Evil exists between the Beginning of a Promise and its Fulfillment

[Lucretius]

See, said the Jews, how he loved him; and some of them asked, Could not he, who opened the blind man’s eyes, have prevented this man’s death?

In this world, evil “exists” only because we exist between the beginning of creation and it’s fulfillment. Death “exists” because God hasn’t yet fulfilled His promise of resurrection. Evil “exists” because it is necessary for a greater good that God may or may not have fully brought about yet.

Therefore, an atheist has to deny the resurrection, that a greater good can come out of an evil, and ultimately the fulfilment of all creation and history. The atheist isn’t just looking at the “facts of evil” and going from there, but is himself making metaphysical and theological claims, ones that we don’t have evidence for, actually

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[fhansen]

See, said the Jews, how he loved him; and some of them asked, Could not he, who opened the blind man’s eyes, have prevented this man’s death?

In this world, evil “exists” only because we exist between the beginning of creation and it’s fulfillment. Death “exists” because God hasn’t yet fulfilled His promise of resurrection. Evil “exists” because it is necessary for a greater good that God may or may not have fully brought about yet.

Therefore, an atheist has to deny the resurrection, that a greater good can come out of an evil, and ultimately the fulfilment of all creation and history. The atheist isn’t just looking at the “facts of evil” and going from there, but is himself making metaphysical and theological claims, ones that we don’t have evidence for, actually

Christi pax,

Lucretius

We look at the long-term, placing our hope in He who alone knows the beginning from the end. But for someone who doesn’t *know *Him, the promises of our faith can have little impact.

 

[JapaneseKappa]

See, said the Jews, how he loved him; and some of them asked, Could not he, who opened the blind man’s eyes, have prevented this man’s death?

In this world, evil “exists” only because we exist between the beginning of creation and it’s fulfillment. Death “exists” because God hasn’t yet fulfilled His promise of resurrection. Evil “exists” because it is necessary for a greater good that God may or may not have fully brought about yet.

Therefore, an atheist has to deny the resurrection, that a greater good can come out of an evil, and ultimately the fulfilment of all creation and history. The atheist isn’t just looking at the “facts of evil” and going from there, but is himself making metaphysical and theological claims, ones that we don’t have evidence for, actually

You’ve taken a position that few religious people I’ve talked to have been brave enough to take: that “Evil… is necessary for a greater good.”

Having made such a pronouncement, I think you have to be very careful about what you mean by good and evil.

For example, lets define evil as “something contrary to God’s wishes.” Then your assertion is equivalent to “Something contrary to God’s wishes… is necessary for a greater good.” Or, put another way, strict adherence to God’s wishes will produce the worse good. Colloquially we might even say that God does not wish for the greater good.

 

[Lucretius]

You’ve taken a position that few religious people I’ve talked to have been brave enough to take: that “Evil… is necessary for a greater good.”

Having made such a pronouncement, I think you have to be very careful about what you mean by good and evil.

For example, lets define evil as “something contrary to God’s wishes.” Then your assertion is equivalent to “Something contrary to God’s wishes… is necessary for a greater good.” Or, put another way, strict adherence to God’s wishes will produce the worse good. Colloquially we might even say that God does not wish for the greater good.

You make a good point, and I admit that I was working in the middle of an argument rather than at the beginning.

The reason I ignored this objection is because it is immaterial to the purpose of this post. I can argue instead that evil entered the world through humanity, with God tolerating evil because of His love for Humanity, and my major point will still be left intact.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[Lucretius]

Maybe another way of saying this is that I’m not looking a the problem of evil at the beginning of creation, but between the beginning and it’s completion.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[JapaneseKappa]

Maybe another way of saying this is that I’m not looking a the problem of evil at the beginning of creation, but between the beginning and it’s completion.

Lets say that the standard of goodness is: that which makes the world better at its completion. If evil is required to bring about a greater good, then according to that standard of goodness, evil is actually good.

 

[Lucretius]

Lets say that the standard of goodness is: that which makes the world better at its completion. If evil is required to bring about a greater good, then according to that standard of goodness, evil is actually good.

That’s not the right way to put it. A better way would be that some goods require an evil, like martyrdom, while good itself doesn’t require evil.

In a sense you are correct, though. God will bring greater good at of all evils, and so, in a sense, make evil good.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[NM505StKate]

In this world, evil “exists” only because we exist between the beginning of creation and it’s fulfillment. Death “exists” because God hasn’t yet fulfilled His promise of resurrection. Evil “exists” because it is necessary for a greater good that God may or may not have fully brought about yet.

Therefore, an atheist has to deny the resurrection, that a greater good can come out of an evil, and ultimately the fulfilment of all creation and history. The atheist isn’t just looking at the “facts of evil” and going from there, but is himself making metaphysical and theological claims, ones that we don’t have evidence for, actually

Christi pax,

Lucretius

Some assumptions here Sir. First you bring about God creating the universe which you have to prove. Via science we have a firm understanding of how the Earth formed. We don’t know how life started nor what happened before recorded time started. Now God is all powerful and perfect yes? That being assumed true God then can stop evil at any moment. God could have even made sure evil never came into the world. Perfection should lead to perfection. So does it beg the question as to why didn’t God stop evil in the first place? Before you say it was to test man with God, being all knowing, the outcome was predetermined.

 

[Lucretius]

Some assumptions here Sir. First you bring about God creating the universe which you have to prove. Via science we have a firm understanding of how the Earth formed. We don’t know how life started nor what happened before recorded time started.

Understanding the mechanics of an event isn’t the same as understanding the event. Not only is the scientific answer compatible with “God creating the heavens and the earth,” but the scientific answer is probably itself a fantasy!

A lot of theories can explain footprints, and claiming one is the truth without witnessing it is very dogmatic, in the bad sense Naturalism is far more fantastical then any theology of fairy tale!

Now God is all powerful and perfect yes? That being assumed true God then can stop evil at any moment.

He could, but a lot of people would end up in hell…

God could have even made sure evil never came into the world.

Humans brought evil into the world. Furthermore, what we call evil might not be evil to God: God isn’t human, and thus doesn’t follow our morality.

Perfection should lead to perfection. So does it beg the question as to why didn’t God stop evil in the first place?

The perfection of God isn’t the perfection of creation. God cannot make creation God.

God didn’t stop evil…no, my point is God is stopping evil, He just isn’t finished yet. The POE exists in between the time God promised to defeat evil, and His fulfillment of this promise.

Christi pax,

Lucretius