Why did God create evil?

[ding]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

 

[Auld Phart]

did God create the angels?

including Lucifer?

 

[buttercup]

I noticed that someone on another thread was asking this question, implying that everything is God's fault, or that God is evil. On that thread I didn't see anyone give what I think is the correct answer, and I wanted to reply, but I had to leave the house so I didn't have time.

It all comes down to free will. God did not create "evil." God gave us free will, and the inevitable price of free will is that some people will choose to do evil. Evil is the opposition of goodness, it is when someone goes against God's perfect nature and what he expects of us (truth, love, justice, etc.)

So when someone uses the gift of free will in the wrong way, that is on them. Do not blame God for giving you freedom. Because the alternative would be immoral. If God created us with no freedom to make choices, like robots, or puppets on a string, with no choice in whether to follow God or not... THAT would be evil and wrong. But that isn't what God did. He gave us the freedom to make choices, good or bad. And as a consequence, there is evil in this world. But it is just temporary.

 

[Natural Citizen]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

Well. Something makes cold water hot. And this is observable. As well, something makes darkness light. This, too, is observable.

To your comparison, how, then, did you observe that something made evil turn into good? What did you observe? And how did you observe this? Show us. Thanks!

 

[buttercup]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

Well. Something makes cold water hot. And this is observable. As well, something makes darkness light. This, too, is observable.

To your comparison, how, then, did you observe that something made evil turn into good? What did you observe? And how did you observe this? Show us. Thanks!

He didn't say that something made evil turn into good. He said evil is the absence of good, it doesn't exist in and of itself.

 

[Natural Citizen]

He didn't say that something made evil turn into good. He said evil is the absence of good, it doesn't exist in and of itself

Yes, he did.

In fact, he made two claims. His initial claim, I didn't even ask him about yet. I'm just asking him how he made his observation and what he observed to make the conclusion. Then we can move onto his actual conclusion.

Sacred truths don't count. There are no sacred truths in science.

 

[buttercup]

He didn't say that something made evil turn into good. He said evil is the absence of good, it doesn't exist in and of itself

Yes, he did.

In fact, he made two claims. His initial claim, I didn't even ask him about yet. I'm just asking him how he made his observation and what he observed to make the conclusion. Then we can move onto his actual conclusion.

Please post the direct quote.

 

[WillowTree]

No God exists!

 

[Dan Stubbs]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

Keep it from being boring.

 

[JGalt]

God didn't "create" evil per se. He was probably mildly amused when one of his angels (Satan, Lucifer, Beelzebub, etc) through his own pride decided to lead the revolt of one third of the angels against Him. Of course, angels are imperfect creatures which were not created by God in His own image, as we are.

We are infinitely more special than the angels, as God created us in His own image. The angels are merely messengers which have been around ever since the creation. They are not afforded the same forgiveness that we are.

It was in the Garden of Eden that Satan temped Eve and subsequently Adam, into going against God's wishes. For that, there will never be forgiveness, nor will there ever be forgiveness for the one third of those angels who followed Satan.

But God loved us so much that he didn't want us to perish, therefore He gave us ten commandments to follow, in order to remain in His favor. Unfortunately, many people failed to observe them. So at some point, God brought upon the world the Great Flood.

Even after the flood, silly humans refused to observe God's laws and rules as written in the Old testament. In order to give His creation a way out of sin and eternal damnation, He sent His only begotten son to die upon the cross, thereby having all of the world's sin placed upon Him.

Whether God allowed the temptation in the Garden or he lost control of his angels could be debated by the non-believers. I prefer to believe that He planned all this from the start, to impress upon us what a mighty Creator He is, because the idea of God being imperfect or out of control is kinda silly.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Please post the direct quote.

"Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light."


Do you see it? I do. Three specific claims. All of which demand explanation to how he concluded these three things. Notwithstanding how he was able to prove a negative without any proof of observaton aside from cpmparison. I'm the one with the physics degree here, I'm pretty sure I have at least a fundamental grasp of the scientific theory and how comparison works in terms of observation and determination.

.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

I noticed that someone on another thread was asking this question, implying that everything is God's fault, or that God is evil. On that thread I didn't see anyone give what I think is the correct answer, and I wanted to reply, but I had to leave the house so I didn't have time.

It all comes down to free will. God did not create "evil." God gave us free will, and the inevitable price of free will is that some people will choose to do evil. Evil is the opposition of goodness, it is when someone goes against God's perfect nature and what he expects of us (truth, love, justice, etc.)

So when someone uses the gift of free will in the wrong way, that is on them. Do not blame God for giving you freedom. Because the alternative would be immoral. If God created us with no freedom to make choices, like robots, or puppets on a string, with no choice in whether to follow God or not... THAT would be evil and wrong. But that isn't what God did. He gave us the freedom to make choices, good or bad. And as a consequence, there is evil in this world. But it is just temporary.

Democrats= Evil
Republicans= Sort of Evil

 

[Natural Citizen]

Ding, you're an engineer, as I recall. Right?

Ya gotta back up your claim, my brother. You have to support it. You can't just make a blind comparison absent any observational, correlative, data.

 

[buttercup]

Please post the direct quote.

"Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light."


Do you see it? I do. Three specific claims. All of which demand explanation to how he concluded these three things. Notwithstanding how he was able to prove a negative without any proof of observaton aside from cpmparison. I'm the one with the physics degree here, I'm pretty sure I have at least a fundamental grasp of the scientific theory and how comparison works in terms of observation and determination.

.

You claimed (or implied) that his point was "something made evil turn into good." That is not what he said. He said that evil is the absence of good. Not that something made evil into good.

And why are you trying to make this into a scientific matter? It's more of a philosophical matter. Do you disagree that evil is the absence of good? Or are you simply trying to get him to prove it?

 

[ding]

The simple answer is that God didn't create evil.

Everything God created is good.

Evil is not extant. Evil doesn't exist in and of itself.

Evil is the absence of good, just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.

Well. Something makes cold water hot. And this is observable. As well, something makes darkness light. This, too, is observable.

To your comparison, how, then, did you observe that something made evil turn into good? What did you observe? And how did you observe this? Show us. Thanks!

What you are calling evil is in reality the absence of good. But I'll use the term "evil" for this discussion. Men know right from wrong and when they violate it, rather than abandoning the concept, they rationalize that they didn't violate it at all. That is how much man prefers good over evil. To prove this point, men do not do evil for the sake of evil. They do evil for the sake of their own good. A bad man has no clue that he is bad. Only a good man knows just how bad he is. It's the dunning effect, so to speak.

The reality is that good and evil are human constructs, but the underlying values that define them are universal. Virtue is the greatest organizing principle. It isn't surprising that relationships or societies which behave with virtue like honesty, humility, charity, thankfulness, courage, integrity, etc, have order and harmony. Just as it isn't surprising that societies or relationships which practice behaviors devoid of virtue like dishonesty, arrogance, selfishness, greed, thanklessness, cowardice, etc are disordered and chaotic. So while men think they are behaving with virtue, it is their behaviors and outcomes that tell the real story. But the surprising thing is that everyone believes they are good. No one will acknowledge that they are bad. No one says, the hell with your universal code of common decency. They all argue that they are being decent and good.

If God had made evil then we would see evil being done for the sake of evil. This we do not see.

So to answer your question, man's base condition is good and he only does evil for his own good. So he doesn't turn from evil to good. His actions which you call evil are just devoid of good.

 

[Natural Citizen]

You claimed (or implied) that his point was "something made evil turn into good". That is not what he said. He said that evil is the absence of good. Not that something made evil into good.

No, I didn't imply it. I said it outright.

He made a claim that evil is the absence of good. Okay, fine

But...he made that claim based on a comparision that ''just as cold is the absence of heat, and darkness is the absence of light.''

Well, we know what and why heat makes cold water uncold. We test it and we observe it and we record the data. And we know what makes the darkness undark. We observe what does it and how it does it. We then record the data and make our conclusion.

These latter two things which he compared are provable because they are observable and testable. He cannot make the former claim by way of comparison until he shares with us his correlative observation and his data which deems his conclusion comparable.

Do you see what I'm saying here, buttercup?

And that's not even counting his main claim. The very first thing he said. He ran you people in a compete circle with nothing to offer in support of his claim except blind claim based on a non-negotiable comparison.

Jiminy crickets.

And why are you trying to make this into a scientific matter?

Because this kind of thing gets my drawers in a bunch, that's why. It's intellectually dishonest to make a claim based on a misconception of a proven negative. Also, 'murica, I can say what I want, so long as I don't say bad words and I'm respectful. What the heck. What ever happened to toleration?

It's more of a philosophical matter.

Seems that's how the op's conclusion has been framed. I've got news for you. Philosophy is why the world is on fire.

Do you disagree that evil is the absence of good?

Without a record of the correlative data between a mixture of good and evil, I can't say. And what'd he mix it with, anyway?

Or are you simply trying to get him to prove it?

I was just asking the questions, that the op didn't. As I said, I didn't even get to his main claim. As it it is, I'm still stuck at his lack of experimentation. How'd he prove his negative, is what I'm asking.


Ah well. Gosh. Do whatt ya want, guys, I don't care. lol.

 

[ding]

Ding, you're an engineer, as I recall. Right?

Ya gotta back up your claim, my brother. You have to support it. You can't just make a blind comparison absent any observational, correlative, data.

Man is the only animal capable of knowledge of good and evil. No other creature has this concept. Sure animals can have empathy, but not like man? I mean you don't see animals arguing that it isn't fair that you are eating more than me, right?

Animals function on impulse and instinct. Man functions on these too, but in man's case he has the unique ability to override his impulses and instinct for the sake of good. Do you agree with this?

Would you agree that man has the capacity to do good and evil? Again, I believe evil is extant and is the absence of good because we don't really see anyone doing evil for evil's sake, right?

So then the question begs why did God create such a world. I believe that that is an artifact of life. In other words, I don't believe God had a choice. It is part and parcel of the extant nature of good. I know people will howl that I said God had no choice but the reality is there are things God can't do. For instance, God can't oppose Himself; He can't go against His own nature.

So there are two very interesting things which come out of free will. One is that evil has the effect of making good better. It's like salt and sugar. Salt makes sugar taste sweeter. We are told elsewhere that He uses all things for the good of those who love Him. Among other things the Jews discovered is that there is meaning in suffering.

The other interesting thing is that good has no meaning unless there is evil. In other words, it is not virtuous if you are forced to be virtuous, right

Man prefers good over evil. Man doesn't do evil for evil's sake. Man does evil for the sake of his own good and when he does he rationalizes that he didn't do evil.

But from these acts, goodness will arise and we will be stronger for it. It is a self compensating feature whose sole purpose is to propel consciousness to the next rung in the anthropological ladder.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Ding, what I'm saying to you is that you have to make good and evil quantifiable if you're gonna campare them with some other quantifiable phenomenon. That's all I'm saying. You're gonna run into people out in the world way smarter than me on debates like this, if it's something that you ever take seriously enough to promote in an activist way. I know people who do that. It's rough.

On message boards like this, you're just gonna run into aholes like me, so not important be sharp in that regard. It's just friendly chatting.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

did God create the angels?

including Lucifer?

Yes. And the angels make choices like Man does.

 

[harmonica]

wrong--- god created everything
but there is no god
define evil
....murder?/rape? genocide?---this is what humans do---god created humans
people NATURALLY get pissed off and NATURALLY commit violence/murder/hate/rape/etc