How do Abrahamic faiths tackle the problem of evil?

[MD]

There is no evil in existence only good. According to the Baha'i teachings God created only good. This is very clear. For instance. There is no such thing as darkness. Darkness is the absence of light. What we call evil is the absence of good.

http://reference.bahai.org/en/t/ab/SAQ/saq-75.html

If God is all good, and God is everywhere, then there cannot be an absence of goodness nor God. Darkness is an absence of light, but that means light isn't the only property of the universe. If evil is the absence of God, then there are forces that exist outside of God.

 

[loverofhumanity]

If God is all good, and God is everywhere, then there cannot be an absence of goodness nor God. Darkness is an absence of light, but that means light isn't the only property of the universe. If evil is the absence of God, then there are forces that exist outside of God.

Evil does not exist at all not anywhere not outside God. Everything God created was good. Light exists, darkness does not. Ignorance is the lack of knowledge. Existence is good and positive. There is no such thing as a negative existence.

 

[MD]

Evil does not exist at all not anywhere not outside God. Everything God created was good. Light exists, darkness does not. Ignorance is the lack of knowledge. Existence is good and positive. There is no such thing as a negative existence.

Did God create everything?

 

[loverofhumanity]

Did God create everything?

He only created good. For instance He didn't create wars or the terrorist or the murderer or liar. These things are people's choices not God's. A child is born pure, good and innocent and free from any evil. If, through wrong education it grows and develops into a person committing evil then that is not because it was created evil but because it acquired ways that were so far away from good that we term it evil.

 

[MD]

He only created good. For instance He didn't create wars or the terrorist or the murderer or liar. These things are people's choices not God's. A child is born pure, good and innocent and free from any evil. If, through wrong education it grows and develops into a person committing evil then that is not because it was created evil but because it acquired ways that were so far away from good that we term it evil.

So who created all the bad things then?

 

[loverofhumanity]

So who created all the bad things then?

Only good comes from God. God does not create evil or commit evil, we do.

 

[randomvim]

I'm not necessarily saying suffering is evil. I'm saying that if evil exists then it's logically impossible to exist with a good God. Do you believe evil exists?

Why?

 

[MD]

Only good comes from God. God does not create evil or commit evil, we do.

But God created us, the conditions which give rise to us, and the propensity for us to do bad things. If God is fully good, then God cannot create the bad things that come about in the universe. Thus either there are other forces aside from God in the universe, or God is not fully good.

 

[loverofhumanity]

But God created us, the conditions which give rise to us, and the propensity for us to do bad things. If God is fully good, then God cannot create the bad things that come about in the universe. Thus either there are other forces aside from God in the universe, or God is not fully good.

God created all good. It only becomes bad when we use it in a wrong way. This should explain a bit deeper the Baha'i view of the non existence of evil.

"In creation there is no evil; all is good. Certain qualities and natures innate in some men and apparently blameworthy are not so in reality. For example, from the beginning of his life you can see in a nursing child the signs of desire, of anger, and of temper. Then, it may be said, good and evil are innate in the reality of man, and this is contrary to the pure goodness of nature and creation.

The answer to this is that desire, which is to ask for something more, is a praiseworthy quality provided that it is used suitably. So, if a man has the desire to acquire science and knowledge, or to become compassionate, generous, and just, it is most praiseworthy. If he exercises his anger and wrath against the bloodthirsty tyrants who are like ferocious beasts, it is very praiseworthy; but if he does not use these qualities in a right way, they are blameworthy. " Abdul-Baha

 

[randomvim]

You're argument supports my point. An almighty God cannot create a triangle with 2 sides, in the same way that an almighty God cannot be full of goodness and create evil.

This doesn't make sense. by definition, a shape that has 2 sides can never be referred to as a triangle.

Only an all powerful God may exist in a way that humans can not understand. [emoji3]

It seems things are being misunderstood. if we are talking strictly under Christiandom or Laws of Judah then why are we not using terms as they are described by Christianity and Judaism.

In such we need to define what is evil. what good is. what do we mean by all good/full of goodness?

if these terms are changed or conditions changed "like a two sided triangle" then none of us will ever understand how God is explained or how/why God is and the things we don't like or know of exist(like evil).

Now the concept of evil was explained in a great way earlier, why is it dismissed?

 

[randomvim]

An omnipotent God has created a deterministic universe. Knowing what you will do, creating the conditions which lead you to do those things removes the concept of free will.

assuming God is creating your environment so that you like the color red, took Jenny to prom, and choose door number 3 ( zoink!).

I have never heard of God being explained this way - consistently generating the world around us so we make a choice that is not ours. Very similar to the way I would cut down a tree so you'd go left instead of right. Or so this is how I understand your wording.

The world around us is interesting indeed where things interact within a "law" but gravity only keeps us on earth with an atmosphere that can lead us to breath. this doesn't mean no one will hold their breath. ????? [emoji12]

So if we consider how our Lord is explained through the religions being used or referred to by o.p. - we do not get this explanation of the world.

Depends. Did the father create the conditions to let the son suffer? How deep is the suffering?

If a father punishes a son for committing a sin, knowing fully that he created the conditions for the son to sin, and knowing that the son would sin, does that make such a father loving? I would say it makes such a father evil.

this portion is tricky because it goes into two different things. suffering is not evil.

a father creating a baseballfield so his son may play ball only to have another kid throw the ball incorrectly and hit the son....this is the world as I see it. physics, atoms, etc. all determining how that ball is thrown and flows through the air - but ability to throw that ball doesn't mean it will be thrown good.

in every way this father created the conditions for his son to suffer and receive pain but that is a risk that life has.

in terms of your situation where father creates a situation where son would sin. the word "would" is challenging as it means that a person will always choose to sin. but that is not the case. also, it ignores the possibility to not sin.

Further it implies a world in which we have to sin or an environment that means we will sin. taking away free will. though the only condition created is an ability to choose our own actions. where or where do we look at why free will was ever implemented ?

 

[MD]

God created all good. It only becomes bad when we use it in a wrong way. This should explain a bit deeper the Baha'i view of the non existence of evil.

"In creation there is no evil; all is good. Certain qualities and natures innate in some men and apparently blameworthy are not so in reality. For example, from the beginning of his life you can see in a nursing child the signs of desire, of anger, and of temper. Then, it may be said, good and evil are innate in the reality of man, and this is contrary to the pure goodness of nature and creation.

The answer to this is that desire, which is to ask for something more, is a praiseworthy quality provided that it is used suitably. So, if a man has the desire to acquire science and knowledge, or to become compassionate, generous, and just, it is most praiseworthy. If he exercises his anger and wrath against the bloodthirsty tyrants who are like ferocious beasts, it is very praiseworthy; but if he does not use these qualities in a right way, they are blameworthy. " Abdul-Baha

Again if God created everything and everything was good, then evil cannot exist. Desire might be a better explanation for evil, but again if desire leads to evil or bad things, then a God which created desire knew that it would bring about evil.

God cannot be all good if bad things occur. Even if the bad things lead to a greater good, they are still bad an in some way God is partly bad.

 

[MD]

This doesn't make sense. by definition, a shape that has 2 sides can never be referred to as a triangle.

Only an all powerful God may exist in a way that humans can not understand. [emoji3]

It seems things are being misunderstood. if we are talking strictly under Christiandom or Laws of Judah then why are we not using terms as they are described by Christianity and Judaism.

In such we need to define what is evil. what good is. what do we mean by all good/full of goodness?

if these terms are changed or conditions changed "like a two sided triangle" then none of us will ever understand how God is explained or how/why God is and the things we don't like or know of exist(like evil).

Now the concept of evil was explained in a great way earlier, why is it dismissed?

The triangle example supports my point. A good God cannot create evil, as it lies outside his own existence.

What was the earlier explanation of evil?

 

[Tumah]

So then evil isn't an illusion, but an instrument of God to better the universe?

If you define evil as suffering, than yes.
If you define it as the ability to choose to move in the opposite direction of G-d, then still yes. Just that it refers to the subjective placement of the individual (along the continuum that is the natural progression of the Divine Perception congealing into the physical) towards the direction opposite G-d.

I'm not sure if that's clear, so I'll give an example.
If two people are climbing a ladder, what is up for the lower person, is down for the upper person. Up and down are both subjective concepts with relation to the people. At the same time, the ladder itself (when its standing anyway) has one side that is inherently up and one side that is inherently down of itself at every individual point in the ladder and in the ladder in general.

Your long version was a bit confusing, so I will try and summarize what you've said to understand it. Let me know if I'm right or wrong: God is everything and his perspective is in everything. The perception of his perspective contradicts existence and free will. Without perception of God we have existence. God contracts himself, leaving a void, within which there is creation. If you are within the void and do not perceive God, then you cannot have a relationship to God. Thus you are in the physical in the void, and farther from God. If you are in the spiritual, you are closer to God. Is this right?

If so, what is the void? If God is everything should the physical, the void, creation and everything all be a part of Him. Shouldn't we be as close to him in the physical as we are in the spiritual? Unless the void exists outside of God, which means that there is something outside of God. Which would mean that evil exists independent of God.

I use the word void because its devoid of the perception of G-d, not devoid of G-d Himself. We remain intimately within G-d. What we lack in the void, is the overpowering Perception of G-d that negates everything. Because G-d is inherent in everything, if the Perception of Him was present, there would be room to perceive anything else. So with the Perception removed, there is some small degree of room for existence to be perceived separately from G-d, while still ultimately remaining intimately connected to G-d.
When we speak about spiritual or physical, we actually mean more or less able to perceive the Perception of G-d.

Okay so if God constrains himself to test us, but knows the outcome anyways, what is the point? He knows what we're going to do, and he has created the conditions to do it so his constraint is kind of useless.

That's where the concept of "bread of embarrassment" comes into play. It creates a concept that makes it possible for us to derive more enjoyment of the end result as reward, than had we been handed it as charity. Meaning, the ultimate purpose of the testing is to benefit us, not because G-d needs it.

 

[MD]

I use the word void because its devoid of the perception of G-d, not devoid of G-d Himself. We remain intimately within G-d. What we lack in the void, is the overpowering Perception of G-d that negates everything. Because G-d is inherent in everything, if the Perception of Him was present, there would be room to perceive anything else. So with the Perception removed, there is some small degree of room for existence to be perceived separately from G-d, while still ultimately remaining intimately connected to G-d.
When we speak about spiritual or physical, we actually mean more or less able to perceive the Perception of G-d.

So we're not really moving away from God, we're moving away from the perception of God. But again if our perception of God is lessened, and we suffer and evil exists in this removal of perception, wouldn't that mean that such things exist outside of God? Or that God has created the conditions for us to suffer when we are removed from perceiving him?

Also why use suffering to better the universe, when God can create a perfect universe as is? Or is God using outside forces to better the universe itself, which cannot be made perfectly?

That's where the concept of "bread of embarrassment" comes into play. It creates a concept that makes it possible for us to derive more enjoyment of the end result as reward, than had we been handed it as charity. Meaning, the ultimate purpose of the testing is to benefit us, not because G-d needs it.

But God created us. He created everything. He created all the conditions for us to suffer. Why put us through this test to better us? Wouldn't it be better to just create us to derive more enjoyment of the end result without suffering? If God created everything surely he could have created us to be happy as it is, forever and ever. There wouldn't be a need to just put us through a test. Is it necessary to feel immense pain to become more spiritual, when we could have been simply created to be more spiritual?

 

[loverofhumanity]

Again if God created everything and everything was good, then evil cannot exist. Desire might be a better explanation for evil, but again if desire leads to evil or bad things, then a God which created desire knew that it would bring about evil.

God cannot be all good if bad things occur. Even if the bad things lead to a greater good, they are still bad an in some way God is partly bad.

God not only created everything good but He sent a His Messengers, Educators and Prophets to educate us how to live in goodness.

So it is God Who has provided a good Creation with perfect Educators.

It is us who choose to do good or not but God created us with minds not as robots. Our minds if we turn to God will be good only. Only good comes from God.

 

[MD]

God not only created everything good but He sent a His Messengers, Educators and Prophets to educate us how to live in goodness.

So it is God Who has provided a good Creation with perfect Educators.

It is us who choose to do good or not but God created us with minds not as robots. Our minds if we turn to God will be good only. Only good comes from God.

I agree that if we turn to God we turn to goodness. I however disagree that God created everything, and that suffering and evil come from an outside source, outside of God. Thus I accept that God is benevolent but not omnipotent. You can't really have both, they create a paradox.

 

[loverofhumanity]

I agree that if we turn to God we turn to goodness. I however disagree that God created everything, and that suffering and evil come from an outside source, outside of God. Thus I accept that God is benevolent but not omnipotent. You can't really have both, they create a paradox.

Why do you see God as kind but not all powerful.? Creating the universe was both an act of His power to bring about such complex life and as well kindness to endow us with life.

Let's take war where much suffering comes from. War comes from the misuse and abuse of the human qualities of things like desire and anger, power etc.

However, If desire be directed towards peace, we desire peace with all our hearts, then there will be no wars and if anger and power be used to stopping oppressors and tyrants there will be no more oppressors and tyrants on earth.

By turning to God and His Educators the result is only goodness.

 

[MD]

Why do you see God as kind but not all powerful.? Creating the universe was both an act of His power to bring about such complex life and as well kindness to endow us with life.

Let's take war where much suffering comes from. War comes from the misuse and abuse of the human qualities of things like desire and anger, power etc.

However, If desire be directed towards peace, we desire peace with all our hearts, then there will be no wars and if anger be directed to stopping oppressors and tyrants there will be no more oppressors and tyrants on earth.

By turning to God and His Educators the result is only goodness.

Because an all powerful God created suffering! An all powerful God created wars, genocides, etc. You say that humans caused this, but if we are creations of an all powerful God then he planted the seeds of hate as well as love within us. He created the conditions for this universe to give rise to all the suffering. This nullifies the fact that he's all good.

Please refer to the OP, the flowchart I've posted pretty much explains why a God cannot be all good and all powerful.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Because an all powerful God created suffering! An all powerful God created wars, genocides, etc. You say that humans caused this, but if we are creations of an all powerful God then he planted the seeds of hate as well as love within us. He created the conditions for this universe to give rise to all the suffering. This nullifies the fact that he's all good.

Please refer to the OP, the flowchart I've posted pretty much explains why a God cannot be all good and all powerful.

We understand our suffering comes from wrong choices , which go against the will of God. Childbirth is painful too but it is not an evil thing but a good thing.

We were created for good not evil but God wanted to create a human being not a robot. Free will is a good thing but only if we turn it towards God's ways.