God created evil

[josh987654321]

If a manufacturer knows that he has a faulty product, he doesn’t continue making that product, does he? No, he corrects it. Now, this is a human who lacks omniscience, and he knows enough to correct a faulty product. God, according to the Christian model, has the option of knowing the flaws in advance and not producing the product until it is fixed. What does he do?
Rather than remove the evil he created he gives it a certain time to roam free tempting and attacking another part of his creation. Then he sends his son to the Middle East to offer a New Deal. If you believe that My Son died for you and you don’t do this and this and this, I’ll forgive you for My faulty creation.
Remember, He only sent his Son to the Middle East. To an area about 30 miles by 15 miles in size. I guess the majority of the human population wasn’t worthy of a personal appearance. Two thousand years later there are still people who have not heard about the new way of doing things. Love and Mercy?

Trying to relate us to machines? only difference is I know I have free will, I am not a group of parts doing nothing but what it was designed to do, not a toy which only moves when He pulls the strings.

I cannot always choose what happens to me in this life, but I can absolutely choose how I react to it.

If God knows that giving us free will will also result in us abusing that gift, than as you said, it’s not that it was worth “the risk” because he is omniscient and knows but rather as C.S. Lewis rightly puts it “If God thinks this state of war in the universe a price worth paying for free will-that is, for making a live world in which creatures can do real good or harm and something of real importance can happen, instead of a toy world which only moves when He pulls the strings-then we may take it it is worth paying.”

Please read this -
Originally Posted by Extract from the book "From Sinai to Calvary":

“From Sinai to Calvary”

Jesus said: **“Contemplate this scene, My beloved, and learn that My own cannot march through life without a cross. 4) “Go and tell the world what you are learning and, if they want to silence you, shout even louder. Do this for the sake of the power of the love that unites you to Me, which is as united as these two pieces of wood that form an instrument of salvation for all of humanity.

1. “Tell the consecrated souls that the cross that they wear, is not only to adorn their chests or identify them superficially with Me. First they must gird themselves with the cross and learn to “make themselves comfortable” on it instead of running away from it. Tell them they cannot long for Tabor, if they have not first passed through Golgotha. It is here on the Cross where they will learn charity, humility, poverty of spirit and temperance in all acts of their lives. 6) “Assure them that I give proof and testimony that, the devil can be easily defeated from the experience of the cross. Contemplate Me: I am a true Man, in whom the flesh manifests its limitations, and true God, in demonstrating the relentless force of Agape Love.
2. “Pray for those who do not know of sufferings, for it is certain that they are not among My own…Observe these two condemned ones who flank Me and meditate on the ways that men carry their crosses. 8) “Some carry it with rage, with bitterness, amidst much grief. He who carries a cross in similar circumstances and with those sentiments, carries for sure a cross, which has no sense because instead of drawing him closer, it pushes him away from Me. Usually that is the cross of those who refuse to understand the meaning of suffering, which takes on supernatural dimensions. That is the cross of the thief at My left, it is the cross which will always be heavy and will never be able to redeem.
3. “Dismas, on My right, accepts his cross with resignation and even with dignity; he assumes it at first because he has no other recourse. But suddenly, when he recognizes Me and knows that I Am the Son of God, he accepts that cross, acknowledging himself as a sinner, and asking that through it, Mercy remembers him. 10) “Finally, you have Me here in front of you, embracing My redeeming Cross to teach all of you to carry yours. I invite you to be co-redeemers with Me, making reparation for your own sins and those of all mankind. Know that this way of carrying the cross is reflected in your conduct, when before you are difficulties and pains and through them you draw closer to Me and you profit from them to give testimony before men. When you embrace your cross, you can feel that the only thing you desire is strength, because the thirst for souls consumes you.”**

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[billcu1]

What evil? I don’t see any. It seems to me that everything is under control.

 

[josh987654321]

Lewis is trying very hard to give God an out, but he fails miserably because he does not deal with omniscience properly. In the final paragraph he acknowledges that God knew what the humans would do with free will, but thought it worth the risk. Wait a second C. S. , there was no risk…an omniscient God would have known precisely what was going to happen long before it happened.

Lewis says it…God created humans to love him, so he gives them free will. Of course, He also created evil and knew the outcome. So, the Christian God created the vast majority of humanity to be condemned, just so He could have a few to love Him.

I have to say that if I had to go into court, I would not want C. S. Lewis to represent me.

John

Please refer to my above post for the reply to alot of this.

God didn’t create evil, he allowed it.
"Evil is the absence of God's presence in the hearts of man:

The professor of a university challenged his students with this question. “Did God create everything that exists?” A student answered bravely, “Yes, he did”.

The professor then asked, "If God created everything, then he created evil. Since evil exists (as noticed by our own actions), so God is evil. The student couldn’t respond to that statement causing the professor to conclude that he had “proved” that “belief in God” was a fairy tale, and therefore worthless.

Another student raised his hand and asked the professor, "May I pose a question? " “Of course” answered the professor.

The young student stood up and asked : “Professor does Cold exists?”

The professor answered, “What kind of question is that? …Of course the cold exists… haven’t you ever been cold?”

The young student answered, “In fact sir, Cold does not exist. According to the laws of Physics, what we consider cold, in fact is the absence of heat. Anything is able to be studied as long as it transmits energy (heat). Absolute Zero is the total absence of heat, but cold does not exist. What we have done is create a term to describe how we feel if we don’t have body heat or we are not hot.”

“And, does Dark exist?”, he continued. The professor answered “Of course”. This time the student responded, “Again you’re wrong, Sir. Darkness does not exist either. Darkness is in fact simply the absence of light. Light can be studied, darkness can not. Darkness cannot be broken down. A simple ray of light tears the darkness and illuminates the surface where the light beam finishes. Dark is a term that we humans have created to describe what happens when there’s lack of light.”

Finally, the student asked the professor, “Sir, does evil exist?” The professor replied, “Of course it exists, as I mentioned at the beginning, we see violations, crimes and violence anywhere in the world, and those things are evil.”

The student responded, “Sir, Evil does not exist. Just as in the previous cases, Evil is a term which man has created to describe the result of the absence of God’s presence in the hearts of man.”

After this, the professor bowed down his head, and didn’t answer back.

As fhansen so well put it in the very first couple of posts -

No, but God allowed evil. If God created evil then He didn’t “create a being with free will”. You can’t have it both ways.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[josh987654321]

What evil? I don’t see any. It seems to me that everything is under control.

If I am understanding you correctly, than I believe you are blind to think that (no offense intended).

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[josh987654321]

Some people see things as they are and say why. I dream dreams that never were and say, Why Not?—RFK

If God would concede me His omnipotence for 24 hours, you would see how many changes I would make in the world. But if He gave me His wisdom too, I would leave things as they are. - J.M.L. Monsabre

 

[tonyrey]

What evil? I don’t see any. It seems to me that everything is under control.

So there is nothing wrong with the world?

 

[billcu1]

If I am understanding you correctly, than I believe you are blind to think that (no offense intended).

Thank you for reading
Josh

Well I myself believe that any “evil” is going to sooner or later be worked out for good. I have faith in God. Must be good in the making. IMO.

 

[billcu1]

So there is nothing wrong with the world?

As a great saint once said something to the effect: God is in control and never changes. Everything is passing away, do not worry…Know who ?

 

[gwarald]

1. God has omniscience
2. God is cognitively open to free will (since otherwise couldn’t create a being with free will)
3. God knows the decision we perform in a situation as a result being cognitively open to free will and situation, in another word God is cognitively open to creation
4. Creation was performed by first cause and God was cognitively open to first cause
5. Evil exist and God was aware the source of evil in first cause since it was cognitively open to it
6. God created evil

If I understand, then what you are saying is basically this:

Since God knows everything from the beginning, He knew all the evil that would take place as a result of His Creation. In spite of this knowledge, God created it anyway.
So, in other words, based on His foreknowledge God knew:

1. No Creation=no evil
2. Creation=evil.

Your logic makes sense to me.

I think the more important question might be, was God right in creating evil creatures and circumstances?

 

[fhansen]

If I understand, then what you are saying is basically this:

Since God knows everything from the beginning, He knew all the evil that would take place as a result of His Creation. In spite of this knowledge, God created it anyway.
So, in other words, based on His foreknowledge God knew:

1. No Creation=no evil
2. Creation=evil.

Your logic makes sense to me.

I think the more important question might be, was God right in creating evil creatures and circumstances?

The most basic question is, was God right in giving any of His created beings free will?
No free will=no evil

 

[Bahman]

The most basic question is, was God right in giving any of His created beings free will?
No free will=no evil

The very important consequence of being cognitively open to a system is pure fatalism hence free will is an illusion if God is cognitively open to creation. In another word the source of each act we perform were known in first cause. Read the argument this way,

1. God has omniscience
2. God is cognitively open to free will (since otherwise couldn’t create a being with free will)
3. God knows the decision we perform in a situation as a result being cognitively open to free will and situation, in another word God is cognitively open to creation
4. Creation was performed by first cause and God was cognitively open to first cause
5. We act and and God was aware the source of each act in first cause since it was cognitively open to it
6. Free will is an illusion

 

[meltzerboy]

The very important consequence of being cognitively open to a system is pure fatalism hence free will is an illusion if God is cognitively open to creation. In another word the source of each act we perform were known in first cause. Read the argument this way,

1. God has omniscience
2. God is cognitively open to free will (since otherwise couldn’t create a being with free will)
3. God knows the decision we perform in a situation as a result being cognitively open to free will and situation, in another word God is cognitively open to creation
4. Creation was performed by first cause and God was cognitively open to first cause
5. We act and and God was aware the source of each act in first cause since it was cognitively open to it
6. Free will is an illusion

Does it matter to us if free will is an illusion so long as we perceive that we have free will? In psychology, there is a phenomenon called the illusion of control, which means that we tend to believe we have control of our future even though there are always forces beyond our control. However, people who do not have the illusion of control think their behavior, whatever it may be, does not matter, that the outcome of a situation does not depend on their behavior. These people tend to become depressed and give up on making decisions and taking action.

 

[Bahman]

But say if you were suddenly given the gift of foreknowledge; you stepped out of time, so that you could see the beginning from the end, past and future, even while time still continued to flow for everyone else. Would that knowledge, by itself, alter the outcome of people’s choices or actions?

I understand your argument. But the basic idea behind this thread is not foreknowledge but being cognitively open to a system which leads to foreknowledge. In this scheme, foreknowledge is the consequence being cognitively open to system with a grand price, pure fatalism. The problem which is claimed is that one could create a system with full micro design which leave no place for system itself, read it traditional way of looking at creation. The problem with this system is that system fall in trap of pure fatalism since each action is the result of pure contact of system with a situation and there is no internal degree of freedom left for system to act upon since system is fully micro designed.

 

[Bahman]

Does it matter to us if free will is an illusion so long as we perceive that we have free will? In psychology, there is a phenomenon called the illusion of control, which means that we tend to believe we have control of our future even though there are always forces beyond our control. However, people who do not have the illusion of control think their behavior, whatever it may be, does not matter, that the outcome of a situation does not depend on their behavior. These people tend to become depressed and give up on making decisions and taking action.

Our decisions based on what we perceive are formed upon logical thinking and will/wishes/desires that we have no control on them hence there is no room left for free will from stand point of what we perceive. This means that we cannot define/understand free will from stand point of what we perceive hence we cannot perceive the impact of free will on our decision if we accept that we have free will.

 

[fhansen]

The very important consequence of being cognitively open to a system is pure fatalism hence free will is an illusion if God is cognitively open to creation. In another word the source of each act we perform were known in first cause. Read the argument this way,

1. God has omniscience
2. God is cognitively open to free will (since otherwise couldn’t create a being with free will)
3. God knows the decision we perform in a situation as a result being cognitively open to free will and situation, in another word God is cognitively open to creation
4. Creation was performed by first cause and God was cognitively open to first cause
5. We act and and God was aware the source of each act in first cause since it was cognitively open to it
6. Free will is an illusion

If 6 is right then 2 is wrong.

 

[Bahman]

If 6 is right then 2 is wrong.

Nah, if 6 is wrong then 2 is wrong and that is the problem with this dilemma. Hence God cannot do full micro-design at the same time grant free will to creation. This means the traditional way of defining omniscience leads to pure fatalism hence we need to find a proper definition for it in order to leave any room for free will.

 

[fhansen]

Nah, if 6 is wrong then 2 is wrong and that is the problem with this dilemma. Hence God cannot do full micro-design at the same time grant free will to creation. This means the traditional way of defining omniscience leads to pure fatalism hence we need to find a proper definition for it in order to leave any room for free will.

God can’t be cognitively open to an illusion.

 

[Bahman]

God can’t be cognitively open to an illusion.

That is the point I am raising since if 6 is wrong and we accept that God cannot be cognitively open to an illusion then 2 is wrong.

 

[fhansen]

That is the point I am raising since if 6 is wrong and we accept that God cannot be cognitively open to an illusion then 2 is wrong.

So 6 is wrong?

 

[fhansen]

I understand your argument. But the basic idea behind this thread is not foreknowledge but being cognitively open to a system which leads to foreknowledge. In this scheme, foreknowledge is the consequence being cognitively open to system with a grand price, pure fatalism. The problem which is claimed is that one could create a system with full micro design which leave no place for system itself, read it traditional way of looking at creation. The problem with this system is that system fall in trap of pure fatalism since each action is the result of pure contact of system with a situation and there is no internal degree of freedom left for system to act upon since system is fully micro designed.

Why would do you impose micro design into it? God could create the world, let it do as it may, but simply know what it would do in any case.