Answer to the Problem of Evil

[Darat]

No, example; Allah/God is never do evil, He is always good and just (justice is also goodness). This does not make Allah a robot. It shows that he is a very good being. People in Paradise will always choose goodness with their free will.

Peace

Nice to see you back, to remind you still waiting to hear your response to:

My Turkish article translated with machine:

https://free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9611966.0

Peace

I was bored so...

"....his world is the realm of testing, of confronting oneself, and it is also the place where some small punishments or rewards begin to be offered. And every adversity or happiness that happens in this world functions both as a test and as a way of giving the person what they deserve. ..."​

Three year old girl, raped multiple times and beheaded: https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/s...ape-and-beheading-of-3-year-old-girl-in-india

What lesson was she learning, what testing was she undergoing, how did she deserve to be raped and killed?

 

[Darat]

I don't believe that you are genuinely interpreting my statement that way.

Obviously would be evil doers would be weeded out before they could get to Heaven.

Not according to the Christians.

 

[psionl0]

Not according to the Christians.

What do "the Christians" say and which sect are you referring to?

 

[Little 10 Toes]

... and Emre_1974tr, when you're done replying to Darat, how about you reply to me too?

So it's okay to kill someone because they might cause someone to disbelieve. Not will, did, or had, but might.

No, there he is a servant directly commissioned by God. It's just like the angels of death. Or doomsday workers.

Otherwise, nobody can slap anybody for their faith:


https://www.answering-christianity.com/blog/index.php?topic=3774.0

Who brought up slapping?

Your post does nothing to counter the fact that it's okay to kill someone because they might cause someone to disbelieve. Not will, did, or had, but might.

I'm not going to go to all the sites that you post. I went to one and that's more than enough.

 

[Darat]

What do "the Christians" say and which sect are you referring to?

RC, CofE, Methodists, GOC, EOC, Baptist and many, many more.

Jesus died, god forgives, if you accept Jesus (and often a few other requirements baptism and so on) then you'll get to heaven. Doing something evil does not bar you from heaven, not believing in Jesus/church doctrine does that.

Very surprised you didn't know this as it is a major tenant of all the organised Christian churches I know about and they cover most of the Christians in the world.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

RC, CofE, Methodists, GOC, EOC, Baptist and many, many more.

Jesus died, god forgives, if you accept Jesus (and often a few other requirements baptism and so on) then you'll get to heaven. Doing something evil does not bar you from heaven, not believing in Jesus/church doctrine does that.

Very surprised you didn't know this as it is a major tenant of all the organised Christian churches I know about and they cover most of the Christians in the world.

Don't forget the RC's Last Rites ritual. It's a Get Out of Hell free card if you are lucky enough to find someone authorized to mumble it over your dying body. (That's always seemed a bit arbitrary and unfair to me. But that's just me.)

 

[I Am The Scum]

You don't have to get into the finer details of free will (or any arguments on its existence) to see that it's a big distraction on the problem of evil.

Suppose a not-nice person is on their way to do an unspecified Very Bad Thing™ to their intended victim. I am in a position where I could very easily prevent this act from occurring, either peacefully or violently. Which of the following is the morally superior option?

A: I prevent the Very Bad Thing™ from occurring.
B: I do nothing, thus maximizing the free will of the not-nice person.

If A is true, then God cannot be maximally good, as he allows evil acts to occur every single day, unprevented.
If B is true, then it would be morally impermissible for anyone to ever interfere with any evil act. No matter how bad the action is, you just gotta look the other way.

 

[TheGoldcountry]

It's all about the timing. If you repent at the right moment, you're good.

It's like putting off that pesky dentist appointment and then getting the root canal. You should have thought ahead.

 

[shuttlt]

Graham Greene's Brighton Rock is pretty good on this. It's partly about the difficulty, not to say impossibility, in genuinely repenting at the last moment at the end of a wicked life simply because you think it is in your interests to do so.

 

[bruto]

No, that's what you are suggesting.



So which is it? Are people in heaven robots, or is the ability to make evil choices not necessary for free will?

I would presume that the "people" in heaven are not the people we think of as people. Whether they have or need free will is irrelevant. The question is whether when they were people before they were dead they had actual free will. Psion10 says they do. I contend that although they have what looks like and functions as free will most of the time it's not quite really free will if a conscious interventionist god is in charge not only of the afterlife but the world itself.

We've been going round and round on this in what looks like an ever-narrowing spiral, to the point where I don't think there's much more to bother with, since I don't think such a god exists anyway. It's likely a distinction without a difference.

 

[psionl0]

RC, CofE, Methodists, GOC, EOC, Baptist and many, many more.

Jesus died, god forgives, if you accept Jesus (and often a few other requirements baptism and so on) then you'll get to heaven. Doing something evil does not bar you from heaven, not believing in Jesus/church doctrine does that.

Very surprised you didn't know this as it is a major tenant of all the organised Christian churches I know about and they cover most of the Christians in the world.

That is a different topic altogether.

A common theme in the gospels is separating the "sheep from the goats". A "goat" can be forgiven and become a "sheep" but absolutely nothing in the gospels suggests that any of the goats will go to heaven.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

That is a different topic altogether.

A common theme in the gospels is separating the "sheep from the goats". A "goat" can be forgiven and become a "sheep" but absolutely nothing in the gospels suggests that any of the goats will go to heaven.

Nor yet sheep.

 

[psionl0]

I would presume that the "people" in heaven are not the people we think of as people. Whether they have or need free will is irrelevant. The question is whether when they were people before they were dead they had actual free will. Psion10 says they do. I contend that although they have what looks like and functions as free will most of the time it's not quite really free will if a conscious interventionist god is in charge not only of the afterlife but the world itself.

We've been going round and round on this in what looks like an ever-narrowing spiral, to the point where I don't think there's much more to bother with, since I don't think such a god exists anyway. It's likely a distinction without a difference.

LOL Somebody always tries to close the discussion AFTER they have had their say. Never before.

And of course, you tried to pull a bait and switch by saying "there is no god therefore there is no free will" as if that was your argument all along.

 

[bruto]

LOL Somebody always tries to close the discussion AFTER they have had their say. Never before.

And of course, you tried to pull a bait and switch by saying "there is no god therefore there is no free will" as if that was your argument all along.

No to the second part. I am of the opinion that there is no god, and therefore there is no god impeding free will.

 

[psionl0]

No to the second part. I am of the opinion that there is no god, and therefore there is no god impeding free will.

Which is still not your earlier argument.

You have repeatedly claimed that if God can override free will then there is no free will. I have pointed out that just one act that is not free will doesn't mean that every act is not free will.

Instead of addressing this point, you do what many do - you wait awhile then repeat your earlier point as if the counter argument has never been made.

 

[bruto]

Which is still not your earlier argument.

You have repeatedly claimed that if God can override free will then there is no free will. I have pointed out that just one act that is not free will doesn't mean that every act is not free will.

Instead of addressing this point, you do what many do - you wait awhile then repeat your earlier point as if the counter argument has never been made.

I recognize the counter-argument. I just don't agree with it. I think it would be quite possible for a god to grant free will. But to do that would require a kept promise not to intervene. It's not a matter of whether he can but whether he does.

 

[psionl0]

I recognize the counter-argument. I just don't agree with it. I think it would be quite possible for a god to grant free will. But to do that would require a kept promise not to intervene. It's not a matter of whether he can but whether he does.

Who makes up these rules? There is no argument that God gave no free will whatsoever.

 

[Darat]

That is a different topic altogether.

A common theme in the gospels is separating the "sheep from the goats". A "goat" can be forgiven and become a "sheep" but absolutely nothing in the gospels suggests that any of the goats will go to heaven.

It is quite clear that for most if not all Christian churches that being evil doesn't stop you from being with god for eternity. So one answer to the "problem of evil" is that there isn't a problem because god is happy spending eternity with evil people as long as they have followed the right procedures. It's just us silly humans that think there is anything wrong with evil going unpunished.

 

[psionl0]

It is quite clear that for most if not all Christian churches that being evil doesn't stop you from being with god for eternity.

That is the exact opposite of what "most if not all Christian churches" teach (at least, the ones I have heard of).

"Lest ye repent . . ."

 

[ponderingturtle]

Wow, that's pretty evil.

No you see killing someone is not in and of itself evil, because you are just sending them to heaven or hell as they deserve. Hence the traditional way to deal with heretics "Slay them all, the Lord will know his own".