Hello LOR,
I've been sitting around in my miserable little life and musing about the problem of evil and how Christians seem to be either completely oblivious to it, or manage to reconcile it with their belief in their God.
Now from what we know of the Christian God, he is tri-omni: omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent.
For the time being, I'm most concerned with the first two omnis:
Now, having defined those, let's take a moment to define evil, just for the heck of it.
e,·vil   [ee-vuhl]
-adjective
1.
morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life.
2.
harmful; injurious: evil laws.
3.
characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: to be fallen on evil days.
4.
due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: an evil reputation.
5.
marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: He is known for his evil disposition.
With that out of the way I must ask a question.
Couldn't an omnipotent God create a world where evil did not exist, or did not occur?
A common argument from Christians is that this would interfere with freewill, and that the lack of freewill is an undesirable trait (and indeed one of God's greatest gift to us) and thus would be inconsistent with the perfect world God was trying to create.
Now, I, as a lowly human can CONCEIVE of a world where freewill and a lack of evil is compatible.
Perhaps evil can be chosen, in theory, but the way this world was designed, no evil choices will ever be made. In other words, I can conceive of a world where every human being (or angel for that matter) always freely chose to do good.
So why didn't God design it this way? If I can conceive it, it should have been easy to make, but nevermind that.
Even if it were implausible within our logical framework, a God possessing omnipotence would not be bounded by such constraints. Indeed, he should be able to define his own laws of logic and create the perfect world with no issues at all. If you argue he could not, can you say his omnipotence is intact?
Another argument I see is that evil isn't necessarily something that exists per se, but actually just a lack of God, or of goodness. One of the more interesting explanations of that argument I've come across is here:
http://www.heaven.net.nz/answers/answer15.htm
But I take issue with this. Nevermind that I'm perhaps not quite able to concede such a definition of evil, it still doesn't address the point. Why did this "lack of God" even arise in his world in the first place.
Now let's go back to the 3rd omni I neglected to define:
om,·ni,·pres,·ent   [om-nuh-prez-uhnt]
-adjective
present everywhere at the same time: the omnipresent god.
If God is indeed omnipresent, then what meaning does "lack of God" have? It shouldn't be possible at all.
The Christian then says, "Well, you don't lack God, you merely reject him". Indeed, this is free-choice. This is freewill. But what did it take to make such a rejection? What sort of choice would that be? Would it not be evil by their definition? Is it perhaps a lack of God which is causing the rejection of God? It doesn't make sense.
So my conclusion:
I can conceive of a world where evil does not exist.
Even if it were not possible by our logic, for God it should be possible.
Evil exists therefore:
1) God is NOT tri-omni.
OR
2) God is not benevolent and does not care for the problem of evil.
OR
3) God does not exist
Either way, the Christian God does not remain intact.
This is honestly one of the biggest reasons I originally became an atheist some years ago, before I came across more arguments and became a little more acquainted with science. I was just wondering if there was anyone who saw holes in my argument or perhaps thought it doesn't quite do. I'm looking for attack and maybe input to make it more robust. I'm interested in some constructive discussion perhaps? Sorry if it may seem a little sloppy in the way I laid it down. I'm terrible with articulation. Perhaps later I'll make adjustments if I think I can do better.
I've been sitting around in my miserable little life and musing about the problem of evil and how Christians seem to be either completely oblivious to it, or manage to reconcile it with their belief in their God.
Now from what we know of the Christian God, he is tri-omni: omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent.
For the time being, I'm most concerned with the first two omnis:
- om,·nip,·o,·tent   [om-nip-uh-tuhnt]
-adjective
almighty or infinite in power, as God.
- om,·nis,·cient   [om-nish-uhnt] Show IPA
-adjective
having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things.
Now, having defined those, let's take a moment to define evil, just for the heck of it.
e,·vil   [ee-vuhl]
-adjective
1.
morally wrong or bad; immoral; wicked: evil deeds; an evil life.
2.
harmful; injurious: evil laws.
3.
characterized or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; unfortunate; disastrous: to be fallen on evil days.
4.
due to actual or imputed bad conduct or character: an evil reputation.
5.
marked by anger, irritability, irascibility, etc.: He is known for his evil disposition.
With that out of the way I must ask a question.
Couldn't an omnipotent God create a world where evil did not exist, or did not occur?
A common argument from Christians is that this would interfere with freewill, and that the lack of freewill is an undesirable trait (and indeed one of God's greatest gift to us) and thus would be inconsistent with the perfect world God was trying to create.
Now, I, as a lowly human can CONCEIVE of a world where freewill and a lack of evil is compatible.
Perhaps evil can be chosen, in theory, but the way this world was designed, no evil choices will ever be made. In other words, I can conceive of a world where every human being (or angel for that matter) always freely chose to do good.
So why didn't God design it this way? If I can conceive it, it should have been easy to make, but nevermind that.
Even if it were implausible within our logical framework, a God possessing omnipotence would not be bounded by such constraints. Indeed, he should be able to define his own laws of logic and create the perfect world with no issues at all. If you argue he could not, can you say his omnipotence is intact?
Another argument I see is that evil isn't necessarily something that exists per se, but actually just a lack of God, or of goodness. One of the more interesting explanations of that argument I've come across is here:
http://www.heaven.net.nz/answers/answer15.htm
But I take issue with this. Nevermind that I'm perhaps not quite able to concede such a definition of evil, it still doesn't address the point. Why did this "lack of God" even arise in his world in the first place.
Now let's go back to the 3rd omni I neglected to define:
om,·ni,·pres,·ent   [om-nuh-prez-uhnt]
-adjective
present everywhere at the same time: the omnipresent god.
If God is indeed omnipresent, then what meaning does "lack of God" have? It shouldn't be possible at all.
The Christian then says, "Well, you don't lack God, you merely reject him". Indeed, this is free-choice. This is freewill. But what did it take to make such a rejection? What sort of choice would that be? Would it not be evil by their definition? Is it perhaps a lack of God which is causing the rejection of God? It doesn't make sense.
So my conclusion:
I can conceive of a world where evil does not exist.
Even if it were not possible by our logic, for God it should be possible.
Evil exists therefore:
1) God is NOT tri-omni.
OR
2) God is not benevolent and does not care for the problem of evil.
OR
3) God does not exist
Either way, the Christian God does not remain intact.
This is honestly one of the biggest reasons I originally became an atheist some years ago, before I came across more arguments and became a little more acquainted with science. I was just wondering if there was anyone who saw holes in my argument or perhaps thought it doesn't quite do. I'm looking for attack and maybe input to make it more robust. I'm interested in some constructive discussion perhaps? Sorry if it may seem a little sloppy in the way I laid it down. I'm terrible with articulation. Perhaps later I'll make adjustments if I think I can do better.