Posted on 09/03/2023 10:10:00 AM PDT by daniel1212
Certainly that logical fallacy, a superficial ignorant parroted polemic (such as invokes everything from the Flood to AIDS as a moral argument against God), can be answered. There simply is no contradiction btwn God being omnipotent (and omniscient) and all good (from whom all good has come, as the creator of an exceedingly vast, systematicity ordered universe, exquisitely fine-tuned for our physical life), and the allowance of evil, For unless you want a world in which mankind is like a cloud or a robot, then allowing evil is a necessary good if: Man is to be a being with the ability to make moral choices; And if such choices are to have effects/consequences, for both good and evil, And which consequences can affect others as well as self, directly or indirectly. But which God can make to ultimately work out for what is Good, in the light of all that can be known. Which includes just punishment for eternal beings which manifest they wanted the opposite of God, (John 3:19–21) though only being punished according to what they could and did choose to do, (Deuteronomy 24:16; Luke 10:1- 15; Revelation 20:12; cf. 2 Corinthians 8:12) while making all to work out to the benefit of those who honestly choose Him over sin, seeking and finding the mercy of God in the Lord Christ. (Roman 8:28) Consider some alternatives. God could have, 1. made us (and angels) with no moral standard or sense or deprived us from the moral ability to respond to or choose good [morally insensible, even as with clouds]. 2. granted us free moral agency, but never have given us anything to choose between [negation of moral choices, and no devil or God]. 3. left man only with recourse to finite competing sources as his ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security, and supreme judge of what is good [atheism and atheistic governments]. 4. called man to make the Creator their ultimate object of spiritual affection and allegiance and source of security as being what is right and what is best for man, versus finite created beings or things being one's "god," and provided moral revelation and influences. Yet always have moved us to do good, and never have allowed us to choose evil (even if as by making believing in God and choosing good so utterly compelling — like God appearing daily and always doing miracles on demand, and preventing any seeming evidence to the contrary - so that no man could attempt to make excuses for not believing in Him [effective negation of any freedom to choose]). 5. allowed created beings a negative alternative to faithfulness to the creator, and the ability to choose evil, but immediately reversed any effects and not penalized such [negation of consequences to choices]. 6. allowed us to do bad, but restricted us to a place where it would harm no one but ourselves [isolated consequences to choices]. 7. allowed us to choose between good and evil, and to affect others by it, but not ultimately reward or punish us accordingly [negation of judicial and eternal consequences, positive or negative]. 8. given us the ability to choose, and alternatives to chose between, and to face and overcome evil or be overcome by it, with the ability to effect others and things by our choices, and to exercise some reward or punishment in this life for morality, and ultimately reward or punishment all accordingly [pure justice]. 9. restrained evil to some degree, while making the evil that man does to work out for what is Good, with justice yet with mercy, and grace, towards those who want good, and who thus the One who is supremely Good. 10. in accordance with 8, the Creator could have chose to manifest Himself in the flesh, and by Him to provide man a means of escaping the ultimate retribution of Divine justice, and instead receive unmerited eternal favor, at God's own expense and credit, appropriated by a repentant obedient faith, in addition to the loss or gaining of certain rewards based on one's quality of work as a child of God. And eternally punish, to varying degrees relative to iniquity and accountability, those whose response to God's revelation manifested they want evil, [justice maintained while mercy and grace given]. But man, as an exceedingly finite being who is but a speck in this universe, and in the sea of humanity, and whose existence on earth occupies an infinitesimal amount of time, and who is very ignorant of what all the effects of his choices have been and will be, in time and eternity, and quite impotent to make them all work out as he/she wants, not only in one’s own life but in others, and for this life, as well as eternity, is in no position to sit in judgment upon an omniscient and omnipotent being and giver of life, who alone knows what all the effects will be of even our most seemingly insignificant actions or inactions, not only in this life but for eternity. And can make all work out for what is Good, for what is just, as well as showing mercy and grace. And which the God of the Bible has often manifestly done already, and promises to do for those who choose the ultimate Good, the living and true God, (Romans 8:28) by His grace, thanks be to God. This the choices of an omniscient omnipotent Being cannot be judged as being evil or good by extremely finite and relatively ignorant man. Not that - in my ignorance myself - I have/do not too often protested His dealing with me as I subjectively imagined Him, though objectively blessed, and I am being blessed right now listening to,
“The alternative is faith in natural causes”
That is not the only alternative. I already gave the example of the Hindu explanation which fits neither of your two cases.
I did not see your Hindi alternative to an infinitely wise omniscient as well as omnipotent being, who knows what every single effect will be of every choice of man, of instead that of faith in purely natural causes
What?! By quoting you, I am actually quoting myself?!
Now you really are hallucinating!
In my postings, I generally quote, point for point, what the other party has stated, and then address each and every separate assertion (e.g., by identifying a fallacy - rarely does this get even only the slightest "rise" out of anyone, unfortunately).
Are you saying I shouldn't first quote you, for the sake of clarity, before proceeding to refute your individual claims?
Regards,
>>> If God is all powerful, then why can’t he stop evil from happening?
A: He is... and what do you think His plan is, if not to rid His creation of evil? Part of ridding His creation of evil is to demonstrate to His creation what happens when it is allowed to happen... to demonstrate and teach us that we need Him to save us from it.
>>> That would mean he’s not all powerful.
No... It means He is capable of completing His perfect GOOD Will in spite of things being done out of evil intent. That which is meant for evil, God turns to good.
>>> If God refuses to prevent evil, then he can not be all good.
The gift of free will comes with the obligation to allow the consequences of that free will... otherwise, free will was never given. This however does NOT negate His right to judge all such actions of free will, whether they be good or bad.
So can a Christian explain how God is all powerful and good in this case?
One would think that the smarter a person is, the more moral they would be (i.e. less sinful)... simply because they should be able to understand and foresee the consequences of sinful acts in society... but that is not the case. In fact, it is quite the opposite and demonstrated in the example of Lucifer himself who was created as the most powerful and most intelligent being under God Himself... and yet he became the father of all lies because pride evolved in him from whatever level of ignorance he DID have.
This is the basis from which humility serves us best... to be able to recognize from this example and others that we are NOT God.... and that without Him, our existence is void of peace, love, hope, etc... to the point where our existence is destined to eternal chaos without His order and law. Those who come to realize that we CANNOT live perfect and sin-less lives without His direct intervention are those who seek and find His salvation through Jesus Christ.
In short, God allows Evil so that we will KNOW why we need Him... and to save us from an eternal existence without Him.
Eventually, evil will be bound, and only those who have given over their free will back to the Lord Jesus who died for us, will have life and freedom In Him.
God is Good AND All powerful BECAUSE His Mercy outweighs his need for justice against ALL of us... for we are ALL sinners.
When I say “your gut,” I’m referring to higher intution. Don’t be distracted by the anotomical aspect in the metaphor.
I don’t think you’d deny the usefulness of higher intuition.
And as for what you say here about God’s intentions, slow down a bit. You seem distracted, in that you try to ignore Revelation 21:4.
But most of all, how could you possibly pretend to know what God would think? You can only know what you would think.
Don’t recognize the quote, sorry...?
The issue was why is their evil in the world—and/or why do bad things happen to good people.
Hindus explain evil as being a function of evil gods in the pantheon.
That was my point.
Certain persons in politics yearn for such power
Sounds like you’ve been kitten-huffing Voltaire 🤣
But Voltaire apparently never noticed Luke 13:1-5.
I hereby assert that such a world would be devoid of suffering (surely you don't dispute that!) and would therefore be preferable!
I assert in particular that, while some foggy-minded human beings might not choose that, an omniscient, all-loving Creator must perforce prefer that.
My "personal feelings" about that are irrelevant. Instead, I assert that, objectively, a world without suffering is always preferable to a world with suffering.
Can you seriously dispute that?!
Regards,
Now do hot stoves...
I didn’t say pain and suffering don’t matter. I said they don’t last.
Other religions contradict, on logical grounds, the Gospel of Christ, therefore they are not true, so why would we believe them?
The original issue is “why does God let bad things happen?” It wasn’t about empires or the bad things they do. I was making a general point in a general way to address the issue. If God intervened, he’d be one busy deity micromanaging every decision. Having worked in an environment where the boss did that, I’d say everyone at every level people would stop making decisions and just let God sort it out. I’d argue that’s the opposite of what God wanted; thus we have to suffer our own little Hell’s the same way a child learns not to stick a bread knife in the electric socket.
England advanced civilization, literacy and it allowed people to move there and set up shop. Yes, they were instrumental in ending slavery in the West. (It continues to this day in a lot of places. Especially in Muslim countries, where I’d wager the thing they call Allah is the opposite of the Christian God.) There’s a good argument that slavery happens in the US. Years ago, a fence in Sarasota bought a van and took his thieves around to various top-end neighborhoods and they’d hit three houses at a time. He paid them in drugs...slavery. It was stupid and the cops nabbed the whole group after about a month. It would be nice if God smacked the Hell out of him. But the upshot was hundreds of people bought alarm systems, arguably a good outcome. Everyone had neighborhood meetings and doubled up on our security, also good. So we didn’t need God to micromanage the situation even though some people got hurt.
But the point isn’t about history and who did what to whom, it was about God letting bad things happen. (Also, from the perspective of good things/bad things, I’d say LBJ was one evil bastard who destroyed the black family structure on purpose with his Great Society and welfare. He even said it out loud, “We’ll have these (plural n-word) voting for us for the next hundred years.” One might ask why God didn’t strike him dead for all the misery he caused. I’d like to think God was waiting at the pearly gates smacking a metaphorical rubber hose against the palm of his hand.
Again, it was all about God, good vs. evil and not about history. That was just a ten-thousand-foot example.
But you never quoted me.
If your comments in post # 194 are your own and not mine, why would you claim to have quoted me?
I believe there is a place for the good book in society as a moral compass, but my faith there is a God is Zero.
What manner of man is this? He commands even the wind and waves, and they obey him.
Problem is, we simply don’t know all the ways in which nature and the supernatural’s relation with one another were modified by the fall.
(”What if you fell off a cliff? Would you just hit the ground and nothing would happen?” ...we don’t know, maybe before the Fall He’d have sent an angel to keep you from tripping in the first place.)
Assuming “everything else remains the same” after sin is natural to think, but there is no specific evidence for it.
God does not “let evil happen”, so the premise is false. All beings choose good or evil, whether natural or supernatural, except for the uncreated Creator who is only good.
I was actually in Gainesville at the time when they filmed some of the scenes there.
You cannot compel Grace, but you can get in its way.
On the other hand, see Saul of Tarsus. God does things for His own purposes sometimes, even when we think He shouldn’t.
We are in agreement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.