If God exists can evil also exist?

[`mud]

If one would remove the name `God` from this thread,
there wouldn't be a thread to hang your `evil` from !
Ahh...the similarities between the two, where's the Ghost ?

 

[Koldo]

Actually, there's nothing good and bad in this world because there's NOTHING good or bad which can be done to soul.
The only problem is that we are assuming ourself as body, rather than soul.

Why can something only be good or bad if it can be done to the soul?

 

[chinu]

If one would remove the name `God` from this thread,
there wouldn't be a thread to hang your `evil` from !
Ahh...the similarities between the two, where's the Ghost ?

Like; no matter how evil was the person when he/she was alive,
Everybody pray for him/her to rest in peace, after death.

 

[Nimos]

Human and animal suffering is separate from evil and I do not believe God is off the hook for all human and animal suffering

In that case the definition or example of evil as I wrote wouldn't work. Because then it becomes a matter of personal preferences, if God is not off the hook in all cases when it comes to unjustified suffering then according to the two of us, at least, that would be considered an act of evil.

Furthermore we run into some issues even with our own example. Because what we might think of as being unjustified, might not be the case for someone else.

Therefore at least in my opinion natural evil is a good example of where God is running into some issue, because these are outside human influences and therefore we can look at these from a neutral position. So when God claim to have created all, he also created the possibility for natural evil. So clearly if that falls in the category of evil, then God is surely capable of evil. Which means that he per definition is unable to be omnibenevolent.

Then one could obviously argue, that since evil must also be created or at least allowed by God, that it is also him that define what is evil and what is not. Which makes sense, at least from his perspective. But quickly falls apart when looking at it from a human perspective in correlation to the bible. Because all of it is based on the fall in the Garden of Eden and God saying that now humans know the difference between good and evil. Which obviously is not the case, if we believe God to be omnibenevolent, while at the same time are unable to justify some of the things he does and some of the things he allows, such as natural evil.

As far as I see it, people can't have it both ways, these things are clearly in conflict.

 

[ChristineM]

When I discovered this verse many years ago, it took me a while to wrap my head around it. It finally dawned on me that , to me, the verse was saying that 'God' and all creation are neutral and non binary; man is left up to his own devices to decide what is 'good' and what is 'evil'. Thankfully most of us make the same decision.

I don't read it like that. I read it as written.

 

[chinu]

Why can something only be good or bad if it can be done to the soul?

I said there's nothing good or bad that can be done to the soul.

 

[`mud]

@Nimos

......natural evil .....

REALLY !

 

[BSM1]

I don't read it like that. I read it as written.

Understandable. But then you're still left with the task of defining what is good and what is evil.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Evil is “sin”. “Sin” is the result of Man’s Ego.

Man’s Ego is an inevitable effect of experiencing life through a perspective, limited by his individual 5 senses. This makes Man think that he is separate from all else, thereby distorting his values and priorities.

Life - through the free-will that Man was determined to evolve into acquiring (beautiful paradox, I know) has become his opportunity to understand what God knows. Because, not even the best teachings and advice can replace the insight of a first-hand experience.

Humbly,
Hermit

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Why?

Are you going to assume that just because God is omnipotent God should prevent all evil?
This is the argument of a simpleton. It assumes that:

(a) there can be no good reason for evil to exist, and
(b) humans are not responsible for eliminating the evil they cause.

God does not want to eliminate evil because that is the responsibility of humans.
Have you ever seen a court of law hold God responsible for evil?
No, because any rational person knows humans have free will thus are responsible for the evil they cause.
They do not have to be a believer to realize this.
Case closed.

Then I see that you have opted to allow the word "evil" to refer ONLY to one of (at least) two possible concepts of evil: a broad concept which refers to any bad state of affairs, or what might be called "natural evil", and bad states of affairs that result from the intentions or negligence of moral agents, or "moral evil." I accept both, since to the one suffering from the evil, there is no significant difference.

Hurricanes, lightning strikes causing injury or fire, diseases and harm caused by poisonous snakes are examples of natural evils, and are not caused by intentions or negligence. By contrast, moral evils do result from the intentions or negligence of moral agents. Murder and lying are examples of moral evils.

To the person who just died, it is a matter of great indifference whether he was shot, purposefully or accidentally, by another human, or struck by lightning.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is evil really something that comes from a particular place, or a particular state, or is it simply the lack of something? (For example, a room with bright lights may lack darkness, yet the ability to turn the lights off may give the ability for their to be darkness.)

If evil were just an absence of good, then intending evil toward someone would be no worse than being apathetic toward them.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Evil is “sin”. “Sin” is the result of Man’s Ego.

Man’s Ego is an inevitable effect of experiencing life through a perspective, limited by his individual 5 senses. This makes Man think that he is separate from all else, thereby distorting his values and priorities.

Life - through the free-will that Man was determined to evolve into acquiring (beautiful paradox, I know) has become his opportunity to understand what God knows. Because, not even the best teachings and advice can replace the insight of a first-hand experience.

View attachment 41506

Humbly,
Hermit

Interesting that you would post something you learned from the words of someone else in defense of the idea that we need direct experience ourselves to learn.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Hi 9-10ths_Penguin,
Sorry, I don’t follow... how do you mean?

Humbly,
Hermit

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Hi 9-10ths_Penguin,
Sorry, I don’t follow... how do you mean?

Humbly,
Hermit

Sorry - I didn't look closely enough at the tweet you quoted. I assumed it was from someone else.

Quoting yourself would have been strange, so it didn't even occur to me to check whether that's what you were doing.

 

[Hermit Philosopher]

Sorry - I didn't look closely enough at the tweet you quoted. I assumed it was from someone else.

Quoting yourself would have been strange, so it didn't even occur to me to check whether that's what you were doing.

No, I’m just strange - sorry. Forever quoting myself.

Kind Regards

 

[Fool]

If God exists can evil also exist?

@ Koldo said:

God, to be God, has to be omnibenevolent.
If God behaves in a manner contrary to omnibenevolence, he is not omnibenevolent, and therefore not God.

Evil is detrimental to our well-being, and therefore, as a matter of logic, its existence is incompatible with the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent being.

The existence of evil is contradictory to God's utmost desire: our well-beings. And therefore, the existence of evil (that which is contrary to our well-beings) is proof that God doesn't exist

God can't be at the same time all-good by nature and not do whatever is necessary to prevent evil.

God, if he existed, would prevent all people from doing evil.

****************************************************************************************

If an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent God existed, would such a God allow evil to exist in the world?

If you answer yes, please explain why you think so.
If you answer no, please explain why you don’t think so.​

Is the existence of evil in the world a reason to believe that God (as defined above) does not exist?

If you answer yes, please explain why you think so.
If you answer no, please explain why you don’t think so.​

Thanks, Trailblazer.

Evil can exist only at a lower dimension in opposition to the Absolute

 

[Koldo]

I said there's nothing good or bad that can be done to the soul.

I know, thus my question. Why can something only be good or bad if it can be done to the soul?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

No, I’m just strange - sorry. Forever quoting myself.

Kind Regards

Sorry about the misunderstanding.

Going back, then: it seems that you're arguing against God's omnipotence.

You seem to be arguing that God is training humanity for something (though with no details on what we'd be training for or why, or why we should think that this is the case) and that God is incapable of training us adequately without having us suffer evil and inflict it on others.

 

[stvdv]

God, to be God, has to be omnibenevolent.

I never read about "God being omnibenevolent" in Indian Scriptures, and Sai Baba never once mentioned it in all the thousands discourses He gave
He always mentioned God as being: a)Omniscient + b)Omnipresent + c)Omnipotent
I don't know who came up with "Omnibenevolent"
Maybe an Atheist to mess up Spiritual Truth

 

[stvdv]

If an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent God existed, would such a God allow evil to exist in the world?

If you answer yes, please explain why you think so.
If you answer no, please explain why you don’t think so.

There is a mistake here: The attributes of God are: a)Omniscient + b)Omnipresent + c)Omnipotent (not omnibenevolent)
"A Judging God" is human interpretation