If God exists can evil also exist?

[Trailblazer]

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.

 

[GardenLady]

God did not create humans as automotons to serve him without choice. We have the ability to make choices. We have selves and we can--and do--choose self-will over God's will. Isn't all evil really selfishness?

 

[epronovost]

çIsn't all evil really selfishness?

No. absolutely not. It's sometime ignorance, hatred, incompetance, misjudgement, complete random misfortune, terrible inescapable choices, etc.

And as to asnwer the question, yes there can be gods and evil in a universe. One or several of them would be evil gods though or they would otherwise too weak to stop evil. Note that all of this has been exposed by Epicurus over 2000 years ago.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

God did not create humans as automotons to serve him without choice. We have the ability to make choices. We have selves and we can--and do--choose self-will over God's will. Isn't all evil really selfishness?

How do you know that? Humans created computers to serves them without choice. We don't allow our creations any choice in the matter.

So how do you know -- where does your information come from -- about how, and with what capacities and with what freedoms -- God "created humans?"

 

[GardenLady]

So how do you know -- where does your information come from -- about how, and with what capacities and with what freedoms -- God "created humans?"

"Created humans" is a shorthand phrase. I am not by any means denying the scientific evidence supporting either evolution or deep time. I am a Christian (Lutheran flavor) and believe that God had a hand in creation and in the spiritual formation of humanity. How that happened I do not know, and it is not in any way provable, of course; but I believe it did happen and that at some point in our becoming human that God intervened in some way. As to humans having choice, this is evident from observation.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

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?

Oh, good. Theodicy again.

This is really simple: either your definition of God is incorrect (omnipotent, ominscient and omnibenevolent), or your concept of "evil" is.

If we assume that "evil" means that which is undesirable because it is hurtful, malicious, or just plain "not good," then a God that is omnibenevolent (which translates as " wanting all good"), which is also omnipotent (which translates as "can make whatever he wants happen") -- is simply impossible if that which is NOT GOOD still persists. Case closed.

 

[February-Saturday]

What if God cares just as much about the well-being of evil and suffering? Actually, if he was all-loving, he would have to love evil as much as good. Kind of in the name.

 

[Nimos]

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.

Hello Trailblazer

Good and Evil is always interesting topics.

Can you be more specific in your definition of evil and what exactly you mean?

Would this work as an explanation of evil as you see it?:

Any harm done to another being which is either unjustified or intended on purpose, is evil.

 

[Quintessence]

Eh, I'm not a classical monotheist and as such the "problem of evil" doesn't apply to my own theology. As I understand it, the god-concept of classical monotheism is fundamentally numinous - that is, this god-concept emphasizes its mystery and incomprehensibility. I see little reason to apply human logic to such a god-concept and expect it to make sense. I doubt it is supposed to make sense.

In any case, one can't really talk about the "problem of evil" without talking about the other "problem of evil" - and that's how "evil" is a construct humans project onto reality rather than some sort of objectively existing quality of the universe. With that taken into account, it seems even more foolish to me to think an omnimax deity would abide by human concepts like "good" and "evil." Granted, that sort of begs the question as to why humans would put the quality of omnibenevolence onto this god-concept at all, which... well, I've got nothing.

 

[Trailblazer]

Oh, good. Theodicy again.

This is really simple: either your definition of God is incorrect (omnipotent, ominscient and omnibenevolent), or your concept of "evil" is.

If we assume that "evil" means that which is undesirable because it is hurtful, malicious, or just plain "not good," then a God that is omnibenevolent (which translates as " wanting all good"), which is also omnipotent (which translates as "can make whatever he wants happen") -- is simply impossible if that which is NOT GOOD still persists. Case closed.

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.

 

[sun rise]

The OP questions assumes evil is obvious and "is detrimental to our well-being," I don't accept that referential frame.

To me, what we call evil is what was good in the past. Is eating someone alive evil? We'd say yes today. But creatures from which we evolved did this all the time.

In earlier human society cannibalism was considered good and now it's considered evil.

So that illustrates that what we consider evil has changed over time.

And if someone does something we all agree is evil, what is the consequence? They suffer in the astral in a hell state where they experience the pain they inflicted. Then they are reborn to balance that in a new life in one way or the other. Thus from a long-term perspective, what appears detrimental in a single life is a learning experience over the progressive sweep of many lives.

This is the equivalent of sticking a finger in fire, getting burned and learning to not do it again. We all learn, sooner or later.

So wrap this into the rest of the OP, a benevolent God as our deepest self, goes through learning experiences which are labeled good and evil until the learning is complete.

 

[GardenLady]

I personally find that ending an argument with "case closed" undermines the argument. It is evidently intended to abort any conversation or discussion. That action serves to render the argument suspect.

ETA: Same goes for "end of discussion" and the evangelical version "God said it, I believe it, that settles it."

 

[February-Saturday]

God did not create humans as automotons to serve him without choice. We have the ability to make choices. We have selves and we can--and do--choose self-will over God's will. Isn't all evil really selfishness?

No. If you were truly selfish, you would understand enlightened self-interest and Machiavellianism, and you would end up trying to be more good in the long-run than most people are. If you're intelligent, at least.

Evil is different. Evil isn't selfish. It doesn't serve anyone. It's the self-destructive, petty sadism. Far from being born out of pragmatic self-interest, the hunting ground of evil is addiction. Evil is pursued for its own sake.

There's a difference between making money to survive and enjoy your life and squeezing every penny out of the people under you just to watch the number in your account go up. There's a difference between choosing personal chastity and murdering bar patrons looking for a consensual hook-up.

And there's a difference, as Nietzsche has long pointed out, between wanting power of your own life and power over others. Supplementing your own will onto other people is abusive; it's the hallmark of a cult in the BITE model. So if you're trusting a church to tell you what God's will is, you're being abused by its leadership. That's evil. Not individualism.

 

[Trailblazer]

The OP questions assumes evil is obvious and "is detrimental to our well-being," I don't accept that referential frame.

To me, what we call evil is what was good in the past. Is eating someone alive evil? We'd say yes today. But creatures from which we evolved did this all the time.

In earlier human society cannibalism was considered good and now it's considered evil.

So that illustrates that what we consider evil has changed over time.

And if someone does something we all agree is evil, what is the consequence? They suffer in the astral in a hell state where they experience the pain they inflicted. Then they are reborn to balance that in a new life in one way or the other. Thus from a long-term perspective, what appears detrimental in a single life is a learning experience over the progressive sweep of many lives.

This is the equivalent of sticking a finger in fire, getting burned and learning to not do it again. We all learn, sooner or later.

So wrap this into the rest of the OP, a benevolent God as our deepest self, goes through learning experiences which are labeled good and evil until the learning is complete.

Whereas I do not believe in reincarnation in the sense that we come back to this earthly life to learn more lessons, I agree with everything else you said.

I believe that after we die we will continue to progress in the spiritual world, so we will all learn, sooner or later. Depending upon how they lived this life, some souls might have an advantage when they cross over, so they might make more progress than others, but every soul has the potential to progress. The afterlife is a mystery yet to be revealed.

 

[Trailblazer]

Hello Trailblazer

Good and Evil is always interesting topics.

Can you be more specific in your definition of evil and what exactly you mean?

Would this work as an explanation of evil as you see it?:

Any harm done to another being which is either unjustified or intended on purpose, is evil.

Howdy Nimos.

I did not forget you. Your post on the other thread will still be answered, and it was next in line, but then of course I had to start this thread and get busy again.

For purposes of this thread the definition of evil would have to come from @ Koldo because he is the one who started the debate with me on another thread. I think he meant all evil, including suffering and natural evil, but maybe he can show up and speak for himself.

Were I to define evil, I would say it is as you defined it. Human and animal suffering is separate from evil and I do not believe God is off the hook for all human and animal suffering, I but I do believe God us off the hook for all evil acts humans commit which are either unjustified or intended on purpose because I believe that humans have free will to choose.

 

[shunyadragon]

The existence of evil is an ancient perspective to try and explain the dark and violent aspet of humanity and nature they could not explanation as coming from God, because God's Creation must be God. Therefore various explanations such as humanity is responsible for bringing evil into the world with the 'Original Sin] and the 'Fall.' The involvement of Demons and other manifestations of evil are common in ancient worldviews,

I reality the nature of our existence is as it is naturally whether God exists or not, and there is no such thing as an 'evil' outside source.

 

[rational experiences]

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.

Therefore you would ask where did God go, for evil to be present.

Science in male history said I conjured the spirit of evil by forcibly in the sciences changing God.

God originally you would quantify supported a loving human discussed spirituality, then it was removed when God by story human theme was changed.

As a rational self advice.

Therefore God since has not supported a loving spirituality, as part of our own human science lesson. Less of the son statement, change God, change yourself.

 

[Koldo]

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.

It should be noted however that I am including all three attributes as essential to God (with the capital letter). I can certainly imagine the existence of an evil god, for instance.

 

[Koldo]

What if God cares just as much about the well-being of evil and suffering? Actually, if he was all-loving, he would have to love evil as much as good. Kind of in the name.

Now that's an intriguing twist. But I don't think abstract concepts, such as evil, can experience some sort of well-being in the first place.

 

[Koldo]

The OP questions assumes evil is obvious and "is detrimental to our well-being," I don't accept that referential frame.

To me, what we call evil is what was good in the past. Is eating someone alive evil? We'd say yes today. But creatures from which we evolved did this all the time.

In earlier human society cannibalism was considered good and now it's considered evil.

So that illustrates that what we consider evil has changed over time.

And if someone does something we all agree is evil, what is the consequence? They suffer in the astral in a hell state where they experience the pain they inflicted. Then they are reborn to balance that in a new life in one way or the other. Thus from a long-term perspective, what appears detrimental in a single life is a learning experience over the progressive sweep of many lives.

This is the equivalent of sticking a finger in fire, getting burned and learning to not do it again. We all learn, sooner or later.

So wrap this into the rest of the OP, a benevolent God as our deepest self, goes through learning experiences which are labeled good and evil until the learning is complete.

The biggest problem about the 'we learn from evil' argument is that evil is still unnecessary. We would probably learn a couple of things if we went through flaying, but I sincerely doubt you would find it necessary to experience it yourself to learn something. Not to mention there is an omnipotent deity that could grant you this knowledge instantly with no suffering required.