose to take a walk in a forest or along the beach, etc, etc... and I just framed each of these as if there were only two options.

The point is that there are plenty of possible choices that we can make without the need for evil options to exist at all. Evil is not a necessary component for free will to exist. The question arises then that why wouldn't an all-loving God create the world in such a manner that only good or neutral options were available? If she were all-powerful and all-knowing, then there would be no excuse for allowing the existence of evil in the first place since free will could still be preserved.

And before someone says that it would be an incomplete free will without evil because it would be putting limitations on our options, it would seem that we already always have limitations on our options. I cannot choose to fly. I cannot choose to avoid death forever. I cannot choose to manipulate the laws of physics. I cannot choose a lot of different options due to natural limitations. We don't have totally free will to do anything anyway. Why wouldn't an all-loving God also put a limitation on our ability to make evil choices then? What is the value of evil that such a God would deem worthy of preserving?

Note: I don't believe in good and evil, so most of my position on this is for the sake of debate.


Before I begin to discuss the issue we must understand what is meant by free will. As a general rule, Judaism teaches that evil exists and that human beings have free will. That being said, I will try to look at this from a Jewish position (although because my personal opinion varies from the "official" understanding my post may not be accurately representative of the position that is generally held).

First we must understand by free will. Usually, what is meant by free will is moral free will. We do not believe that God wanted man to be able to choose to do anything he wants. That, of course, is a why we cannot fly without the use of machines, or read minds, or any of the other impossible things we may wish we could do.

That in mind, the most logical argument I've heard for the existence of evil for the sake of free will is as follows:

When someone asks the question "Can God create a stone so heavy that He cannot lift it?" the person creates a paradox attempting to trap the believer in an omnipotent God with an unsolvable solution. However, the question is not problematic for those of us who believe in an omnipotent God because the questioner has not described a logical action for God to complete. In the same way that we cannot completely comprehend the concept of a square circle (given that we have no existing reference point from which to learn) we cannot understand the concept of an omnipotent being creating something that would be beyond its power to affect.

Similarly, when it comes to moral free will, perhaps it is impossible to have moral free will without the ability to choose between moral alternatives. Thus, in order for us to truly have the ability to make choices freely when it comes to morality, we must have moral options to choose between.

Does that make sense? I could elaborate much more, but I'll stop here for now.

 

[ForeverFaithful]

The bad news is that some much evil is founded in your good news&#8230; shall we list them? For now I will skip the biblical listing and focus on &#8216;Historically Christianity&#8217; as it is the worst offender concerning atrocities, this would be true of any religion had it been given the opportunities Christianity received mind you. We have the Inquisitions, Crusades, Witch hunts, Nazis, the conquest of the Americas&#8230;.all this bloodshed, all this good news, all supported by the Church, all supported by the bible with somewhere between 20 and 50 million dead because of the peace and love of the one true god?
This is where most fall back on the apology &#8220;they were not real Christians&#8221;&#8230;. I&#8217;ll save anyone using this apology the embarrassment of using it and respond&#8230;of course they were! IF they were not, then the Church and creators of your bible are not real Christians as well which ends your faith right here and now. How could your belief in the bible still stand if everything you believe in it came from NOT Real Christians who handed the word and its interpretations down to you?
I&#8217;ve already put a lot on the plate, would you like to study the support in anything I claimed so far? If so, tell me what you would like sourced and I will gladly provide it for you&#8230;.

Matthew 7:
21 Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord," shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
22 Many will say to Me in that day, "Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?"
23 And then I will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness."

Martin Luther figured the same maybe the Church of Rome was handing down a altered version of the Word of God, so he went to the original Greek and Hebrew and wrote it in the vernacular, still the method used today. Hebrew being written by Israelis and the Greek being written mostly by Martyrs who I struggle to find any kind of evil you can attribute to.

The idea that Church support Nazism is flawed, Look into the Confessing Church, no they weren't perfect, but they opposed the Nazi Regime, The Vatican had it's own problems in Italy yet there was still anti-Nazi sermons from behind the pulpit. Yes the Nazi established a state church, but I do believe they held Mein Kampf as more inspired then the Bible, and believe that Christ, King of the Jews and Lion of the Tribe of Judah was not Jewish, That's not really Christianity. Crusades and Inquisitions where defensive wars! Muslim empires were growing and threating places Like Byzantium so the East called the West for help, Yes the Church got involved, but Western Civialition does not equal Christian Doctrine. The next 6 weren't nearly as meaningful, but some of them had nothing to do with Muslims such as the 4th Crusade, What do you gain from this bickering? Canada used to be one of the most anti-semetic countries in the Western World, now our Prime Minister is nuts about Israel, does that reflect the people in the Courty or the Country itself? I really don't understand your point. If I was a praticing Jew and I decided to have rital orgies on the Sabbath, does that make it an aspect of Juadism or is it an abuse of Juadism? Take any political ideology, any religious ideology or even lack there of and then think that bit over.

Now I'm getting all huffed up I mean this only because of my frustration, you have every right to believe Christianity is a horrible thing here on Earth if it suits your fancy but I'd rather you look into it a bit more.

To go back to the orginal post I'll have to say I don't believe evil exists, it is merely the absence of good. It is vital in free will in relation to a diety that we be able to do what that diety doesn't want us to do, by defetion evil, though it is only the absence of divine will that creates that situation

 

[Straw Dog]

That in mind, the most logical argument I've heard for the existence of evil for the sake of free will is as follows:

When someone asks the question "Can God create a stone so heavy that He cannot lift it?" the person creates a paradox attempting to trap the believer in an omnipotent God with an unsolvable solution. However, the question is not problematic for those of us who believe in an omnipotent God because the questioner has not described a logical action for God to complete. In the same way that we cannot completely comprehend the concept of a square circle (given that we have no existing reference point from which to learn) we cannot understand the concept of an omnipotent being creating something that would be beyond its power to affect.

Similarly, when it comes to moral free will, perhaps it is impossible to have moral free will without the ability to choose between moral alternatives. Thus, in order for us to truly have the ability to make choices freely when it comes to morality, we must have moral options to choose between.

I don't believe that I created a paradox. I was just addressing one that has already been made: that an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving deity refuses to prevent evil.

So the value here is not in our ability to choose the paths we take in life, but just the moral decisions we make? How valuable is this moral training we're being put through? At what cost?

For example, let's examine the case of rape. Are you saying that God values moral free will so much that he respects the rapist's right more than the victim's right to not be raped? I fail to see why God could not allow the rapist to make his moral decision to commit the act, but then intervene to protect the victim from having her rights violated. That way, the man can be judged for his evil choice without the effects of that choice causing unnecessary harm to the woman. What's the value of the evil act itself? The man has already made his choice and God would know the conviction in his heart.

There's also the problem of "natural evil". Earthquakes, famine, diseases, hurricanes, tsunamis, cancer, life perpetuating itself by killing and eating other life, etc, etc... all things in which human beings have no real control over nor free choice in.