The problem of evil

[ERayR]

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

Here is another thought for you to consider. Good and evil are eternal principles and as long as there are people (spirits) being advanced and tested there will be good and evil. Hence they will exist without end.

God has chosen and is the embodiment of good and those that oppose good embocy evil to some degree. Our job is to become as God so that we no longer give evil a place to reside.

Just some thoughts.

[CV75]

evil seems to be a necessary element for free agents to make choices relational to God.

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.

Genesis 1: 31, "And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good." At least at their inception, every thing that God made was good. As He endowed His creations, particularly His children, with agency, they were able to become evil, as Lucifer demonstrated. As some indeed became evil, and others remained good, the basis for choosing between good and evil came about.

Lucifer is a fallen angel, originally good. It would seem that if all things God made were good, then Lucifer fell without being enticed by an external evil created by God. We are not told what evil enticed him, but he took the intelligence that he possessed and acted upon it contrary to God's will. We know he was very powerful, and given much light, and so may have comprehended and then experimented with its opposite, which led to his downfall. On the other hand, God comprehends all things, but does not do that which would undo them.

[Mudcat]

Here is another thought for you to consider. Good and evil are eternal principles and as long as there are people (spirits) being advanced and tested there will be good and evil. Hence they will exist without end.

God has chosen and is the embodiment of good and those that oppose good embocy evil to some degree. Our job is to become as God so that we no longer give evil a place to reside.

Just some thoughts.

Hi ERayR,

As I am thinking about it, my view has issues of it's own problems. The one that comes to the top of my mind, is that if I were to assume that God's goal is to create the maximal number (quantitatively or qualitatively) of free agents. Then why bring a stop to it at some future point (judgment) But that's just me blathering a bit.

On this thought of yours and other LDS, that evil and good both are eternal principles. Well it certainly seems to fit with your view, I'll agree. But it seems problematic to me.

Let's assume your right about it and God is good, because that is what he has chosen. If so, then God is not the locus of "Good" rather an example of good, in that He has chosen to follow a particular eternal principal vs. another to perfection. In this sense, "God" is simply the result of particular and rigorous formula.

In such a case, God is God, because of his ability to adhere to the highest principles. The problem isn't so much in God's ability to adhere, rather it's in the notion that there are principles that God must adhere to something, in order to be God... and this perfect adherence must be to "Good".

If this is so, then "Good" being some arbitrary cosmic principle like gravity is the God maker of sorts. Take Nephi for example, God could not have told Nephi anything other than to slay Laban because only someone who perfectly adhered to good could say such.

There is more to say on the matter... but I am sleepy.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

[Libs]

I don't really understand the whole idea of eternal principles hanging out there with no author. Do they have an author?

[nicolasconnault]

I don't really understand the whole idea of eternal principles hanging out there with no author. Do they have an author?

That is more a metaphysical than a theological question. Personally I don't see the need for an author to "create" eternal principles, firstly because anything eternal cannot be created (it has always existed), and secondly because that would imply a rational, logical being existing in an initially completely chaotic dimension, devoid of principles and laws.

[CV75]

The problem isn't so much in God's ability to adhere, rather it's in the notion that there are principles that God must adhere to something, in order to be God... and this perfect adherence must be to "Good".

At the very least, God is bound to stay true to Himself ("I AM that I AM", or "I SHALL BE that I SHALL BE"), which makes Him that eternal principle, which is "Good" (Matthew 19:17), wherever He came from. He must adhere to Himself, however He got that way.

[ERayR]

Hi ERayR,

As I am thinking about it, my view has issues of it's own problems. The one that comes to the top of my mind, is that if I were to assume that God's goal is to create the maximal number (quantitatively or qualitatively) of free agents. Then why bring a stop to it at some future point (judgment) But that's just me blathering a bit.

That is a problem with your view. In my view that no longer becomes a problem because as we each emulate God more and more we come to the point where evil no longer holds any attraction and there will always be those progressing through that point of the eternal time line.

On this thought of yours and other LDS, that evil and good both are eternal principles. Well it certainly seems to fit with your view, I'll agree. But it seems problematic to me.

Let's assume your right about it and God is good, because that is what he has chosen. If so, then God is not the locus of "Good" rather an example of good, in that He has chosen to follow a particular eternal principal vs. another to perfection. In this sense, "God" is simply the result of particular and rigorous formula.

In this view God is good personified. He is a locus for all his creations.

In such a case, God is God, because of his ability to adhere to the highest principles. The problem isn't so much in God's ability to adhere, rather it's in the notion that there are principles that God must adhere to something, in order to be God... and this perfect adherence must be to "Good".

I don't know of any view where God does not have to adhere to a certain set of principles to be God. The creeds (Nicene and Athenasian) outline principles that define God, thus they are principles he must adhere to (have) in order to be God. This may only be in the minds of the followers but indeed if, in their view, God did not adhere to these principles then, to them, he would not be God.

Regardless of what we may want to believe there are eternal principles that, if one wants to progress, must be followed.

If this is so, then "Good" being some arbitrary cosmic principle like gravity is the God maker of sorts. Take Nephi for example, God could not have told Nephi anything other than to slay Laban because only someone who perfectly adhered to good could say such.

There is more to say on the matter... but I am sleepy.

Respectfully,

Mudcat

I'm not sure what you mean by this and I haven't given it much thought but good and evil are not arbitrary and go much beyond things like gravity. Gravity can be suspended under certain conditions. Good and evil can not.

Again I am not sure what you mean about Nephi and Laban.

[Libs]

That is more a metaphysical than a theological question. Personally I don't see the need for an author to "create" eternal principles, firstly because anything eternal cannot be created (it has always existed), and secondly because that would imply a rational, logical being existing in an initially completely chaotic dimension, devoid of principles and laws.

The problem I see, is in how to bring order out of chaos, without intelligence. I know LDS theology speaks of "intelligences" that are eternal, but they seem to be in some kind of embryonic state, at that time, not really having the ability to make "order" (principles), I wouldn't think.

I don't know. It's difficult to make sense of it, IMO. Makes much more sense (to me) to have an eternal, unchanging God who established these principles and order in the universe.

[nicolasconnault]

The problem I see, is in how to bring order out of chaos, without intelligence. I know LDS theology speaks of "intelligences" that are eternal, but they seem to be in some kind of embryonic state, at that time, not really having the ability to make "order" (principles), I wouldn't think.

I don't know. It's difficult to make sense of it, IMO. Makes much more sense (to me) to have an eternal, unchanging God who established these principles and order in the universe.

That doesn't make sense to me, because if God was unchanging and had always existed, He would have had to define and establish the bounds and principles of his own existence. An intelligent being is a principled, orderly being. If God has always been intelligent and orderly, He then cannot have established that order at a set point in time.

[Libs]

That doesn't make sense to me, because if God was unchanging and had always existed, He would have had to define and establish the bounds and principles of his own existence. An intelligent being is a principled, orderly being. If God has always been intelligent and orderly, He then cannot have established that order at a set point in time.

The way I see it, God has always been orderly and intelligent (eternally) and whatever God creates is orderly.

If you just have eternal principles hanging out there somewhere, there is no explanation as to where they came from..

[stemelbow]

The way I see it, God has always been orderly and intelligent (eternally) and whatever God creates is orderly.

If you just have eternal principles hanging out there somewhere, there is no explanation as to where they came from..

having no explanation as to where they come from is not necessarily a problem. its merely a we don't know. But, the problem is so persistent on the mainstream concept that not only do we know where they came from but its also that we must accept a god who is the source of evil. Thus, with this, the mainstream concept of God being self-existent is infinitely more problematic then that we simply don't know the answer in regards to the LDS concept.

love,

stem

[staccato]

Here is another thought for you to consider. Good and evil are eternal principles and as long as there are people (spirits) being advanced and tested there will be good and evil. Hence they will exist without end.

God has chosen and is the embodiment of good and those that oppose good embocy evil to some degree. Our job is to become as God so that we no longer give evil a place to reside.

Just some thoughts.

But God already knows who is going to advance and who is going to pass/fail the test. If any child fails, God has knowingly created that child who will fail.

Or are you assuming ALL of God's children will eventually choose to the point they will become a God and all evil will be eradicated?

[paulpatter]

But God already knows who is going to advance and who is going to pass/fail the test. If any child fails, God has knowingly created that child who will fail.

It's difficult--perhaps impossible--to defuse your point. One can argue that the child who is foreordained to fail still had his/her agency. . .still had the freedom to make choices. But did he/she have the freedom/inclination to make failure-proof choices? Obviously not, having been pre-programmed to fail. Did Judas have the freedom to do other than betray Christ? No.

I find this to be an extremely difficult problem, and I also find--unfortunately--that the LDS explanation is something less than satisfactory. Still, we don't have all the facts at this point, do we?

[blackstrap]

men do acts which God considers evil. God does things that some men consider evil. Are there acts that are always evil no matter who does them? Or is evil situational?

[CV75]

pre-programmed to fail

God continually invites all His children only to be good (2 Ne. 26: 33). No one is foreordained to commit wicked acts. People who do wicked things were actually foreordained to a righteous work, but through their agency chose against it. Those who are foreordained to righteous works are given the agency to do so, but with that agency, the capacity to conceive and carry out the opposite work (2 Ne. 2: 11), and so must overcome a corresponding temptation in order to carry out the Lord

[paulpatter]

God continually invites all His children only to be good (2 Ne. 26: 33). No one is foreordained to commit wicked acts. People who do wicked things were actually foreordained to a righteous work, but through their agency chose against it. Those who are foreordained to righteous works are given the agency to do so, but with that agency, the capacity to conceive and carry out the opposite work (2 Ne. 2: 11), and so must overcome a corresponding temptation in order to carry out the Lord

[ERayR]

You mount a vigorous and plausible rebuttal to my argument. Still, I find it less that compelling. You write, "No one is foreordained to commit wicked acts." There are multiple references in our scriptures to intelligences/spirit children being singled out to excel in mortality; hence: 1) "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations" (Jer. 1:5). 2) "For whom he did foreknow, the did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . (Romans 8:29). 3) "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew" (Romans 11:2). 4) ". . .God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" (2 Thes. 2:13). 5) "And this is the manner after which they were ordained--being called and prepared from the foundation of the world according to the foreknowledge of God. . . (Alma 13: 3). The list goes on (and on), none of which is news to you.

Note, however, that many were not among the chosen--not foreordained--hence, it is not a stretch to suggest that at least some were "foreordained," by default, to enter mortality at a disadvantage and to fall short in managing their mortal estate. True, all have an opportunity to gain exhaltation, but some clearly have an advantage over others.

I do not believe that any were called and set apart to be failures. It was known by God that there would be those who would not measure up but they were not ordained to fail. I look at this mortal experience as a sorting test to sort out the spirits to their most coomfortable level.

[staccato]

I do not believe that any were called and set apart to be failures. It was known by God that there would be those who would not measure up but they were not ordained to fail. I look at this mortal experience as a sorting test to sort out the spirits to their most coomfortable level.

Explain Satan to me then.

[TAO]

You mount a vigorous and plausible rebuttal to my argument. Still, I find it less that compelling. You write, "No one is foreordained to commit wicked acts." There are multiple references in our scriptures to intelligences/spirit children being singled out to excel in mortality; hence: 1) "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations" (Jer. 1:5). 2) "For whom he did foreknow, the did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son. . . (Romans 8:29). 3) "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew" (Romans 11:2). 4) ". . .God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" (2 Thes. 2:13). 5) "And this is the manner after which they were ordained--being called and prepared from the foundation of the world according to the foreknowledge of God. . . (Alma 13: 3). The list goes on (and on), none of which is news to you.

Note, however, that many were not among the chosen--not foreordained--hence, it is not a stretch to suggest that at least some were "foreordained," by default, to enter mortality at a disadvantage and to fall short in managing their mortal estate. True, all have an opportunity to gain exhaltation, but some clearly have an advantage over others.

Paulputter... let me explain to you my thoughts on the issue.

Basically.... we were sent to Earth with a plan. What do I mean? I mean... all of our trials that we would face in life were preplanned by God. He knew what they were going to be - but he did not tell us. In life, thus, we are given trials. These trials are sent to help improve us, to help turn our weaknesses into strengths, that way we may be perfected and be able to properly act over our stewardship when the time comes. Life, is therefore a test, one in which we have a limited amount of time to bring our spirit to be willing to accept all God needs us to accept, for us to receive all he has to offer.

When we were spiritually made, we had flaws in us, I think. God did not give us these flaws, much as we are born with flaws here on Earth, we are not perfect. Thus, we needed a way to fix those flaws; trials were set up, on Earth, to help repair those areas we had missing. We were given weakness; the ability to be tempted, so that our flaws could be tried, and we could become strong. Our weakness was applied, as so, it became a fair chance for us - some of our trials would be hard - but none impossible to overcome - it was based on our choice. And so we came here to Earth (and God knows what choices we will make, but it is still necessary for us to come here so we can be improved). And we go through difficult trials. And some of us, despite the capability to succeed, choose to fail. And God continuously gives us chances, until the end of this life (and perhaps after) for us to make ourselves a willing spirit, so we can have what he so badly wishes to give us.

[TAO]

Explain Satan to me then.

Temptation isn't the only way to sin. You can sin out of your own choice to sin, without temptation, as well. All it takes is a choice, even a ridiculous one.

[staccato]

Temptation isn't the only way to sin. You can sin out of your own choice to sin, without temptation, as well. All it takes is a choice, even a ridiculous one.

That is not what I am referring to. In order for this alleged plan on earth to occur, God would have had to have known that Satan would turn away and act as an enabling opposition to good. Satan was supposedly one of the good guys, the son of the morning. Satan was, in essence, foreordained to his role as antagonist. He was preprogrammed to fail.

[paulpatter]

I do not believe that any were called and set apart to be failures.

Neither do I, and I haven't so stated.

: It was known by God that there would be those who would not measure up but they were not ordained to fail.

Inasmuch as they were not chosen (while others were), some were "ordained" to fail by default.

: I look at this mortal experience as a sorting test to sort out the spirits to their most coomfortable level.

Perhaps that is, indeed, the case; however, a "comfortable level" suggests a range of possibilities, some of which may include elements of failure.

[TAO]

That is not what I am referring to. In order for this alleged plan on earth to occur, God would have had to have known that Satan would turn away and act as an enabling opposition to good. Satan was supposedly one of the good guys, the son of the morning. Satan was, in essence, foreordained to his role as antagonist. He was preprogrammed to fail.

Yes, he would have, and did. God isn't one to take away our agency. Just as he doesn't reveal to us what we will do in the future, what trials we will succeed, what trials we will fail, he didn't tell Lucifer either.

No, he was not programmed to fail staccato... when we were spiritually made... it was with errors... much as when we are physically made on this earth... and born.... it is with errors as well. At least that's what I think.

[CV75]

There are multiple references in our scriptures to intelligences/spirit children being singled out to excel in mortality

Note, however, that many were not among the chosen

Every child of God's earthly mission was foreordained (Acts 17: 26). Abraham 3:22-23 can pertain to all those who were prepared to come to this earth, not just those who were "more intelligent" (verse 19). Some "noble and great" ones are listed in scripture for various purposes, as when their mission is a dispensation. I think it improper to say that these excel in mortality by virtue of their foreordaining and their assignment while others do not by virtue of theirs (D&C 58: 41). In addition, each succeeds or fails according to their own choices. We cannot look down on someone who lived in the Great Apostasy whose descendants carried out the mission of the reformation and the Restoration as not excelling within the temporal habitation and assignment they were given, but those who built their mortal foundation on them did. Jesus would not remind us that He excelled over Ruth, or that Solomon excelled.

We cannot say that God for made of a lesser caliber those who fail in their mission. All are to excel in terms of D&C 76:92, in that God has made it possible for all to choose eternal life. There is no scripture that says that any are not foreordained or chosen in some fashion to perform a mission in this life that glorifies God.

From the beginning we have been given light and its associated agency, and as beings co-eternal with God we have conceptualized its opposite and so have always defined ourselves and acted accordingly. God is still God because He can allow us to do whatever we want (with consequences) and still continue to be God, even to the point of redeeming us and allowing us to accept or reject even that. He wants us to be like Him because He knows it is in us to do so, no matter how it appears to those who would compare one to another on any level.

[CV75]

Inasmuch as they were not chosen (while others were), some were "ordained" to fail by default

None were not chosen for some mission on earth leading to eternal salvation. None that I can see were chosen to fail. God never works by default--with much individual attention He judges each of us to His right hand or His left.