Problem of Evil Revisited

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I suppose any number of answers are possible, depending on whether or not one believes in God. Sometimes, it's easier to accept that things just happen without any particular outside force or influence. If one believes there is no afterlife, no god, no punishment for our "sins" and that life is utterly devoid of meaning or purpose, then it's easier to take life as not so serious or important. Even "evil" becomes meaningless, since we're really just animals (aka "human monsters") functioning on instinct as best we can.

I think you are deeply mistaken. The assumption that no belief in an "afterlife" or god or punishment for sins leads to a lack of meaning or purpose is deeply flawed. All of the atheists I know are full of purpose, and none of them wishes to kill anyone, or even hurt anyone. And I can provide you immense amounts of documented evidence that people who DO believe in afterlife, God and punishment for sin are very often killers and hurters. I've been hurt by them myself, and many have been killed by Muslim extremists who belief in an afterlife with Allah, or by Catholics who hate Protestants (and vice-versa) and by Hindus hating Muslims (and vice-versa).

If there is a God, and if we hold to the assumption that God has a divine plan and that "everything happens for a reason," then it might change one's perspective.

Only if you have some way to understand what that divine plan might be. For all you know, we could be food for the denizens of Proxima Centauri. How would you know otherwise?

Some people automatically assume that "God is good," but even that may not be the case. What if God is evil? That would solve the "problem of evil" rather easily.

And what if god was neither good nor evil -- just non-existent? That would also solve the "problem of evil" rather easily. And using all the evidence available to us just now, it also happens to be the answer that best adheres to the evidence.

The only reason there is a "problem of evil" is because people assume not only that "God exists," but also that "God is good." But we don't really know that God exists, and even if he does, we don't know that he is "good."

Or, actually, anything else about him, either.

 

[Stevicus]

But the playing field IS leveled! That's what we're complaining about. We want it UN-leveled, so that the "good guys" win and the "bad guys" lose. But the world treats us all the same, regardless. "God" world treats us all the same. So that if we are seeing life as "unfair", it's because we're viewing it from a selfish, self-centered perspective; wherein we say what is 'good and evil', and we decide who deserves to be treated, how.

I don't agree that God treats everyone the same (assuming there is a God). God decides who is born into which families (which determines wealth and political power), whether or not they're strong or weak - or are born with disabilities. God decides which areas of the world will get earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes. God decides which planes are going to crash. God decides who will get sick, who will get cancer, who will die of a heart attack. God decides who gets insomnia and who gets a good night's sleep. God decides who will roll a "7" and who will roll craps.

There were a number of assassination attempts on Hitler, so if people were allowed to exercise their supposed "free will," a lot of human misery could have been prevented. God decided that all of those assassination attempts would fail.

 

[Stevicus]

I think you are deeply mistaken. The assumption that no belief in an "afterlife" or god or punishment for sins leads to a lack of meaning or purpose is deeply flawed. All of the atheists I know are full of purpose, and none of them wishes to kill anyone, or even hurt anyone. And I can provide you immense amounts of documented evidence that people who DO believe in afterlife, God and punishment for sin are very often killers and hurters. I've been hurt by them myself, and many have been killed by Muslim extremists who belief in an afterlife with Allah, or by Catholics who hate Protestants (and vice-versa) and by Hindus hating Muslims (and vice-versa).

That wasn't really what I meant. Fact is, we are just animals trying to survive, no less or more important than any other living thing. We are on a tiny planet in an average solar system making our way through the galaxy. As I see it, it's the religionists who take this view that "humans are the center of the universe" and that "God's" existence revolves totally around us. They're the ones who seem to need a "purpose," but if one lets go of that belief, then one's only real "purpose" is to live. 1000 years from now, is anyone going to care whether we lived or died? Unless we do something truly history-making, then I tend to doubt it.

 

[idav]

I suppose any number of answers are possible, depending on whether or not one believes in God. Sometimes, it's easier to accept that things just happen without any particular outside force or influence. If one believes there is no afterlife, no god, no punishment for our "sins" and that life is utterly devoid of meaning or purpose, then it's easier to take life as not so serious or important. Even "evil" becomes meaningless, since we're really just animals (aka "human monsters") functioning on instinct as best we can.

If there is a God, and if we hold to the assumption that God has a divine plan and that "everything happens for a reason," then it might change one's perspective. Some people automatically assume that "God is good," but even that may not be the case. What if God is evil? That would solve the "problem of evil" rather easily.

The only reason there is a "problem of evil" is because people assume not only that "God exists," but also that "God is good." But we don't really know that God exists, and even if he does, we don't know that he is "good."

Assuming God exists, it doesn't make all that much sense that humans be created in the first place. An all powerful being wouldn't need anything from some pesky animals and that alone puts some reason into life. Life itself is an argument against an evil God in my view. So I don't really assume God is good all the time, it's part of the question as to what the purpose of life is. Let me ask it this way, in an evil universe would there be such a blessed thing as life and pro-creation?

 

[Milton Platt]

Yes they are, because they are assuming that if God is able to stop the evil (omnipotent), then God is obliged to do so. Yet we could choose not to do evil, and we don't seem to feel any obligation to refrain from it.

Not all evil is done by mankind. And anyway, we are acting within the system designed by the supposed creator god. You can't design a tiger to eat meat and then condemn it for eating meat. You cannot design a human with the innate propensity for evil and then blame the human for acting on those propensities. A god that can see all outcomes within a given system beforehand and could design any system it wishes and designs a system that contains evil in any form is a malevolent god.

 

[idav]

There is no such thing as unconditional love. It is extremely conditional.

If God has conditions that would be a choice. Parenting is the closest thing we have to unconditional love. Sure might be a problem for humans but an all powerful deity can certainly pull it off.

The teaching is that the wicked shall be destroyed. The wicked are those who disobey willfully, deliberately, unrepentantly -- in committing serious sins.

Are you trying to say God hates some people ?

 

[idav]

He allows His children this brief moment of probation to prove what they actually desire in eternity.

If they desire evil, they will receive evil in eternity. If they desire good, then good.

God loves His children. For this reason He allows them to be free and to choose for themselves.

If the good are hurt by resisting evil, then all the sweeter. For they will enter into mortality with more experience than they would have had had they not done so.

Pain and suffering doesn't always make people stronger it sometimes destroys them.

 

[Grandliseur]

If God has conditions that would be a choice. Parenting is the closest thing we have to unconditional love. Sure might be a problem for humans but an all powerful deity can certainly pull it off.

Are you trying to say God hates some people ?

Personally, I try to have no opinion except that which I can understand from the Inspired Word of God. Thus, I hope that everything I state about these matters to be founded in scripture:

Job 20:5-9
5 That the joyful cry of wicked people is short And the rejoicing of an apostate is for a moment?

6 Although his excellency ascends to heaven itself And his very head reaches to the clouds, 7 Like his manure cakes he perishes forever; The very ones seeing him will say, ‘Where is he?’

8 Like a dream he will fly off, and they will not find him; And he will be chased away like a vision of the night. 9 The eye that has caught sight of him will not do so again, And no more will his place behold him.​

Job 36:5-6 5 Look! God is mighty and will not reject; [He is] mighty in power of heart; 6 He will not preserve anyone wicked alive, But the judgment of the afflicted ones he will give.

Psalm 9:5 5 You have rebuked nations, you have destroyed the wicked one. Their name you have wiped out to time indefinite, even forever.​

I hope you can read this and understand what God thinks yourself. It is never about what I say or think.

We must do what we can to have God's commands written on - in our hearts and try to be obedient.

​

 

[Prestor John]

Pain and suffering doesn't always make people stronger it sometimes destroys them.

No one can ever be destroyed. They may give in to despair, but they will always exist and learn from their experience.

It would be better for them to endure the pain and suffering well, which is the entire reason why God gives His Law and His Son, so that we can endure this life well and come out on top.

 

[gurthbruins]

Because there is a random element of probability at work, sometimes referred to as "luck." What "we" might expect from God is to at least make things fair - a level playing field. If it appears that "evil" has an unfair advantage over "good," then it may appear to some that God is stacking the deck deliberately so that "evil" will triumph.

It's just like what Reverend Scott said in The Poseidon Adventure, when he was in a prayer rant against God: "We're not asking you to fight for us, but dammit don't fight against us! Leave us alone!"

I like every reply I have seen here, I click on 'like' but the number of likes remains unchanged. So am I forced to reply just to say 'I like it'? Actually, that is a more convincing way to say 'like'.

 

[gurthbruins]

My answer should flow logically from my viewpoint, which thus needs to be described. As holistic pantheist, which I would say Marcus Aurelius was, I see the universe as an organism, the only organism there is, which does have parts, just as the human body has parts. The human being is intended to be a self-regulating part of the whole. This self-regulation is partly effected by the consciousness of pain and pleasure. (The whole idea of evil is based on the useful hatred of pain. Useful, that is, to the process of self-regulation.)
It is natural to hate pain. That motivates us to avoid it. But if pain were abolished, people would soon destroy themselves. It would be much harder to learn what things are injurious.
The idea of a God who can answer prayers and load the dice in our favour is false. If we see God as the universe, then we see that what determines events are the laws of cause and effect, That is why the psalmist says:
'And his delight is in the law of the Lord; and in his law doth he meditate day and night'. Note it is not the Lord that matters so much, as his LAW. What law? The laws of cause and effect. As revealed by science.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

From freewill of course.

Good = obedience to GOD
Evil = disobedience to GOD

"Of course?" It seems to me that the "free will" excuse is nonsense.

"Free will" only refers to our will to act on our desires. It doesn't refer to:

- the source of our desires, or
- our ability to actually carry out our will.

The options that free will chooses between weren't chosen by us. We can't put our free will into practice if what we want to do is physically impossible.

So what do you actually mean when you say that evil comes from free will?

 

[Tmac]

I don't equate worshiping God with butt-licking. I have a relationship with God. Friends don't let Friends screw up the planet.

First, I don't think God has any desire to be worshiped, I don't even like the word. I'm assuming your relationship with God is friendly, thus the friends don't let friends comment, as for screwing up the planet, we let each other screw it up all the time.

 

[Profound Realization]

The problem of evil is often presented as logic and reasoning for a non-benevolent God. I know it's a pretty common argument on these forums so I will be brief. I have always reconciled the problem of evil by seeing God and humans as a father child relationship of unconditional love. In the case of unconditional love, can it be said that God would necessarily allow evil due non-favoritism?

Has anyone seen the movie The Shack? Well this movie uses that argument as a man struggles with faith after losing thier youngest to a human monster. It uses a horrific example to address the problem of evil so if anyone has seen the movie, that's the kind of context I'm looking for. Why would God allow such horrible atrocities?

The only universe that would make any sense with evil in it is a universe with 2 God's. 1 perfectly good and 1 perfectly evil.

Any individual would have both a perfectly good conscience and a perfectly evil conscience that aren't them, but at war for that individual. The more the 1 is listened to, the more the one merges with the 1 listened to, and more separated from the other 1. When there is any kind of suffering, the 1 God-conscience co-suffers with the individual.

Both free will, and determinism would exist.

The only kind of justice system that would be of perfect justness is if the father were once a "human monster" that raped and killed another father's youngest and must experience the equal amount of suffering themselves. For the youngest children, they'd have to be also involved in the not-so-innocent strings of rape and murder. Perhaps feel the pain and suffering as a child in the lense as what they once did. If there is a way out of the strings without having to experience the same measure of effects in the perfectly just, justice system...perhaps it is if genuine forgiveness and/or repentance is established between either and/or for the other.

 

[Stevicus]

Assuming God exists, it doesn't make all that much sense that humans be created in the first place. An all powerful being wouldn't need anything from some pesky animals and that alone puts some reason into life. Life itself is an argument against an evil God in my view. So I don't really assume God is good all the time, it's part of the question as to what the purpose of life is. Let me ask it this way, in an evil universe would there be such a blessed thing as life and pro-creation?

The only thing any of us really knows is that we are alive and we are here. We don't know why or who (if anyone) brought it all about. If we want to create our own "purpose" in life, then we are free to do so, but it may only have meaning to us personally.

 

[PureX]

I don't agree that God treats everyone the same (assuming there is a God). God decides who is born into which families (which determines wealth and political power), whether or not they're strong or weak - or are born with disabilities.

We don't know this. We just assume it, so we can blame God for it. But we all had an equal chance at being born a king, or a pauper. And if we humans would distribute power and wealth equitably, no one would be born into either. So again, why are we blaming God for being born into conditions that we created?

God decides which areas of the world will get earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes. God decides which planes are going to crash. God decides who will get sick, who will get cancer, who will die of a heart attack. God decides who gets insomnia and who gets a good night's sleep. God decides who will roll a "7" and who will roll craps.

Again, we don't know any of this to be so. We just assume it so we can blame God for it. But we humans know where these disasters are most likely to strike, and we know how to protect ourselves from them. But we live there, anyway, and do nothing to prepare for them. So why is it God's fault when one strikes and we succumb to it?

There were a number of assassination attempts on Hitler, so if people were allowed to exercise their supposed "free will," a lot of human misery could have been prevented. God decided that all of those assassination attempts would fail.

Again, we make this assumption so we can blame God. But we produce these Hitlers by the way we treat each other, and we allow their insanity to flourish until it finally threatens us. So who's fault is it when it grows so deadly that it does finally threaten us, and it takes a world war to stop it?

 

[PureX]

Not all evil is done by mankind. And anyway, we are acting within the system designed by the supposed creator god. You can't design a tiger to eat meat and then condemn it for eating meat. You cannot design a human with the innate propensity for evil and then blame the human for acting on those propensities. A god that can see all outcomes within a given system beforehand and could design any system it wishes and designs a system that contains evil in any form is a malevolent god.

There are a whole lot of assumptions being made, here, so that we can then blame God for creating a world that doesn't treat us like gods.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

We don't know this. We just assume it, so we can blame God for it. But we all had an equal chance at being born a king, or a pauper. And if we humans would distribute power and wealth equitably, no one would be born into either. So again, why are we blaming God for being born into conditions that we created?
Again, we don't know any of this to be so. We just assume it so we can blame God for it. But we humans know where these disasters are most likely to strike, and we know how to protect ourselves from them. But we live there, anyway, and do nothing to prepare for them. So why is it God's fault when one strikes and we succumb to it?
Again, we make this assumption so we can blame God. But we produce these Hitlers by the way we treat each other, and we allow their insanity to flourish until it finally threatens us. So who's fault is it when it grows so deadly that it does finally threaten us, and it takes a world war to stop it?

It seems like you're dancing around the idea that god-concepts and claims about gods are generally made-up and unjustifiable.

While I don't disagree, I also recognize that most of the world isn't on board with this, so in order to have meaningful conversations, sometimes we have to entertain other people's ideas - even if we disagree with them - in order to consider them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There are a whole lot of assumptions being made, here, so that we can then blame God for creating a world that doesn't treat us like gods.

No; the reasoning is that if God knowingly created the world and was free to create it however he wanted, then the form of the world is an expression of God's will and therefore the form of the world can be used to infer God's will.

The leap you're making isn't in the argument. "I'm poor, therefore God must have wanted me to be poor" does not necessarily imply "God should have wanted me to be rich."

 

[PureX]

It seems like you're dancing around the idea that god-concepts and claims about gods are generally made-up and unjustifiable.

None of us knows if or what "God" is. So we invent images and ideas that we apply to the possibility of God's being. I'm not "dancing around it", I'm saying it outright. Our idea of "God" is self-serving, which is why we choose to maintain and believe in it. But how is it serving us? That's the real question we need to be asking. Is it serving us by aiding and abetting our ignorance, bias, and irresponsibility? Or is it serving us by humbling our outrageous egos, and by helping us to empathize with the suffering of others, and by giving us the courage and desire to love, forgive, and be kind and generous to ourselves and to others?

While I don't disagree, I also recognize that most of the world isn't on board with this, so in order to have meaningful conversations, sometimes we have to entertain other people's ideas - even if we disagree with them - in order to consider them.

The only way the God debate becomes meaningful is if we ask ourselves how our idea of God is serving us in our life. Debating whether or not God exists, or what God's nature is, or what God is responsible for, is irrelevant in and of itself because none of us knows the answers to those questions. What is relevant is how we are each choosing to idealize "God", and how that ideology is serving us in our own lives.

I don't think the 'let's blame it all on God' meme is serving those who hold it very well. I think it gives them an excuse to remain stupid and lazy regarding the problem of human suffering.