The problem of evil

[stemelbow]

Your first sentence does not accommodate the qualifications you assign to it in your second sentence.

Perhaps not. I don't really see how, but perhaps you are correct.

The first sentence is absolute; i.e, "all things." Note, too, that you introduce a new element in the second sentence that strikes me as an argumentive distraction, to wit: "all by Himself."

I agree with your last point as well...I struggle to get the point across while maintaining focus. The addition was an effort to maintain focus.

Thanks for the critique.

love,

stem

[stemelbow]

At first it might seem that if God created all things, then evil must have been created by God. However, evil is not a

[stemelbow]

Simply said- God does not create evil. God only creates that which is good. He gives that good- which is always innocent in it's beginning, the power to choose- whether to be obedient or not. He also provides laws and both rewards and consequences for our actions that we ourselves choose to do. As we make those choices we are either protected and justified by law or we are condemned by law. If we become evil, it is only because we ourselves have created it for ourselves. We ourselves therefore are the creators of evil and of good- through our choices.

Luvifer was not created evil nor was he created with a knowledges that he would become evil. He was innocent in the beginning just as you and I- he was on equal footing the same as the rest of us. he chose to become evil through disobedience. He was not predestined to become evil, his actual destiny of his creation was to become a God himself just as it is our destiny to become the same. but the choice is ours and ours alone. No one writes our future except for our own choices- they write our future.

I agree with what you have said, essentially. Of course in this explanation it seems creation was never creation ex nihilo.

love,

stem

[stemelbow]

Hi Stem.

Catholics often define evil as "absence of good". You may think of this as a mental gymnastic. I don't. I'll give the briefest defense. Evil isn't anything that is. Evil is things that are not. It is health that is missing. It is virtue that is lacking. It is that which is contrary to good nature...that is a temporary result of the Fall of Man, which is our "felix culpa" (happy fault), which brings about a greater glory in redemption, than would have been without a Fall. Evil isn't created.

I agree with you up to this point.

It is by man, made in God's image, "Uncreation". So yes, I hold that God creates good things out of nothing, ex nihilo. But I say He does even more, making good come out of less than nothing, evil. In this Valley of Tears, we have various disasters that befall us, the greatest of which is inevitable death...but if death is swallowed up in victory, if God used the death of His only Begotten to accomplish life, we see that the good God, who created everything good, Who permitted that evil should enter His good Creation, makes good even out of the greatest evil.

3DOP

I just have a few questions to consider then...If God knew all things before anything else existed, including all things that would happen as a result of His creation, then all things are directly contingent upon God, right? If deeds/thoughts are included in all things, which they must be if God conceived of them as well, then these deeds/thoughts must have their origin in God's conception, right? If not, what is your explanation for this?

You see...if God is what is good, and He alone existed before creating anything, and He alone knew all things that would happen as a result of His creation, then all things that come about due to His creation were initially conceived of by God, right? If God before creating determined that no creature would suffer any amount of suffering ever, then none would suffer ever... If God before creating determined that there would be no Lucifer to rebel, then there would be no Lucifer to rebel, right?

love,

stem

[Zakuska]

If God is all powerful. Why doesn't he just anialate evil in the first place. He must be pretty sadistic to allow his creations to suffer so.

[stemelbow]

If God is all powerful. Why doesn't he just anialate evil in the first place. He must be pretty sadistic to allow his creations to suffer so.

That's an interesting point too. If God is all-powerful, if God knew the outcome of each of His creations, why create some creature out of nothing if that creature will suffer eternally? You see, according to the mainstream concept, all creatures who will suffer eternally in hell, the worst type of suffering imaginable, really have no way to avoid it, since God knew their exact choices before creating them out of nothing.

love,

stem

[kicks]

If God is all powerful. Why doesn't he just anialate evil in the first place. He must be pretty sadistic to allow his creations to suffer so.

God is not all powerful. He has power only to the extent that it does not conflict with the free will of His creations.

[Kevin Christensen]

There is always...

Isa. 45:7 (KJV)

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

Where God explicitly takes credit for it.

He did create the serpent after all and put the Tree of Knowledge in the Garden in the first place.

Avraham Gileadi proposes in his essay in Isaiah and the Prophets that in context this refers not to himself as the absolute source of all good and evil, but rather refers specifically to God's provision of covenant blessings (peace) and their associated covenant curses (evil).

On the other hand, Margaret Barker suggests that this Deutero-Isaiah statement comes as a statement of the inevitable logic of radical monotheism, and that this radical monotheism is a break from previous understandings that involved fallen angels. (See The Older Testament, for example, and her Isaiah commentary.)

In either case, the text has as history, an author, and a context, all of which we filter through interpretive lenses which all call into question its use as a stand-alone proof text.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[ElfLord]

You cannot have a jar of evil.

Thats news to the UMWs on board... some consider Mayonnaise Evil.

[stemelbow]

God is not all powerful. He has power only to the extent that it does not conflict with the free will of His creations.

Which I would argue is all-powerful by definition.

love,

stem

[Zakuska]

Avraham Gileadi proposes in his essay in Isaiah and the Prophets that in context this refers not to himself as the absolute source of all good and evil, but rather refers specifically to God's provision of covenant blessings (peace) and their associated covenant curses (evil).

On the other hand, Margaret Barker suggests that this Deutero-Isaiah statement comes as a statement of the inevitable logic of radical monotheism, and that this radical monotheism is a break from previous understandings that involved fallen angels. (See The Older Testament, for example, and her Isaiah commentary.)

In either case, the text has as history, an author, and a context, all of which we filter through interpretive lenses which all call into question its use as a stand-alone proof text.

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

I think this might simply be a case of... "As far as it is translated correctly."

• The One forming light and creating darkness, Causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these. (Isaiah 45:7, NASB)
• I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the LORD, do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7, NIV)

Isaiah 45:7 contrasts opposites. Darkness is the opposite of light. However, evil is not the opposite of peace. The Hebrew word translated "peace" is sha?lo?m,² which has many meanings, mostly related to the well being of individuals. Ra??a?h,³ the Hebrew word translated "evil" in the KJV often refers to adversity or calamity. There are two forms of the word. Strong's H7451a most often refers to moral evil, whereas Strong's H7451b (the form used here) most often refers to calamity or distress. Obviously, "calamity" is a better antonym of "peace" than "evil."

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/evil.html

[kicks]

Which I would argue is all-powerful by definition.

love,

stem

And I would argue that there is a difference between having maximum power and being all-powerful.

[stemelbow]

And I would argue that there is a difference between having maximum power and being all-powerful.

Fine by me. I care not which terms are used.

love,

stem

[Rob Osborn]

Evil exists because of two facts. First is that there are laws with both rewards and penalties for either obeying or disobeying. Second is that there are created beings with free will to live under these laws.

That said, God is all powerful in his ability to perfectly judge and execute judgment where needed and to reward perfectly where rewards are justified. God does not know beforehand who of his future creations will choose bad or good, that is why we truly are free to choose- we are not predestined to some outcome that only God knows.

[stemelbow]

Evil exists because of two facts. First is that there are laws with both rewards and penalties for either obeying or disobeying. Second is that there are created beings with free will to live under these laws.

I don't know if I necessarily buy your stated facts. Whether there are rewards or not anyone can engage in the evil of envy. On your second one, depends on what yoou mean by created beings.

That said, God is all powerful in his ability to perfectly judge and execute judgment where needed and to reward perfectly where rewards are justified. God does not know beforehand who of his future creations will choose bad or good, that is why we truly are free to choose- we are not predestined to some outcome that only God knows.

I don't know if we know, or you know if what you say here is true or not. For instance, God knew which of the apostles would betray Jesus, did He not?

thanks fo rthe comments.

love,

stem

[paulpatter]

God is not all powerful. He has power only to the extent that it does not conflict with the free will of His creations.

I wonder about the idea that God is not all powerful. Elder McConkie, for example, states: "To carry forward his own purposes among men and nations, the Lord foreordained chosen spirit children in pre-existence and assigned them to come to earth at particular times and places so that they might aid in furthering the divine will. . . . The mightiest and greatest spirits were foreordained to stand as prophets and spiritual leaders, giving to the people such portion of the Lord's word as was designed for the day and age involved." (Mormon Doctrine, p. 290)

If God has power only "to the extent that it does not conflict with the free will of His creations," he is, in fact, all powerful. Why? Because he knows in advance--'before the world was"--those intelligences who will exercise their free will pursuant to his designs: Thus, "Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born." (Abr. 3:23)

Then there is this: ". . .there is nothing that the Lord thy God shall take into his heart to do but that he will do it." (Abr. 3:17)

And this: "And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command [emphasis added] them." (Abr. 3:25)

Note, too, that both the Father and the Son referred to themselves as the "Beginning and the End."

[CV75]

Lucifer rebelled because God conceived of the rebellion all on his own.

No so:

Agency exercised by truth and intelligence (the personification of which is God Himself) is the basis for existence (D&C 93: 30). When not so exercised, we have condemnation (D&C 93: 31). A fullness of existence can be called

[nicolasconnault]

Let's use our imagination for a moment.

You are God.

Despite being all-powerful, you are bound by eternal laws, and in fact it is through your obedience to these eternal laws that you are able to orchestrate the salvation of souls.

Because you are omniscient, as you plan the salvation of billions of souls, you immediately become aware of all future events, including the actions of the souls to whom you will grant free agency.

Are you responsible for the actions of free agents if you know them in advance?

Is a parent the source of all the evils he knows his children will commit? (I know my son will lie eventually).

[stemelbow]

Stem had said:

Lucifer rebelled because God conceived of the rebellion all on his own.

No so:

Agency exercised by truth and intelligence (the personification of which is God Himself) is the basis for existence (D&C 93: 30). When not so exercised, we have condemnation (D&C 93: 31). A fullness of existence can be called

[Vance]

Evil has no existence of its own, it is really the absence of God.

Then how can it exist at all, if God is omnipresent?

[stemelbow]

Let's use our imagination for a moment.

You are God.

Despite being all-powerful, you are bound by eternal laws, and in fact it is through your obedience to these eternal laws that you are able to orchestrate the salvation of souls.

I can do that. Just to be clear this sounds to be the LDS view, rather than the mainstream view though.

Because you are omniscient, as you plan the salvation of billions of souls, you immediately become aware of all future events, including the actions of the souls to whom you will grant free agency.

Are you responsible for the actions of free agents if you know them in advance?

On the LDS view, I don't think that's possible. On the mainstream view, it must be so. Mainstream ideas are that God created all things out of nothing, and being all-knowing and all-powerful, He must be the source of all events that take place as a result of His act of creation. Why? Because He designed it out of nothing. He, alone, conceived of every thing that would happen. Every evil, for instance, that is ever done was conceived of by God before anyone existed, on the mainstream view--if taken to its logical conclusion. Such is not necessarily the case for the LDS view.

Is a parent the source of all the evils he knows his children will commit? (I know my son will lie eventually).

Of course not. Parents do not create out of nothing. And while we have a perspective of "all will lie at some point" as history seems to indicate, we simply do not know the details of each act/thought that will happen to our children. This is just a poor analogy when considering the argument laid forth.

love,

stem

[stemelbow]

Then how can it exist at all, if God is omnipresent?

Very good point. If God is everywhere, then how can evil ever be done, assuming He is good? The mainstream view is illogical as contradictions must be made at nearly every turn in hopes to hold it.

love,

stem

[CV75]

To be clear/fair, my comment above, in context, was in reference to the mainstream concept of God--not to the LDS view.

Yes, I understood that. I just like to promote the LDS view in favor of the mainstream view.

[LDSToronto]

Let's use our imagination for a moment.

You are God.

Despite being all-powerful, you are bound by eternal laws, and in fact it is through your obedience to these eternal laws that you are able to orchestrate the salvation of souls.

Because you are omniscient, as you plan the salvation of billions of souls, you immediately become aware of all future events, including the actions of the souls to whom you will grant free agency.

Are you responsible for the actions of free agents if you know them in advance?

Is a parent the source of all the evils he knows his children will commit? (I know my son will lie eventually).

It depends what you mean by omniscient. Is God able to see the future so clearly that he knows the exact lie, the exact wording, the exact time of the lie? Or, does he have a notion that lies will be told, and he shows the way to repentance?

If God knows perfectly what I will do, then I have free will, and thus, no agency to change my path.

[Mudcat]

No evil ever would exist or occur or be thought of if God did not conceive of the evil designs before creating ex nihilo, right?

I agree with your logic on this. As an Evangelical, I see no way around the issue that God, as the Divine creator of all things, is responsible for the existence of evil.

Though I agree with the notion of free agency, such agency does not alleviate the responsibility God has for evils presence.

The way I understand it, as it relates to the problem of evil, is that creating free agents and allowing them the opportunity to be drawn into a state of perfection/goodness is better than not creating such free agents. This seems to be God's goal... drawing free agents into a loving fellowship with Himself.

Evil, as I see it, is any action that is against the nature of God but evil seems to be a necessary element for free agents to make choices relational to God. Ergo evil must exist for this sort of stuff to actually work.

However, not only do I hold God ultimately responsible for making evil, I hold him ultimately responsible for it's demise in the future. The fact that evil will cease at some future point, with a greater good being accomplished is a strongsuit for an Evangelical view, IMO.

In contrast, LDS seem to think that God is not ultimately responsible for evil and works to organizationally diminish evil and increase good. However given the infinite nature of evil that seems also consistent with such a view, evil can never be eliminated.

Just some thoughts.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

edited - grammar and syntax