how can a good God create a world iwhere there is suffering

[Guest]

Why do you think this is inconsistent? I do not like my boss at work. In fact, I cannot stand to be in the same room with him for five minutes. But, I have to allow this relationship to "exist" for a greater "good", i.e. my paycheck!
The issue then becomes one of motives, does it not? So there is nothing inconsistent with God not "liking evil" or even "standing it's presense". The fact is it is present and He allows it to exsist. Therefore, there must be a greater good behind the suffering we temporally experience.

Except that the greatest good is one without evil. So how does the existence of evil bring about a greater good than the non-existence of evil?

Motives are irrelevant. If you preach against the existence of something, yet allow that thing to exist, that's inconsistent.

Tell me Asimov. What is your understanding of good? By what standard do you measure it from?

Red herring, this discussion isn't about my moral perspective. I'm assuming the Christian morality in this discussion.

[Guest]

Convince a man against his will; he's of the same opinion still.

You can lead a horse to water, but if he won't drink it, maybe something is wrong with it...
D.

[Guest]

As new life that is being prepared to "Freely" ask to spend eternity with God, wouldn't it make sense that we are being crafted in a process that is unique to each individual piece?

No.

I think it is very reasonable to think that the process we are being formed in is perfect and works better than alternatives.

Are you stating that God cannot bring about a perfect state of affairs without having to break a few eggs? He can't make the perfect omelette without breaking a few bad eggs? Hmm?

The people who end up with God will have the value and worth of a free willed volunteer who has endured through all tests to reach the goal.

Compared to what?

[Guest]

Derek wrote:

Let's back up a bit. Where's the logical inconsistency in the following?

a.God is all loving.
b.God is omnipotent
c.Evil exists
d.God has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil to exist

They don't follow. A morally sufficient reason hasn't been given.

There is no logical inconsitency here, if all four premises are maintained. Let's put it this way. If God has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil, (and the Christian thinks He does), then there is not incoherence within the Christian worldview.

By the way the bible is repleat with reasons why we should beleive that God has a morally sufficient reason. I don't have to satisfy your subjective opinion as to their worth to defeat the argument. It is philosophically sound.

[Guest]

There is no logical inconsitency here, if all four premises are maintained. Let's put it this way. If God has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil, (and the Christian thinks He does), then there is not incoherence within the Christian worldview.

And God has no morally sufficient reason for allowing evil to exist. The very concept of morality has no room for the allowance of immorality. Being moral, one would disallow immorality to infect a moral world. If God is moral, he would disallow immorality to exist.

One would have NO morally sufficient reason to allow immorality to exist. To state that one has a morally sufficient reason to allow immorality to exist is being incoherent.

By the way the bible is repleat with reasons why we should beleive that God has a morally sufficient reason. I don't have to satisfy your subjective opinion as to their worth to defeat the argument. It is philosophically sound.

You mean the bible writers are making up excuses for why their philosophy is unsound and rejected by anyone who cares to think about it.

[Guest]

Asmiov

Quote: "Except that the greatest good is one without evil. So how does the existence of evil bring about a greater good than the non-existence of evil"?

Indeed. The greatest good is a world without evil. This was the original
state of affairs, was it not? Since you are questioning the problem from a Christian view, simply revisit the Genesis account. All that God created was good! Man through his own free act made evil actual in his experience through disobedience of a specific command. Man could have 'eaten from the tree of life' and none of us would be having this discussion right now!

So then how does evil's exisitence now bring about a greater good? Man chose his course. God is dealing with us based upon that choice.
The remedy is the merits of Christ who died and rose again.

Quote: "Motives are irrelevant. If you preach against the existence of something, yet allow that thing to exist, that's inconsistent".

I disagree. The motives of a paycheck in my analogy were I admit, too simplistic. But the motive of God runs much deeper. It's His love. Love is His motive Asimov. Why He allows as much suffering and evil as He does can only be explained by His love. If He elected to end all evil and suffering tonight at midnight, where would you be?

[Guest]

Indeed. The greatest good is a world without evil. This was the original
state of affairs, was it not? Since you are questioning the problem from a Christian view, simply revisit the Genesis account. All that God created was good! Man through his own free act made evil actual in his experience through disobedience of a specific command. Man could have 'eaten from the tree of life' and none of us would be having this discussion right now!

Irrelevant. If the greatest good is a world without evil, and God desires the world to be the greatest good, it would never have had evil in it. Regardless of what Man desires, if God does not wish it, it wouldn't have happened.

God desired all of these events to occur.

So then how does evil's exisitence now bring about a greater good? Man chose his course. God is dealing with us based upon that choice.
The remedy is the merits of Christ who died and rose again.

The greatest good MUST exist if God wants it to exist. It never would have degenerated from the greatest good if God did not want it to. There is no "dealing". You make it sound like God's knowledge is contingent, which is impossible given that knowledge is necessary.

Why He allows as much suffering and evil as He does can only be explained by His love.

Really? I beat my girlfriend, the only reason I do it is because I love her. Doesn't sound very consistent, does it?

If He elected to end all evil and suffering tonight at midnight, where would you be?

Wherever he, as someone who can establish any state of affairs that he wants and loves me and wants the greatest good to be established, wants me to be.

[Guest]

There is no logical inconsitency here, if all four premises are maintained. Let's put it this way. If God has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil, (and the Christian thinks He does), then there is not incoherence within the Christian worldview.

And God has no morally sufficient reason for allowing evil to exist. The very concept of morality has no room for the allowance of immorality. Being moral, one would disallow immorality to infect a moral world. If God is moral, he would disallow immorality to exist.

One would have NO morally sufficient reason to allow immorality to exist. To state that one has a morally sufficient reason to allow immorality to exist is being incoherent.

By the way the bible is repleat with reasons why we should beleive that God has a morally sufficient reason. I don't have to satisfy your subjective opinion as to their worth to defeat the argument. It is philosophically sound.

You mean the bible writers are making up excuses for why their philosophy is unsound and rejected by anyone who cares to think about it.

Either you don't get the argument, or you are just trying to be argue for the sake of arguement.

What you are saying above does not amount to much more that simply your opinion about what God would or wouldn't do. And the last statement is just ad hominem.

Within the Christian worldview, we believe that God has a good reason to allow evil and suffering to exist. Similar to how a dentist has a good reason for causing me the pain that he does when he pulls my tooth. There is no logical inconsistency here at all.

God can be good, and allow bad to exist, for His own good purposes.

Quote:

Do you not believe that one's view of good and evil is due to their enviorment and culture? In an atheist worldview, what else could it be?

Now you're flip-flopping. Please be consistent, as you've made two separate statements and now you're asking me a different question. I've said our concepts of good and evil, like all knowledge, comes from our environment.

Then you make two statements:

1) That I said that evil is determined by culture and environment.
2) That I said that one's view of good and evil is due to their environment.

So which is it?

I was using the two more or less interchangably. Could you establish a definition for "culture" and "enviorment"? Either way, I'm interested to know the answer to the question.

[Guest]

I think your difficulty, Asimov, lies in your present understanding of free will. If man truly has a free will, he may choose to do good or chose to do evil, or choose to do anything else he chooses to do.

God creating beings which will choose only the good is inherently contradictory and thus incoherent. For if they choose only the good, they are not free to chooe the bad. This means that they are not truly free will agents.

I disbelieve that God allows murder and torture, and rape of little girls, etc. for some "greater good". I think affirmations that He does so, do an injustice to His all loving character. This kind of thinking also leads people to hate God.

Somehow, when man and all nature fell from the way God created it, God allowed it all to continue.

Suppose, at the present time, God should prevent all harm from happening to people.

1. To prevent people harming other people, it would be necessary to remove the free will of those who do the harming.

2. To prevent people from being harmed by natural forces, the stability of the world and nature would have to be suspended. For example, if you threw a rock over the cliff, it would fall, but if you stepped over the cliff yourself, you wouldn't --- so that you could not be harmed. There would be no consistency in the forces of nature.

So God cannot prevent evil in the world, and still maintain free will, and world stability.

[Guest]

Hi Asimov,

(I keep wanting to call you Isaac)

I would like to echo Derek in thanking you for your continued participation in this thread.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me that your reasoning presupposes that God doesn't operate within limits. That was the way I expected you to answer Traveler's workplace analogy. It's one thing to put up with a boss you don't like for the greater good of a paycheck when you're only human. It's quite another thing indeed when you're the all-powerful master of the universe who can shape reality to whatever whim is desired to put up with suffering.

Is that a fair presentation of where your coming from?

If the greatest good is a world without evil, and God desires the world to be the greatest good, it would never have had evil in it.

So your question, in it's barest form is...

"Given the presupposition of an all-powerful God that wants only a perfect world, why do we have an imperfect one?"

Am I understanding you correctly?

Perry