Alvin Plantinga - Does Evil Disprove God?

[@dhoyt902]

I think God made the best possible logically consistent world that gives intelligences agency and free will, true children. I understand evil is unavoidable in such a world. I have been affronted by evil to the extreme, but I forgive God. My ultimate ancestor. Like forgiving my father. I get it, my dude. Love ya God. ❤️

[@defenderofwisdom]

No, it disproves an all good god who blames man for sin.

[@dongshengdi773]

Why is everyone blaming AI and skynet for destroying humanity.? Why is everyone blaming AI and skynet for destroying humanity.? So it means Humans are evil for allowing AI to run amok ?

[@chyfields]

To micro-manage the social behaviour of all species would diminish, or negate, the importance of freedom of individual creatures to co-create their own rules for social interactions, (rather than the Creator's rules). Were the Creator to micro-manage, there would be no difference between the rules of species and no need to discern attributes. Each realm has its own rules of engagement with reality, by design and for good reasons.

[@SolveEtCoagula93]

The Greatest Story Never Told: God creates man - man upsets God - God says: 'Never mind man, you're only human. I have infinite understanding and infinite compassion. Therefore I forgive you.' Job done!

[@lalaeatinagotdamnburger3416]

That’s not just.

[@SolveEtCoagula93]

@@lalaeatinagotdamnburger3416 What it shows is the actions of a parent who has infinite love and compassion. Infinite understanding and wisdom. Any human parent would try everything in their power to forgive an errant offspring. A Being who is meant to be infinite in all senses would surely be the exemplar when it comes to forgiveness?

[@ronhudson3730]

God starts this universe, sets the conditions for life to exist and evolve through chemistry and the natural selection. We along with any other intelligent beings have the choice to live and react each other based upon several factors. Our culture, our religions and our mental health. Most of us can choose to be beneficial for a variety of reasons including ethical and self-interest ones. The idea of “Evil” is not helpful. Is the person who commits terrible crimes against individual or humanity in general, evil. Or is that person on somewhere on a spectrum of aberrant behaviour? I do think that God “checks in” from time to time to provide guidance. I also think God is aware of each of our personal lives and delights in our positive achievements. I also believe God mourns along with us during times of trouble. Does God actually intervene in our affairs to save some, while abandoning others? I think not. If the reality is a “Block-time” universe, God lives in and is intimately aware of each and every moment, of everything and everybody. In a sense experiencing existence through everything, throughout all of time.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

I'm a Christian believer and I agree with some of your comments. But what do you mean by "God lives in and is intimately aware of each and every moment, of everything and everybody "? If that's the case, should we ourselves not be aware of this intimacy of God? Respectfully...

[@sensereference2227]

I don't understand why Plantinga says that the best world among all possible worlds is one where the creator of the universe incarnates into human form and is killed to atone for the sins of others? Why, for instance, isn't a world where humanity chooses correctly from the start and lives in harmony with the creator in paradise better? Is that just Plantinga's preference because he's a Christian and likes stories with incarnation? It sounds very subjective.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

I'm a Christian believer but I sometimes question "the best world" in a similar way as you do. In fact, I struggle to understand better this explanation of "best possible world." But then I ponder would God have given us Free Will in a "best possible world" that you suggest. I don't know, maybe we would have been "robots" who obeyed God completely ( " where humanity chooses correctly from the start" ). But then I question, what's the big deal for God to give humanity a free will? Could we not still love God WITHOUT free will? I trust that the incarnation of Jesus was necessary on this planet. It shows the wonderful love of God. Yet, like you, I question if our existence could have been different. Maybe there are other worlds where the incarnation was not necessary to bring a creation "in harmony with the Creator." We don't know the purpose of the Creator God in creating our planet. Some would say it's a test. I want to love God with all my heart but sometimes I wish I was made a robot. Do I make any sense to you? Maybe we are missing something? Can we really blame God? Thanks for your honesty. Respectfully...

[@sensereference2227]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 That makes sense to me. Another thing to consider that, if the creator could see what free will decisions humans would make ahead of time, then picking a planet where humanity choose correctly from the start would not be a planet where they are "robots" because they would still have free will. When I am tempted, as Adam and Eve were in the garden, but I resist temptation and make the right choice, then do I suddenly become a robot? Clearly the potential to choose evil was already there for Adam and Eve (or they couldn't have been tempted in the first place), but the creator could have actualized one of the many other worlds where they freely made a different choice and that evil was never actualized. There is also the example of Jesus in The Bible. Was Jesus a robot because, even though he was tempted, he never choose evil but always chose good? These are things I wonder about.

[@mockupguy3577]

Vape

[@ALavin-en1kr]

@@sensereference2227 Even though God, through omniscience, knows what the ultimate choice will be, that does not mean that he dictates it at the human level of consciousness where the human choice is freely made between two options.

[@sensereference2227]

@@ALavin-en1kr You are ignoring the important fact that G-d chose to actualize this reality, as opposed to all the other possibilities realities where G-d knew people would make different choices, in your analysis. For example, G-d chose to actualize the reality where Adam and Eve gave in to temptation instead of successfully resisting it. Also, if I know ahead of time what someone will do with 100% certainty, then there is really only 1 option before that individual because true agent causation would be beyond that kind of deterministic predictability.

[@keithwalmsley1830]

I honestly believe we get a greater "buzz" from doing a good deed rather than an evil act, I don't think it's particularly religious but may be connected to the wholeness of existence, the inter-connectedness of everything as per quantum mechanics and Eastern mysticism, ie any good act reflects or enhances ourselves? Just a thought.

[@tschorsch]

We evolved to cooperate. Doing things for others makes us feel good because it helps the larger society one belongs to. It enhances us because it fits in with a well functioning society and increases our perceived connection to it and/or our perceived part in it.

[@crabb9966]

In my perspective this is a VERY easily undermined. Being evil grants you societal benefits. Genghis Khan, just one example proves this. We would need a WAY more intricate explanation.

[@crabb9966]

@@tschorsch that's a naive and simplistic view, cooperation doesn't even require moral but me saying that is impertinent because you must have the basis first. Sorry if I sound disrespectful

[@samrowbotham8914]

Ponerology has always been difficult for Christian Theologians to deal with because it raises the question of how can a God of love allow evil not just to exist but flourish. I believe the Gnostics had the answer and that was their motivation for rejecting the world and taking an Anti natalist stance which lead to the sword of Rome falling on their heads. They taught that this world was hell and that the Demiurge was either ignorant or evil.

[@radupopescu9977]

If God wouldn't allow evil, then He could delete it. But in this case, freedom to choose, will disappear, and consequently we will be only some robots, with no possibility to choose, some robots programed to do something.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

​@@radupopescu9977 I'm a Christian believer but I tend to agree with you. However the concept of "robots" also confuses me. Sometimes I wish I was a robot. Is that good or bad? Respectfully...

[@radupopescu9977]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 I can't answer to the last question. But I've learned, and I will still learn, that God, has a plan (not like human's) for each of us. And I also believe in God. In general "why evil exist" is not very good explained. But if I want for somebody to really love me, it can't be done, if that somebody hasn't other options. The choices are key for what we really want. Robots aren't alive, even that they might in the future emulate emotions and stuff.

[@zzzaaayyynnn]

πονηρός ponērós is the bugaboo we insist on clinging to

[@dongshengdi773]

With those preliminary theses at hand, Descartes dives into examining the philosophical possibility of God's existence in his Third Meditation. He breaks this evidence down into two umbrella categories, called proofs, whose logic is relatively easy to follow. In the first proof, Descartes argues that, by evidence, he is an imperfect being who has an objective reality including the notion that perfection exists and therefore has a distinct idea of a perfect being (God, for example). Further, Descartes realizes that he is less formally real than the objective reality of perfection and therefore there has to be a perfect being existing formally from whom his innate idea of a perfect being derives wherein he could have created the ideas of all substances, but not the one of God. The second proof then goes on to question who it is then that keeps him - having an idea of a perfect being - in existence, eliminating the possibility that he himself would be able to do. He proves this by saying that he would owe it to himself, if he were his own existence maker, to have given himself all sorts of perfections. The very fact that he is not perfect means he would not bear his own existence. Similarly, his parents, who are also imperfect beings, could not be the cause of his existence since they could not have created the idea of perfection within him. That leaves only a perfect being, God, that would have had to exist to create and be constantly recreating him. Essentially, Descartes' proofs rely on the belief that by existing, and being born an imperfect being (but with a soul or spirit), one must, therefore, accept that something of more formal reality than ourselves must have created us. Basically, because we exist and are able to think ideas, something must have created us.

[@kos-mos1127]

Descartes’s arguments are circular by nature and rely on the fact that we humans exists. That argument can be flipped if humans did not exists then God does not exists.

[@simonhibbs887]

They are fun thought experiments, but they don't work. Firstly Descartes confuses the existence of the idea of a thing, in this case perfection, with the actual existence of that thing. The idea of perfection is objectively real, that doesn't mean perfection is objectively real. We can imagine all sorts of things that don't, or even can't exist. On the second argument we might tentatively accept that something is (was) keeping Descartes in existence, but we have no reason to ascribe that thing, whatever it is, any further attributes than keeping things in existence. We can't even ascribe it the attribute of perfection. Maybe it will fail at any time due to some flaw and we will no longer exist. It's similar to the reason the Kalam cosmological argument fails. Even if for the sake of argument we accept the idea of a cause of existence, we have no reason to ascribe it any further attributes or roles other than causing existence.

[@kos-mos1127]

@@simonhibbs887 That is true all arguments for God require a logical leap. Showing that existence had a cause does no prove their is a God. That cause could be a natural cause or an impersonal force.

[@dongshengdi773]

@@kos-mos1127 Nope, not natural cause because natural causes are illogical. Why not nothing? Why even bother to exist from nothing? Why even evolve from rocks into living beings only to die in a blink of an eye ? Consciousness, fine-tuned , collapse of the wave function, etc etc . Top 3 most intelligent human beings who ever lived ( as of 2023 ). 1. "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent being. And if the fixed Stars are the centers of other like systems, these, being formed by the like wise counsel, must all be subject to the dominion of One. [...] This Being Governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all: And on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God παντοκρατωρ, or Universal Ruler." ~ from General Scholium written by Sir Isaac Newton 2. "Anyone who becomes seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that there is a spirit manifest in the laws of the universe, a spirit vastly superior to that of man." - most famous physicist and philosopher , Albert Einstein 3. "There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the "particle" of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force is the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the MATRIX of all matter." - Max Planck, Father of Quantum Physics "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness." Bonus: "If quantum mechanics hasn’t profoundly shocked you, you haven’t understood it yet. Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.” - Niels Bohr, a Danish Physicist 。 “Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who sets the planets in motion.” “Truth is ever to be found in the simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things.” ~ by Sir Isaac Newton

[@gkankava]

It was really pleasure to listen to Prof. Plantinga's arguments. Yet, I have stumbled upon the following question. The good cannot exist without the evil, and vice versa? Metaphysically, this suggests a relativistic account of good. Next here is also your freedom to choose between good and evil. But a relativistic account of good would not allow you to choose between them clearly, systematically, and fundamentally at least in principle. Would it? Again, given the relativism, metaphysically there would be no difference of this kind between them, so you could not choose this way between them either-- sometimes you might choose what is good, and sometimes what is evil, and so interchangeably, which would perfectly match just a relativistic account of the good.

[@bozo5632]

No. But it disproves the loving, omnibenevolent gods of most of the world's religions.

[@Practicality01]

Am I to understand that his argument is that the world has to be evil because it meant that God has to suffer and God suffering is "the best story possible"?

[@mockupguy3577]

Alvin should have his mind examined

[@mockupguy3577]

Alvin baffles me every time.

[@undertalefanyay5728]

Can there be good and evil without God? If so, who decides

[@browngreen933]

Why are these seemingly intelligent men quoting Hebrew mythology and trying to pawn it off as fact?

[@JSB2500]

Let's omit the request for an explanation as to why, and simply make this statement: These seemingly intelligent men are quoting Hebrew mythology and trying to pawn it off as fact.

[@gordonquimby8907]

A brilliant theologian and philosopher, but not a relevant argument for non-believers. One just needs to look at physics to understand why there is evil. You cannot have a magnet without a + and a - pole. We would not have matter if we didn’t have positive and negatively charged particles making up atoms. And from our own life experiences: There would be no moral choices if all we could do is make good choices. If all our food was sugary sweet, we would learn to detest the taste of sugar. And what would it matter if we chose to love God if we had no choice but to love God?

[@zzzaaayyynnn]

"Good" and "evil" are not scientific terms. We can listen to theologians or just run to Delueze and pure imminence.

[@hordechess7629]

I like your magnet analogy. Evil is always attached to good, so adding more good adds more evil.

[@dennishubbs1869]

My question is how does an all knowing, all powerful ,every present Diety, allow his chief adversary to deceive the first two people that he creates, causing a fall of not only those two people but entire creation?

[@hnr9lt-pz7bn]

​@uPtrade but that could be true if jesus is real.

[@dongshengdi773]

Evil doesn't exist.

[@dongshengdi773]

​@@hnr9lt-pz7bn How do you know what is good , if you don't know what is evil ? Why is everyone blaming AI and skynet for destroying humanity.?

[@thepeadair]

The fall was necessary for our progression. It wasn’t just a fall downwards but also forward. This mortal life is a proving ground to test our character, to learn to eschew evil, to “see if they will keep their second estate”. Our “first estate” was when we chose to side against Lucifer, whose plan would have denied our free will, before this earth was populated.

[@wreckoner2650]

@@thepeadair horseshit.

[@tdiddle8950]

A cosmology that incoporates "evil" doesn’t work for an ethos-based way of understanding. Yet such a world-view does work if it's based upon awareness. There is no evil but that which spurnes us to even greater heights of awareness. If we take that which spurns us to greater levels of awareness as only a stimulus (outside of moral constraints), then we find that morality isn't really necessary at all.

[@Paraselene_Tao]

What a friendly Christian Apologist. He almost makes me forget that he allows himself and others to be duped by a choking miasma of illogical thought and unselfaware darkness. I had heard of Alvin before today. He reminds me of William Lane Craig: able to talk themselves and others into circles, or perhaps labyrinths made of concepts that they dogmatically beleive. The way out of the labyrinth is to tear down the walls: climb out, dig out, or blow out the walls and find your personal freedom. Perhaps you're scared of what's outside the labyrinth. For that, I tell you to be brave, and produce your own useful structures which remain open and adaptable.

[@mockupguy3577]

Oh you must check out Alvin, if you have a strong stomach. He has never been this benign and reasonable.

[@user-ij6vg8xq2r]

If you're "the only thing" - there is no contrast in simply Being. But if such a Being wanted to express/examine Self - it would need to invent contrast.

[@Bill..N]

Faith is not reliant on making logical sense, as Alvin clearly demonstrates..

[@mockupguy3577]

A world where someone dies needlessly in terrible pain and anguish is the greatest possible world.

[@omnitone]

@Billnorris4108 did you watch the video?

[@Bill..N]

@[ o m n i t o n e ] Of course I watched it, my confrontational friend.. Your veiled inference that you understand what was said BETTER than I did has my attention.. Please expand on that a little..

[@Bill..N]

@@mockupguy3577 What do you mean?

[@Bill..N]

@Helge Your comment seems odd, friend.. It comes across as sarcasm, but if so, what is YOUR position then?

[@nocancelcultureaccepted9316]

God, evil, ghost, and whatever are the manifestation of the powerful human brain.

[@radupopescu9977]

Evil is possible because we can choose, even that some choosing are not totally free, they are degree of freedom. Like on a road, you can go on the road or parallel with, but you can't fly above it. If God didn't give us the possibility to choose, then we would do exactly as He wanted to... but what good it was in that? Robots do the same. But, no one cares about them and nobody ask them why they are doing what we program to do! But God did give the choosing possibility to all living beings He created. There is another problem: our choosing's (suitable or not for the situation analyzed) are not affecting only us, but affects others, even after years. When we choose, we also assume the consequences. And some of them are dire, whether we accepting it or not. If God wouldn't allow evil, then He could delete it. But in this case, freedom to choose, will disappear, and consequently we will be only some robots, with no possibility to choose, some robots programed to do something.

[@Latter_broccoli]

A lot of great evils which are the cause of great suffering and deaths are absolutely unrelated to free will.

[@radupopescu9977]

@@Latter_broccoli Not really. This is a matter of interpretation. For e.g. without suffering we would understand those who suffer.

[@FrazyNondoTV]

It'll be nice to see a Dr Hugh Ross collaboration - question and answers. That would be an interesting discussion

[@jamespenny9482]

Hugh Ross is fantastic.

[@glencorreya7657]

One of the questions i find myself wrestling with is who are we humans to place limits on what "God" can do, in line with the argument that everything is created by "God"... Good and so-called "evil" and everything in between. Evil is of course subjective and disagreements galore are both possible and to be expected when trying to define precisely what "evil" is. One person's meat may well be another's poison!

[@simonhibbs887]

It's possible to construct a relativist moral stance in which evil is largely eliminated. So for example a parasite killing a child is evil from the perspective of the child and it's mother, but perfectly fine from the point of view of the parasite and it's children. In fact it's necessary, but this means we're creating a moral equivalence between parasite and child which most religions will not accept. What you can't eliminate is suffering. Even if we say the parasite isn't evil, the suffering of it's victim is certainly a moral problem that can't be sidelined on relativist terms.

[@dongshengdi773]

​@@simonhibbs887 How do you know what is good if evil doesn't exist? . Why is everyone blaming AI and skynet for destroying humanity.? So it means Humans are evil for allowing AI to run amok ?

[@hnr9lt-pz7bn]

We're human, the only living being that created god in our imagination. That's why the interpretation between us may differ.

[@glencorreya7657]

@@hnr9lt-pz7bn IMHO, the bigotry resulting from our flawed perception of the Divine is the among the most serious challenges we face

[@glencorreya7657]

@@simonhibbs887 The food chain is just one example of the conundrum we face.. The situations that arise from the consequences of the vast set of possible genetic mutations of the human genome are another

[@Retamor2]

Why is it always asumed that God should be good? Thats a human concept

[@martinw91]

Evil is the wrong word. Apologists usually bring that back to sin and free will. The question is, why does god allow this level of suffering? We can certainly imagine a world with less suffering. And we (many of us) strive to actualize that when we do things like eradicate the smallpox virus, find treatments for cancer, set up earthquake warning systems, etc. We are actively undoing much of the suffering that god installed by default.

[@tokrv]

So God is good, he could've chosen a world where no one suffers and sins but instead he chose one where his son died in a cool way. Millions of people still suffer because God wanted to see his son die in a nice way. And before Jesus died, people were suffering wrong and for nothing. And after he died, they continued to suffer. But one day when Jesus will return and destroy everything, some hopefully will finally stop suffering but others will suffer forever in eternal infinite torture. The kindest loving God has chosen the best world.

[@Me-yf9lt]

Evil is a tool used to accelerate soul growth.

[@grattata4364]

Bollocks

[@hatersgotohell627]

That is so stupid lol 😆 there's nothing needed for soul growth by a child getting molested or tortured or coming down with a painful terminal disease struck at random.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

​@@hatersgotohell627 I'm a Christian believer and I tend to agree with you because I struggle myself with understanding evil and suffering, especially suffering of children. Jesus loved the little children. He told us to become like children. So obviously Jesus understood suffering and evil in a way that we don't. Respectfully... from Florida

[@MrMegamattX]

How so???

[@Me-yf9lt]

@@hatersgotohell627 we plan our lives in great detail before we are born into the the earth realm. The abuse of a child is planned by both the child and the abuser before they incarnate. For some reason trauma is like soul growth on steroids. When we return to the spirit world after a challenging earth incarnation, our spirits are upgraded a tremendous amount and it’s permanent. The more trauma and suffering you experience, the more radical the increase in vibration when you return home. We come to earth to experience the absence of love so that when we return to spirit, we have a greater appreciation for love. This is why bad things happen in the world. It’s normally planned and all the spirits involved benefit an enormous amount.

[@mountainjay]

You should really put the year that each clip was filmed in the title because it's misleading otherwise

[@ready1fire1aim1]

The Manual of Discipline, one of the Dead Sea Scrolls, says that God created two great spirits, one of truth and one of perversity, the latter being the angel of darkness. 'Through the angel of darkness, however, even those who practice righteousness are liable to error. All their sin and their inequities, all their guilt and their deeds of transgression are the result of his domination; and thus, by God's inscrutable design, will continue until the time appointed by Him.'

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

But why do you think this "angel of darkness" is given permission by God to continue this "domination"? That's one thing that I struggle to understand. I'm a Christian believer. Peace...

[@ready1fire1aim1]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 God's first act of creation was the "self-withdrawal" to allow emptiness/space for us to exist in. This is the contingent and "less real" side of the zero-dimensional space holding our quarks together with the Strong Nuclear Force aka the Monad (the Monad being the first emanation of God). This is where we learn to know Good from Evil. The other side is the necessary and "more real" side and since we're directly with God there then there's no Evil. We come here for some kind of soul (quark mass with no size measured in Megaelectron Volts) evolution. Best I can think of my brother in Christ.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

@@ready1fire1aim1 Hello. I don't quite understand your comments but I do ponder your statement of "God's first act of creation was the self-withdrawal to allow emptiness/space for us to exist in". Can you explain more what you mean by that? I'm not very scholarly nor very scientific -minded. But I do think God gave us the ability to do science ( although I lack this ability myself ! ). Anyhow... I appreciate your response. God bless.

[@ready1fire1aim1]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 I'm connecting NASA's Mirror Universe theory (which has gained prominence since quantum physics proved the universe is not locally real) with Abrahamic theology and our true universal genius Gottfried Leibniz. Trying to figure it all out just like everybody haha. Theories abound.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

@@ready1fire1aim1 I need to read up on the scientific theories regarding quantum physics. Do you recommend any books, especially books that make a strong correlation between quantum physics and the existence of God? Respectfully...

[@mockupguy3577]

Evil does not disprove god. Evil proves god is not all powerful, all good, and all knowing.

[@ahmedbensebti4806]

From a Quranic perspective as i understand it God claims explicitly the creation of both good and evil in this limited life on Earth as a test for our loyalty towards Him before the great reward in the Eternity which dwarfs the evil to nothing for his followers for His enemies the punishment is required but then in the Eternity with a wise and merciful King peace will prevail but the lesson is in every mind: the Creator is an Almighty God.

[@bobsmith7396]

wonder if he ever thought of the pretzel business - think he’d be a Natural!

[@simonhibbs887]

So the world is a death match battle royale of suffering and pain along the lines of the Hunger Games. The only clue as to what we should believe, or even that we are expected to believe anything at all, was a book written in an obscure village that is laced with factual errors, flying horses, bad arithmetic and has a distasteful obsession with stoning women. HE is not making it easy, that's for sure.

[@hnr9lt-pz7bn]

@@simonhibbs887 I get most of it, but I don't know about the bad arithmetic thing. Could you be specific about that?

[@simonhibbs887]

@@hnr9lt-pz7bn The method of dividing up inherited property mandated by god has mathematical errors. In many circumstances the descendants will inherit more than was left to them because the fractions they each get add up to more than 1.

[@kimsahl8555]

Good and evil prove the language of Nature (not a language of Good).

[@zzzaaayyynnn]

The book of Job gives the only real answer to this problem. Theodicies matter.

[@charlesvandenburgh5295]

All the reasons why I'm no longer a Christian.

[@trajancanada]

These are among many reasons why I'm still a Christian.

[@JungleJargon]

If evil is a problem, then why are people evil?

[@grattata4364]

People can't help they're evil. We are what nature evolved us to be, selfish creatures who doesn't hesitate to put others down for self benefit. (read Selfish gene by Richard Dawkings) The problem lies with nature itself, and potentially whom created it to be such a vile and competetive entity. Just look at wild suffering too.

[@Deductivenightmare]

Here’s a collection of analogous questions demonstrating the flawed nature of your question: (1) If cigarettes are problematic, why do people smoke? (2) If driving in a car with no seat belt’s problematic, why do people do it? The fact that a particular behavior’s problematic doesn’t entail that people won’t engage in the relevant behavior.

[@hnr9lt-pz7bn]

Because people have the capacity to do it.

[@muttlee9195]

@@Deductivenightmare why bother

[@Kenneth-ts7bp]

Atheists use the fact they are evil to prove God is evil. If God is good, why does he allow me to be a psychopath?

[@patientson]

If you wont will it, forget leaving anything meaningful for your lineage or people.

[@LiveExcellently]

I'm so thrilled that you talked to Dr. Plantinga! A brilliant mind!

[@rizwanrafeek3811]

Have you read the Quran?

[@mockupguy3577]

It should be examined.

[@katholischetheologiegeschi1319]

​@@rizwanrafeek3811 lol

[@rizwanrafeek3811]

@@katholischetheologiegeschi1319 These two videos are posted by unexpected men these both men asked God for guidance and God delivered it to them with a miracle in the brother daylight. You watch it and learn from it.

[@rizwanrafeek3811]

@@katholischetheologiegeschi1319 Watch and learn video title: "Derrick Feinman How Islam Found Me: My Conversion to Islam"

[@italogiardina8183]

Although the greatest of all possible worlds seems to be infinity good there of which we would be in, it does not preclude another infinity with even a greater good. This would be the egalitarian normalisation of God within a moral community of gods.

[@zzzaaayyynnn]

every state that can exists does so an infinite number of times: eternal recurrence ... and "everything" is possible

[@TheAidenator2001]

Whoever or whatever created this universe created very flawed human beings.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

I personally don't believe we were created as " very flawed human beings.". Yet I do agree that mankind is certainly fallen. I'm just not sure why this happened. Can we blame God ? Satan ? Adam and Eve? Evolution ? Free Will? I'm a Christian believer but I do struggle with these questions. I'm thankful that Jesus the Son of God came to rescue and save " flawed human beings". But I keep asking myself, "is this indeed the best possible world"? I appreciate your honesty. Respectfully...

[@rizwanrafeek3811]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 _" Yet I do agree that mankind is certainly fallen. "_ Did your 'god' expect perfection from Adam and his children when perfection wasn't there from the day-one ? Your Christian's 'god' isn't the God of Abraham for surety.

[@JSB2500]

​@@johnbrzykcy3076 Humans never fell. We brainwash children when they are very young to believe this, and it can be impossible for them to lose this wrong idea because it becomes a foundation for them, but it's not actually true. Humans are fundamentally resource competitors, and resource competitors can always be seen as fallen. So humans were always fallen. They just never fell.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

@@rizwanrafeek3811 You have a valid question. I don't know if God expected "perfection" from Adam and Eve right after their creation. They were created in God's "image" and God indeed said their creation was " good." So something went wrong, right? How do you perceive the creation of Adam and Eve? I'm open minded to learn more. Peace of God to you from Florida...

[@timothy4557]

​@@rizwanrafeek3811 Yes, He's the God of Abraham. Rizwan, crack open a bible and get educated. Here, I'll help you out. Chew on this; " ...for the creature has been made subject to "VANITY" not of its will,but by reason of Him Who has subjected the same in hope...." Rom.8:20. What's your 'god' say ?

[@wingsuiter2392]

If you are motivated to prove your god exists, there is no mental gymnastics too difficult to overcome for you to prove his existence.

[@dongshengdi773]

Why is everyone blaming AI and skynet for destroying humanity.? So it means Humans are evil for allowing AI to run amok ?

[@bittertruth1211]

Evil is the misunderstood wisdom of Nature! After all, God is a GOOD EVIL!!

[@playpaltalk]

Why hate is so easy and love is hard work?

[@evaadam3635]

We are free to choose to do evil or to do good. Choosing to do evil does not disproves GOD's existence but, rather, shows that GOD respects our free will, granting HE exists.

[@tonyatkinson2210]

I don’t see why pain and fear is necessary for free will to exist .

[@markstipulkoski1389]

I guess you can go that route for "moral evil". But how do you defend "natural evil". A lot more construing needed for that. As does the "church lady" on Saturday Night Live, you could blame it on SATAN! But I don't think that is fair, letting a defective Angel, with almost God-like powers, pick on us like that. If I were God, I'd kick that bullies butt into oblivion. But of course, I am not God, and God works is mysterious ways, and suffering children can be consoled that their suffering is all in God's plan, and yada, yada, yada. Yeah, that all makes sense to me now.

[@evaadam3635]

@@tonyatkinson2210 Pain, fear, or comfort can be felt to give us hints that hell and heaven exist so for us to find faith in a loving God for our souls' salvation. Free Will is the power of the soul independent of the feelings of physical body that our soul temporarily dwells..

[@tonyatkinson2210]

@@evaadam3635 so bone cancer in children is a type of warning from god. “Do the right thing or get worse for eternity”

[@evaadam3635]

@@tonyatkinson2210 Your immortal soul is not a child but a split of the Holy Spirit who has no beginning and no end. Your lost soul was sent here at your request, temporarily using a physical body, for a chance to return Home/Heaven through faith.

[@grybnyx]

Arguing in defense of a fixed nonempirical premise- the very opposite of critical thought. But that is what theology is. He says that when people turn their backs to God, God didn’t just do away with them. Actually he did, all of them except for the family of Noah. He can’t even get his hairy tail straight.

[@chem7553]

I'm not sure what God is like, exactly. But, I am confident in this: a universe without the ability for illogical things to exist is a universe that is perfectly homogenous. A perfectly homogenous universe is no different than a universe of nothing. This would be a universe without choice, or even existence itself. In my opinion, there is no greater evil than a universe without evil.

[@KestyJoe]

You seem to have a low opinion of god’s abilities

[@alvinnorris6523]

I really enjoyed this. I want to hear more.

[@josevalverde7431]

God is good after the evil.

[@sethmweber]

I think it’s reasonable to believe some god does exist, but hamstringing yourself to dogma like Christianity makes it impossible to argue for god in a way which accounts for the complex nature that a god would truly have. To me, the Christian god is too simple. So simple, in fact, that it doesn’t fit logically into our complex reality.

[@tanned06]

Lots of mental gymnastics is indeed needed to even think that this is even a best scenario for evil to exist in this world.

[@siulapwa]

Why do people assume god is good

[@thomasb7464]

The biblical god is a lovecraftian cosmic horror. Luckily it doesn't exist.

[@John777Revelation]

The physical world / universe exists, in large part, due to duality and the interaction and balance of these opposing / complementary forces. Light - Dark; North - South, Positive - Negative; Right - Wrong, On - Off, Yin - Yang, 1 - 0, Day - Night, Order - Disorder, Good - Evil, Up - Down, True - False, Hot - Cold, Wave - Particle, etc. is observed to be interwoven within the fabric of the "physical world/universe". Thus, the existence of Good would of necessity require the existence of Evil in the physical world / universe, and vice versa. Moreover, the scientifically confirmed property of duality in the physical world / universe would seem to indicate, through the inherent laws that govern it, the existence of a Prime Observer / Cause."

[@simonhibbs887]

In physics none of those are opposites in an absolute sense, they are simply interpretations we project on to reality. Their opposition is a linguistic shorthand that helps us think about them, but doesn't have any deep metaphysical meaning. Dark is simply the absence of light not the opposite of it, day and night are simply different geometric orientations of planets and their orbits, but technically aren't even geometric opposites due to orbital drift and procession. Even north and south are simply two different points on a sphere. The fact that they happen to be separated by 180 degrees as against some other number of degrees isn't really much special, it just happens to be useful to us when navigating due to the way our brains work. Even true and false in logic are fundamentally just different binary digits, 0 and 1, just numbers, we project values and meaning on to them. Binary logic is a system of logic, but there are many others so it's not at all fundamental. They're opposite in some linguistic sense, but that opposition doesn't mean anything any more than we can say that 2 is the opposite of 4, or 6 is the opposite of zero. Also particle isn't the opposite of wave, they are just two different ways of thinking about the same phenomenon. They are at most just different behaviours, but an electron can be thought of as both wave and particle. That doesn't make an electron the opposite of itself. So this idea that duality is ingrained in reality doesn't actually apply, it's all just humans interpreting things and simplifying them according to our languages and ways of thinking. If god is perfectly good, it's hard to see why god's creations would not also be perfectly good. The evil would have to come from somewhere. In fact it's hard to see how a perfect being could even begin to create something that is not perfect. Surely such a god would follow perfect procedures to implement perfect plans that produced perfect results. Where would the imperfections even come from? Finally the prime observer cause thing is just tacked on at the end. It just doesn't follow. We live in an imperfect world that's messy and flawed, which implies and imperfect, messy and flawed source. Even if we say ok, sure, the universe is dualistic doesn't that imply a dualistic god along the lines of the beliefs of the Zoroastrians?

[@hnr9lt-pz7bn]

@@simonhibbs887 how about the existence of matter and anti-matter, is it our interpretation only and not reality? 🙄

[@simonhibbs887]

@@hnr9lt-pz7bn if they were truly exact opposites, they would cancel out to nothing but instead you get energy out of their mutual annihilation. Also it seems like there are deep asymmetries in physics. For example why is there more matter than antimatter? A naive application of theory says the Big Bang should have produced equal amounts of each. I highly recommend looking up the work of the physicist Chien-Shiung Wu. Then there’s the mathematical objects called spinors, that have to be rotated by 720 degrees to return to their original orientation. It turns out most spin 1/2 particles are spinors, which is most fermions. Wikipedia has a decent article in the Wu experiment, the one in spinors is very technical but that’s not avoidable.

[@Gyrannon]

The truth is you want him to be real cause you don't wanna feel like you wasted your entire life on a fantasy that holds no value other than making you feel precious. If God were all powerful & 100% good, then it makes no logical sense for him to create a world where there is evil & suffering in it, things that he himself has claimed to be opposed to. The only reasons for him to create the world we live in is that this is the best he can do, which means he isn't all powerful or he's a sadist, which would mean instead that he isn't all good. Were I God, there would be nothing to atone for. There would be no plan of salvation as there would be no need for it. There would be no Hell, again no need for it, plus the existence of it alone would make me evil. Everyone would live happy lives. And no one ever would have reason to turn against me. I'm certainly not perfect, but seriously if I can envision a perfect world like that, but he can't, doesn't that just speak volumes about his actual character? The God described in the Bible describes a monster, especially when you read about Job, Abraham, and The Flood. If any one of us did something like he did to those people, you wouldn't be thinking they are right & good, you'd be thinking they are worse than Hitler & Mengele. And he didn't sacrifice anything. He was born on Earth with all his powers. Then underwent a trial that he engineered to happen. Then kill himself for himself just forgive everyone else for things he caused & allowed to happen in the first place. The First Sin? Put your kid whom is completely innocent & naive in a room with knives, tell them don't play with the knives, now leave them alone without any intervention whatsoever. See what happens. Kid cut or killed themselves? Whose fault is it? Their fault for disobeying? Your fault for putting the knives in there? Seriously, no good parent would ever do that. They know better. Clearly God didn't. Hence how he can't be real, cause everything he does is unwise, contradictory, stupid, and evil.

[@AlexB3h3m0th]

paradoxically the fact that is the world is driven by entropy is proof of god. Think: "if there is a devil, there must be a god"

[@caiusiv4616]

Thanks for the insight.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

(2:25) *AP: **_"You start with the idea that God wants to create a really good world."_* ... And this is where theism runs into so many problems. When you posit an omniscient, all-powerful entity from the very start, then this entity will be judged by its fruit. We don't see the level of perfection that's indicative of a priori "good from the get-go." What I posit is that what theism believes to be God is actually "Existence" merely learning everything through a posteriori "trial and error." Theists see good being present before humans ever existed and I see humanity as defining what is good and evil. Our value judgments are what shape the future of "Existence," and this is achieved through *consensus.*

[@browngreen933]

My position too. Existence itself is the ultimate reality -- fundamental, eternal, and unchanging within a constant river or flux.

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@browngreen933 *"My position too. Existence itself is the ultimate reality -- fundamental, eternal, and unchanging within a constant river or flux."* ... True, Existence is the ultimate reality, but we differ on the _"unchanging within a constant river or flux"_ part. I have "Existence" in a constant state of evolution moving from simplicity to complexity. The most recent level of complexity (you and me) can not only be traced back to the first prokaryote with its protective capsule and single nucleoid, but also back to the very first hydrogen atom's positively charged proton and negatively charged electron, and even further back to a mathematical assessment of "Existence = 1 and whatever does not represent Existence = 0" immediately prior to Big Bang. You cannot go back any further than this while still adhering to logic.

[@browngreen933]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC I don't disagree with that. The river or flux I mentioned may be the evolution from simplicity to complexity that you describe. However, when the present universe eventually ends "trillions" of years from now, Existence will reset to its original default condition and will start all over again from a state of simplicity. Does your long-term scenario differ from that?

[@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC]

@@browngreen933 *" However, when the present universe eventually ends "trillions" of years from now, Existence will reset to its original default condition and will start all over again from a state of simplicity. Does your long-term scenario differ from that?"* ... I don't have a recycling universe (or Multiverse). I posit Existence as a one-directional evolution. No need to keep recycling things over and over. Existence either finds what it's looking for or it doesn't. It's an "all-or nothing" scenario, per se. When Existence evolved inanimate matter into living matter, then the inanimate matter became irrelevant. "Life" became the focus and the next direction of evolution. Now, self-aware humans are the focus and the many animals of nature are irrelevant. The many abstract constructs we create and value judgments we issue are the next direction Existence will evolve into. So, just like everything that preceded us, "we" will become irrelevant once that happens. Think of it like the "waste-mold" process for creating a sculpture. All Existence cares about is the final product. Whatever gets used in the molding process becomes irrelevant.

[@browngreen933]

@@0-by-1_Publishing_LLC If you don't think that Existence is cyclic, then how do you account for the so-called Big Bang origin of the universe?

[@NomadOutOfAfrica]

That has to be the worst and most f’ed up explanation of god I’ve ever heard. No wonder Christianity has lost relevance.

[@thespyk]

Look, if you are going to make a coherent argument for religion like this please warn me next time. I need to prepare myself mentally and emotionally. 😅

[@Tom_Quixote]

Why is it people always assume that god must necessarily be good?

[@dongshengdi773]

Rene Descartes did not assume. He proved it using mental experiment Just like Einstein did when he formulated the theory of relativity. Top 3 most intelligent human beings who ever lived ( as of 2023 ). 1. "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent being. And if the fixed Stars are the centers of other like systems, these, being formed by the like wise counsel, must all be subject to the dominion of One. [...] This Being Governs all things, not as the soul of the world, but as Lord over all: And on account of his dominion he is wont to be called Lord God παντοκρατωρ, or Universal Ruler." ~ from General Scholium written by Sir Isaac Newton 2. "Anyone who becomes seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that there is a spirit manifest in the laws of the universe, a spirit vastly superior to that of man." - most famous physicist and philosopher , Albert Einstein 3. "There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the "particle" of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force is the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the MATRIX of all matter." - Max Planck, Father of Quantum Physics "I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness." Bonus: "If quantum mechanics hasn’t profoundly shocked you, you haven’t understood it yet. Everything we call real is made of things that cannot be regarded as real.” - Niels Bohr, a Danish Physicist 。 “Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who sets the planets in motion.” “Truth is ever to be found in the simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things.” ~ by Sir Isaac Newton

[@MarkWendland]

It's a basic tenant of Xty. God is love and contains no shadow. What ultimate good is can be understood differently however

[@Tom_Quixote]

@@MarkWendland Ok so either we have a difficult theological problem of evil when talking about the christian god, or maybe it's simply a different god that is in charge?

[@kos-mos1127]

My vote is Nature is in charge.

[@simonhibbs887]

@@Tom_Quixote Or, just to put it out there, no god at all. But you are quite correct, which is why a lot of enlightenment thinkers opted for the blind watchmaker deist view of an impersonal god, thus still being able to go to church like a respectable 17th century gentleman.

[@kalewintermute28]

Any Deity that imposes an eternity of suffering on a person as a punishment for not believing in something for which no factual evidence was ever provided has not only allowed evil, that Deity IS evil.

[@dongshengdi773]

Evil exists therefore God exists . You can read Rene Descartes The Meditation to prove God is good

[@dongshengdi773]

God = Good Devil = Evil theists = good = positive energy Anti-theists = evil = negative energy

[@dongshengdi773]

Evil doesn't exist. How do you know it's evil ? How do you know what is good , if you don't know what is evil ? How do you know what is beautiful , if you don't know what is ugly ?

[@muttlee9195]

I agree organised Christianity particularly evangelicism in my view is wicked. Lies and spreading untruths are wicked.

[@davenchop]

@@dongshengdi773 religion poisons the mind..

[@jamarvlarue-Herclus]

God don't do none evil His brother do all the evil in the world they was twins brothers he was the good god and his brother was the evil God that was in the Bible the all powerful God is loving and caring but If you piss God off he can be dangerous and loving this God is the ruler of life and death the brother is the ruler owe of the pain we do in this world

[@LarsRyeJeppesen]

Yes it does.

[@vitus.verdegast]

If gods were actual entities that have some control over events, why should they not tolerate those that we humans perceive as "evil?" Maybe the gods are having fun at our expense, but more likely it's just that conflict and suffering are a natural part of life. And please don't invoke the old "he gave us free will" argument-- human behavior doesn't work that way.

[@CesarClouds]

The question assumes and ascribes human concepts, without justification, to a generic deity. Folly.

[@markstipulkoski1389]

He's such a nice fatherly old man. Let's just let him talk about his fairy tale stuff, and then bring up the problem of natural evil in the last minute, and then not press him too hard on it, because he is such a nice old man.

[@simonhibbs887]

Cruel, but fair. Also funny.

[@anteodedi8937]

Lolol

[@Kenneth-ts7bp]

Why are you so evil naturally?

[@deanodebo]

How can there be evil if you don’t believe in God? Is it subjective idea?

[@simonhibbs887]

@@deanodebo The point is not that god is evil according to a secular moral system (though I think I can argue that perfectly well), it's that Christians lay down a moral system and according to those standards it's clear that god is not all good. So it's a point about the inconsistency of some, in fact many religious beliefs.

[@maxwelldillon4805]

Evil disproves an all-loving god imo

[@totoro6214]

I'm a doctor and I see people suffering every day... especially when I see kids on the spectrum today suffering from pain but is unable to express it, my heart breaks. I don't for a second believe an all loving god exists. Even I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy the pain and suffering of raising a special needs child and seeing their own child suffer.. And supposedly we are all god's children

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

@@totoro6214 I'm a Christian believer and I appreciate your honesty because I also struggle with the suffering, often needless, that children encounter. Something seems to be missing in our perception of evil and suffering. By the way, I'm sure many of your patients and their families appreciate your compassion and desires to help. Respectfully...

[@lakevacm]

Evil selfishness as compared to selfishness that grows and expands does not disprove the goodness of God. Having all the time in the world, God as the first to give birth to this universe and man determined to restore man rather than discard man or take a short cut. no matter how long it takes, inconveniences Him or causes God anguish and pain. Does God want to eat when so many of His children are starving? Can God be indifferent when people conclude there is no overarching purpose to human life and no absolute and eternal source of true love, even as God is inside us? The anointing of the Birth from above gives us the revelation that God is inside of us, in the center of our being. In the Book of Genesis, God reveals is heart of lamentation and sorrow saying audibly to the prophet, “The people on earth were very wicked, that all the imaginings of their hearts were always of evil only. YAHOVAH regretted that he had made humankind on the earth; it grieved him to His heart.” The angel was endowed with ambition to receive from God just like man, though man is chosen to expand God’s lineage through the multiplication of physical bodies wherein our eternal spirit grows in the soil of our flesh before transmigrate into the substantial world of spirit. Evil is a temporary condition, it is not eternal. The early Egyptian father of Christianity Origen was correct that we will be restored in eternity. This does not mean there are not grave complications if we put off until after death what we should do in our life by having the payable on death attitude. If things can be restored in eternity, including fallen angels which they can, and which many are in the process of doing, this means this aberrant selfishness is not eternal, nor was it a product of the parental heart of God who had the first parental heart. What is growing and expanding selfish trying to encompass? When selfish becomes stagnant it fails to experience the joy of growing selfishness. Think of it like this; if an individual does not have a family, he can never truly experience the joy of the family level of growing selfishness. In America we have county level competition between schools, everyone will insist that they are the best and no body messes with us. On the national level a patriot asserts the right to give his life for his national level of selfishness. Finally applying our conscience we have a multiracial, multilingual level of selfishness that asserts that God created the whole world for me to serve on His behalf. Here selfishness is approaching the Spirit of God Himself who cares about all His children. So what caused the angel to ignore God appointing him as a chaperone to Adam and Eve in their vulnerable growing period on their way to mature adulthood prior to marriage? He compared himself to them and felt a diminishing of God’s love to himself, when in fact his position was indispensable and God loved him the same as always. The angel envied them. The Process of Murder Envy of 1. Knowledge 2. Position 3. Property 4. Affection When a person or angel fails to take God’s viewpoint envy turns into the process of murder like this: envy -> jealousy -> arrogance-> resentment-> anger -> hatred-> invasion-> violence-> murder/suicide Colossians 1: 19 For it pleased God to have his full being live in his Son ( this does not mean Jesus as a man born like Adam without record of an ancestors prior failure, is God, and being born sinless does not mean it is an immaculate conception, it just means you have the anointing of the Messiah who can provide the change of blood lineage for all mankind, which is the real experience of salvation that expands to the world level) 20 and through his Son to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace through him, through having his Son shed his blood by being executed on a stake. End quote Paul makes a point that God’s reconciliation includes all things in the corporeal and incorporeal realms. Are people who lived a lousy life and now in the place in the so-called “afterlife” designated to the place for warehousing sinners part of the reconciliation? Yes if they are part of “all” things. Then would fallen angels be up for restoration and the reconciliation? Again, yes, if they are a part of all things, which they are a part. God did not select evil from eternity past. Think of it this way: Would you rather your Divine Father who told Jeremiah: “call me, ‘my father’” be pure or cynical? God knew there would be consequences to crossing the line of goodness into unprincipled territory, but He didn’t guarantee as much by our misunderstanding of the concepts surrounding the theological theories of Predestination.

[@kos-mos1127]

Last time I checked any person called he cannot give birth.

[@whitefiddle]

Arguing that the existence of evil is a proof against the existence of God is the stupidest and least explanatory line one could possibly take. One might just as well admit up front that his lack of common sense is proof against the existence of God; e.g. _An all-wise and all-powerful God wouldn't inhabit any possible world with creatures as stupid as me, yet here I am, therefore God doesn't exist._

[@simonhibbs887]

Your point about intelligence doesn't pertain because low intelligence and high intelligence are not opposites. Any amount of intelligence is still intelligence, whereas evil isn't just a very small amount of good. Also we are told in religious teachings that evil is abhorrent to god. We are not told that god abhors stupidity. Many Christian theologians though the history of Christianity have taken the problem of evil as being a significant credible challenge. Alvin is a serious Christian scholar and he say right here in the interview that it can be a serious problem for believers. I think it's unfair to criticise skeptics of religion for taking it seriously as well. If god is all good and created the world, why does the world contain evil. It's a reasonable question.

[@whitefiddle]

@@simonhibbs887 You prove your lack of intelligence in your inability to keep your categories properly sorted. First, the fact that "many Christian theologians" differ on ANY question is not an argument at all: "many Christian theologians" have disagreed on the nature and meaning of the trinity for crying out loud. "Many scientists" differ on the origin of the universe...that is NOT proof that the universe doesn't exist! Sheesh. Second, the obvious fact that the existence of evil presents some Christians with a "challenge" is a far cry from presenting a cogent argument for or against the EXISTENCE of God. Man you're no good at this at all. I never said materialists or atheists can't take issue with the existence or purpose or meaning or justification of evil. What I said was (and take a couple hours to reread the first sentence I wrote): _the mere existence of evil cannot be tendered as an argument against the existence of God._ Good grief; did they burn all the books in your village?

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

​@@simonhibbs887 I'm a Christian believer and I do struggle with "why does the world contain evil". In fact, it makes me frustrated. I appreciate your scholarly comments. And your honesty. Respectfully..

[@simonhibbs887]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 Thank you, I really appreciate that. Frankly I have no personal issue with religious faith as a private matter, only when it intersects with politics or with social issues in nays I see as negative. Members of my family are religious and that’s fine. I sometimes get heated up a bit in comments but try hard to keep it civil. Best regards.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

@@simonhibbs887 Thanks for the response. Don't worry about comments that are "heated up". To be honest, I don't even like the word "religious". And I don't follow politics. From my understanding, Jesus taught us about the truth of God. Yet, it seems like God is "hidden" ( at least in my daily trials). But I don't believe that my experience or the perception that God is hidden can negate the truth that God exists. If God doesn't exist, then I personally don't feel there is a meaning to life. Yet, I still struggle to understand the meaning of life even if we accept God's existence. How do you feel about it? I have no problem with atheists who find meaning to life without a god. However I think there must be some ultimate meaning to life. Evil does make it difficult to find and/or understand the meaning to life. But each of us take life as a journey. Sometimes the path we follow does lead to understanding and even inspiration. I wish you the best on your journey. Respectfully from Florida...

[@muttlee9195]

I can’t believe intelligent rational men can talk like this. Shocking nonsense.

[@wreckoner2650]

absolutely.

[@ramblingthoughtsandideas]

Shocking nonsense indeed!

[@hordechess7629]

I can't believe that you can't believe that

[@mozerm]

I'm not certain that there is or is not a god but I am certain that the bible has nothing to do with god if in fact there is one.

[@MontyCantsin5]

If the Bible and the teachings of Jesus have no bearing on positive arguments for the existence of god then theists really are in trouble.

[@grattata4364]

It doesn't necessary disprove god, it just disproves an all powerful benevolent god.

[@hnr9lt-pz7bn]

Is it considered a God if he's not powerful and benevolent?

[@grattata4364]

@@hnr9lt-pz7bn I agree with your point. That kind of entity is not worthy of the title.

[@Tom_Quixote]

@@hnr9lt-pz7bn Conceptually, I think a being only needs to be very powerful to be considered a god.

[@Sampsonoff]

@@Tom_Quixotesure. But probably not one worthy of worship

[@sgloobal2025]

Well it couldn’t disprove such a god because all I have to do is ask you where are you getting your objective standard from in order to call anything evil in the first place. If you say well it’s just you or some other human or groups of humans subjective opinions; then you’ve refuted your own objection

[@leonardooliva195]

The work of Pietro Ubaldi (1886-1972) solves this problem.

[@mockupguy3577]

Give us a summary?

[@leonardooliva195]

@@mockupguy3577 The problem of onipresence, onipotence and oniscience does not mean that God can do whatever He wishes, because His nature is The Unitary Law that govern everything in the Universe. God's Law is supreme order - and order is not arbitrary. We, Divine beings, are creation of God. We are equal to Him in our deep nature - but not of the same power. This is the reason why there was a possibility of Fall - that brought us to this universe in perpetual evolution (seeking perfection). Ubaldi's work is very extense (24 volumes). Before studying "The System" (1956) I reccomend the study of "The Great Synthesis" (written between 1932 and 1935).

[@EverythingCameFromNothing]

Why suffering and atonement just to go to heaven? Why not just create heaven in the first place and let everyone be happy without suffering? What a cruel god this man speaks of Shame on him

[@missh1774]

Could it be ratio relevant or proportionally dependent on an each full phase?

[@B.S...]

So the best possible world is not a world of happiness it’s a world of redemption, thus evil is necessary. Why is there evil? >> So we can sin… >> So we can be redeemed… and redemption requires suffering… and suffering requires evil… and all this is more perfect than happiness. The logic justifies the necessity of dead babies for salvation… is that objective morality? Who gives a damn about the salvation of evil perpetrators? It’s the victims that are due compensation and justice… Job got compensation but no justice… In real life the victim gets nothing but cremation. Epicurus trilemma goes unanswered.

[@waldwassermann]

The Word is Different.

[@patientson]

Have you had of the nun in America who wont decay? Let that serve as your motivation to speak truth that transforms and encourage you and others around including your enemies. You cant get angry at your endurance and live to tell a story that last uncountable seasons, seasons after seasons. Your endurance cant choose what seasons to be active just as many bad Americans and Europeans treat Africans no matter how much we have endured over the years.

[@davenchop]

mental hospital may help

[@patientson]

@@davenchophelp may hospital mental

[@nirvana_banana777]

If we apply the law of polarity to this question, we can see that without a doubt, God does exist.

[@muttlee9195]

What if you are a non dualist?

[@simonhibbs887]

I addressed this in a reply to John777Revelation so won't repeat it here.

[@nirvana_banana777]

@Mutt Lee it's not about your religious identity. The law of polarity is one of the fundamental metaphysical rules of reality. It means, nothing can exist without its equal and opposite counterpart. Hot cannot exist without cold, night cannot exist without day, sun cannot exist without moon, and so on.

[@muttlee9195]

@@nirvana_banana777 I understand polarity it’s similar to duality but one can transcend such things. That which is all pervading out with time and having no form. Some people give it names. Our true nature is part of it. I have no religious identity as such.

[@simonhibbs887]

@@nirvana_banana777 the problem is it’s nonsense. Hot isn’t the opposite of cold, cold is just less heat than hot. Night and day also aren’t opposites in any deep metaphysical sense. During day the nearest star happens to be in the sky, but other stars are in the sky at night, they’re just fainter. There’s nothing fundamental going on. Sun versus moon is the worst, if the moon disintegrated we’d still orbit the sun. About half the time the sun and moon are even visible in the sky at the same time. It’s like saying Apple is opposite to orange, they’re not opposite, they’re just different. Most apparent opposites are like this, it’s just a quirk of human intuition that thinking in terms of opposites helps us reason about things. It’s a kind of mental simplification we happen to find useful, but it’s not significant in a deep sense.

[@chayanbosu3293]

Evil dose not disprove God rather proves God's existence because God Sri Krishna says this material world is full of miseary and our duty is to cross this material world.

[@suatustel746]

What a malarkey!!!!!!!!

[@hnr9lt-pz7bn]

Proving god existence by saying of another imaginary. Smart human.

[@dongshengdi773]

​@@hnr9lt-pz7bn real science is just all fiction. Nothing has ever been proven. It's all imaginary beliefs

[@simonhibbs887]

As I understand it the issue in Hinduism is a bit different because the frame of reference is not the same as Abrahamic religions, in which god is seen as good and a benevolent paternalistic power. I don't think that's the case in Hinduism right? How does the problem of evil relate to Hindu ethics? I'm genuinely curious.

[@browngreen933]

Different gods.

[@StevenPD]

Ok. Big fella creates them in his image, has a problem with evil, then magnifies the suffering and attempts to pin it on the bringer of light? That’s hella shifty creator ya’ll got there.

[@danielfrancis3660]

I've always thought you need evil to appreciate good.

[@zzzaaayyynnn]

you do, there is no "good" without "evil": otherwise, there is just a state of things, in logical terms, "the case"

[@CountlessTruth]

@@zzzaaayyynnnNo, Evil cannot exist without good, but good can exist without evil. Here's why: Throughout history, no one has ever committed evil acts simply for the sake of being evil. All evil actions are driven by the desire to attain something good. On the other hand, people have performed good deeds solely for the sake of doing good. For instance, feeding a homeless person is a good action that brings both a positive outcome and a sense of personal fulfillment. Both of which are good things. However, physically assaulting a homeless person is a bad action that still aims to achieve something good - in this case, pleasure. Pleasure is an inherently good thing. What determines whether an action is good or bad is the means we choose to obtain that good outcome. Nevertheless, every action in life is motivated by the intention of attaining something good. Even if someone intentionally harms themselves or takes their own life, it stems from a desire to achieve a good outcome, such as pleasure or peace.

[@zzzaaayyynnn]

@@CountlessTruth Nice point. People always do what is "good" in their own eyes, even if the rest of the world sees their actions as "evil."

[@abhishalsharma1628]

Who's this host?

[@lakevacm]

10. The Motivation of the Fall of Lucifer The motives behind Lucifer's fallen act were, first, his desire to dominate Adam and Eve which was derived from his pride and jealousy, and, secondly, his impulse of love toward Eve. Lucifer coveted Adam's position and the greater amount of love which Adam and Eve received from God. Lucifer's desire to receive God's love as much as Adam did was not, in itself, evil. But when he left his proper position and seduced Eve in order to fulfill his own desire, he violated the Principle and created disorder in the whole cosmos. Lucifer was to be under Adam and Eve, and Eve under Adam. Adam and Eve were equal and were to stand before God as a unit when they reached maturity. In the divine order, however, Adam took precedence over Eve because he was created first. Contrary to the divine order, Lucifer dominated Eve, and she in turn dominated Adam through temptation. In this way the order of dominion was reversed. That aspect of human pride which leads men to regard themselves or their creations as God or God-like derives from the fallen nature of the archangel Lucifer. If Lucifer had loved Adam as God did, he could have shared God's joy and happiness from man. Because Lucifer became jealous of Adam and tempted Eve, he took a stand against God. When anyone stands with God, he feels joy and power. If he stands against Him, he destroys not only himself but others also. 11. Could God Prevent the Fall? God is Almighty and All-knowing. Therefore, he could foresee the possibility of Adam's fall. However, God did not prevent the downfall of Adam and Eve. Foreseeing the destructive consequences of their transgression, why did He not intervene? God created the Divine Principle to govern man during his growth from Formation to Perfection. God does not intervene directly in the affairs of His children until they have grown to Perfection. Adam and Eve fell while they were immature. Had they been mature, they would have loved God so deeply that no temptation could have turned them away from Him. For the following reasons God did not directly intervene, either to prevent the fall or to restore Adam and Eve to their innocent state immediately. A. God is absolute and perfect, and He created the Principle to be a perfect system of spiritual law. The Principle provides man with all the guidance he needs for growth to spiritual maturity. In accordance with His Principle, God does not interfere with man while he is fulfilling his responsible part. During man's growth the Principle is sufficient for man's guidance. At the time of their fall, Adam and Eve had reached only the top of the Growth Stage. If God had stepped in to prevent the fall or to restore His fallen children directly, He would have violated His own Principle and invaded man's responsibility. Thus, the Principle would appear imperfect, unable to guide man in his growth. B. God is not responsible for what He did not create. If, after their fall, God had assumed full responsibility, and restored them, He would have been acknowledging their transgression as part of His creation. If God were to acknowledge the non-principled act initiated by Satan as part of His creation, then He would be acknowledging Satan as co-creator. Since God is the sole Creator and brings forth only good, He will in no case recognize evil as part of His creation, nor assume responsibility for its abolishment. C. God created man to be the Lord of all creation. To qualify, man must be mature, having passed through the three stages of growth. When God establishes Direct Dominion over man, man is recognized as having reached maturity. When Adam and Eve fell, they were still immature, thus under the Indirect Dominion of God. If God had exercised Direct Dominion over them at the time of their fall, He would have been recognizing them as mature, which they were not. To see Adam and Eve become fully qualified, God had to wait until they had grown to the state of Perfection. To give man lordship, God had to leave him free of direct intervention until he reached the state of Perfection by himself. God did not explicitly forewarn Adam and Eve about Lucifer's temptation, because they had to use their own judgment in all situations. If He had told them clearly, Adam's dignity as the Lord of creation would have been hurt. God only gave a hint regarding the possible temptation of Lucifer. For these reasons, God did not interfere with the fall of Adam and Eve. He had to work for their restoration afterward.

[@simonhibbs887]

Like all religious narratives it's a great story, and I don't mean to damn with faint praise, seriously I love this stuff. A few points. The bible doesn't say anything about Lucifer tempting anyone, it's a snake. Identification with Satan is a later concoction by theologians. Also it's interesting how much Christian theology is heavily informed by an apocryphal work, the Book of Jubilees. Almost none of the stuff about Lucifer is actually in the bible. That's why you won't see many professional theologians talking about Old Nick. On paragraph A we have a perfect god and perfect divine principle to guide mankind, but mankind isn't grown yet and is tempted. So the flaw in the system is the temptation, which comes from Lucifer. So it's the temptation that's the issue. On paragraph B, these are arguments why god would refuse to assume responsibility for creating evil, but it doesn't constitute an argument that he in fact didn't create evil. In paragraph C we have Lucifer tempting humanity, and humanity using their own judgement and failing. Well, god created Lucifer and also created humanity's faculty of judgement. There's really no avoiding the fact that the buck stops at one desk.

[@lakevacm]

@@simonhibbs887 The story was couched in metaphor. Why? Most likely because there was not yet a person who could take responsibility and reveal the exact, precise nature of the angels crime, whatever his name was who is portrayed as a serpent.

[@stephenzhao5809]

4:57 ... but if you're saying this happened by accident because of a human sinned or this happened in the world or was that something that God pre-planned from the start. 5:07 Well I'd say it's got to be something that he selected from the start he had all these different possiblities all these different possible worlds he could have made actual he wanted to make a really good one actual all the best ones contain incarnation and atonment but any world that contains incarnation and atonement also has to contain evil sin and not just a littlbe bit of it I mean if all the evil there was mere peccadillo on the part of an otherwise admirably disposed angel then that would be massive overkill for there to be incarnation and atonement so there's got to be a lot of it and hence any world any really good world is going to contain a great deal of evil. 5:48 so God is choosing worlds taht have evil so that tantamounts to God creating evil. 5:53 I don't understnad his creating evil but it does amount to his choosing worlds that contain evil I mean the evil is a means tour or a necessary condition of something really good it's not that the evil gets chosen for its own sake but this whole world which contains evil does get chosen. (right) 6:12 how then would you deal with the events that occur before human beings were here the so-called Rose Fawn that was burned in a forest fire before humans ever knew about it or heard about it or how is that compatible? 6:33 Well I mean it's not incompatible but it doesn't look like it fits in very easily but it's a part of Christian belief to think that human beings aren't the only free creatures operating in God's world there are the principalities and powers mentioned in the New Testament there are Satan and his cohorts Satan mentioned in the Book of Job for in the Job story for example um it may be that uh that as C.S Lewis suggests in his space Trilogy out of the Silent Plant and so on it may be that other creatures other free creatures have had a substantial hand in the whole development of life on Earth so that all the waste all the pain all the suffering that goes along with predation in the whole evolution of life starting maybe starting say uh I don't know 500 million years ago or something like that all that is also in the long run 7:35 due to the free activity of other creatures that's a possibility. It's kind of a wild suggestion and one which nowadays will raise eyebrows but I don't think that's anything against it's never stopped you before exactly right. With presence of LORD God there's no death for He can handle the death e.g. in the beginning even before then He meets his children who're separated from much far away by teleportation through the real nothingness, they have to be reduced ultimately, which is not death but very similar because they will die if the process is out of control. Therefore, before human beings were finally formed (evolved), forest fires are necessary for the formation of evolutionary pressure, in other words, they are ways for God to create various life.

[@defenderofwisdom]

Ugh. This guy is as vapid as they come. All just justificatory remarks. Abusive husbands should let their wives know a relationship as great as theirs is contingent on beatings because their relationship persists through the suffering.

[@hordechess7629]

I don't think that analogy makes sense. First, a god is to a parent (either wife or husband) as a person is to a kid (not wife). Second, define abuse. Third, it is not God doing evil, rather God is letting evil happen (ok, maybe you could say that selecting the world with evil is doing evil, but I think at worst it would be doing evil in a more innocent way). Fourth, what if good breeds evil BUT evil does NOT breed good? Then it could be the case that God is doing good which breeds evil, while an abusive husband is doing evil which does not breed good, in which case the analogy makes no sense.

[@Maxwell-mv9rx]

Guys doesnt understand Cristianity . He undermines his opinion hinself. He picture good and evil religious are narrow mind.

[@tschorsch]

Evil disproves an omniscient omnipotent omnibenevolent god. This just gets us back to an infinite set of other unprovable gods.

[@tomdaniels6868]

pretty flimsy argument

[@KestyJoe]

The Christian story is so patently silly, it amazes me that any serious person believes it. This video reinforces that view quite well.

[@loopghost]

Agreed. They want to call an absolute and infinite power, that generates all universes everywhere… their bff. No interest in actually expanding their consciousness to potentially experience real learning.

[@Niatnuom_Esiotrot]

@@loopghost The trouble with this level of claimed power is: 1) If we propose an all-powerful creator entity, it falls into two kinds of category. 2) Category A, it behaves outside human understandable reasoning, if this is true, there is nothing we can discuss about it, and it is certainly not the abrahamic deity. 3) Category B, it behaves within human understandable reasoning. If it falls into this category and is all-powerful, the absolute power will corrupt it because "absolute power corrupts absolutely". 4) If we try to argue that somehow this entity will not be corrupted by this power, it is then counter human reasoning, and a self-contradiction. 5) Nobody has ever successfully argued against the logic of ""absolute power corrupts absolutely". 6) In conclusion, if anyone claim that a deity is all-powerful, then this deity must be corrupt.

[@johnbrzykcy3076]

@@Niatnuom_Esiotrot But what if God's absolute power is balanced with love? If that's a possibility, then I don't see "corruption" as being a necessity. I appreciate your comments. Respectfully from Florida...

[@KestyJoe]

@@johnbrzykcy3076 it’s a nice idea but it ignores the problem of evil as well as nearly all of scripture

[@Niatnuom_Esiotrot]

​@@johnbrzykcy3076 Definition of Love falls into 2 categories. 1. Category A which seeks to exploit the malleability of the word love where an ever expanding number of other words are opportunistically associated with it as the discussion progresses. This is a tactic but a tactic is not a truth, therefore it will likely lead to a semantical squabble. 2. Category B which love is quite simply a great affection for something. 3. By Category B, Love and corruption are not mutually exclusive. Love does not balance corruption. 4. For example it is perfectly plausible for a dictator to genuinely love his dog, mistress, wife, kids, relatives, fans, etc. That does not stop him from being corrupt. 5. This dictator can practice all kinds of nepotism, favouritism, extortion, patronage, kickbacks & etc to benefit the people he love (and he does not have to love these equally nor consistently).

[@wendalwarren6131]

This proves that if one wants the Truth about anything - don’t listen to a believer. Such insufferable mumbo jumbo.

[@BradHolkesvig]

Amos 4 13: For lo, he who forms the mountains, and creates the wind, and declares to man what is his thought; Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things. Deuteronomy 32 39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand. Exodus 4: 10: But Moses said to the LORD, "Oh, my Lord, I am not eloquent, either heretofore or since thou hast spoken to thy servant; but I am slow of speech and of tongue." 11: Then the LORD said to him, "Who has made man's mouth? Who makes him dumb, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the LORD? 12: Now therefore go, and I will be with your mouth and teach you what you shall speak."

[@kos-mos1127]

It’s all made up anyway so it has little value.

[@leoniciolopezgomez7731]

Nothing really matters or makes sense, evil is just what true love is.

[@user-mc1oz3xt5t]

I really like pie

[@anteodedi8937]

The problem of evil is the nail in the coffin for theism. Epicurus figured that out millennia ago.

[@dongshengdi773]

Nope . Rene Descartes proved that theism is the only rational explanation a millennia ago . Why is everyone blaming AI and skynet for destroying humanity.? So it means Humans are evil for allowing AI to run amok ?

[@Kenneth-ts7bp]

The problem of evil is the evidence of good and God, not to mention all of history and science prove a supernatural Deity.

[@ProjectMoff]

@@Kenneth-ts7bp 😂

[@MontyCantsin5]

@Kenneth-ts7bp: The scary thing is some morons really do think that. 😂

[@gmlgml780]

Yeah. Evil doesn't disprove god. God can be existing or not. Evil doesn't care about that. Evil disproves only a good god. Evil shows only that if there is any kind of god, with this much evil existing, that god must be d@mb or downright evil.

[@dongshengdi773]

Rene Descartes proved God is good in his Discourse. The Meditations

[@gmlgml780]

@@dongshengdi773 _"... Rene Descartes proved God is good in his Discourse ... The Meditations ..."_ Yeah. How I just said I don't really believe in any kind of god, but if you do, and you can accept THIS life as the expression of any kind of good, then I wish EVERYTHING to you what can happen under the bright sky of a god like this.

[@kos-mos1127]

@@dongshengdi773 Not really he probed that we exists and are imperfect. Then he made a logical leap that God exist.

[@midlander4]

And this is what utter delusion looks like in the 21st century.

[@SandipChitale]

Theologians are also called apologists right? So all is good. Intentionally not addressing the issue of natural evil like earthquakes and volcanoes killing innocents is revealing. A perfect god should simply be able to create the best world where there is no suffering. The callous talk of great, possible worlds is heartless. I have heard similar callous talk from Keith Ward. Some innocent children have to suffer for bigger good. I think that thought itself is evil itself.

[@patrickboudreau3846]

I cant beleive people cant see that the God idea is just about a bunch of men putting a story together, rules and boundries some 2 thousand years ago. God will burn you for eternity if you dont beleive what we say…its so typically human thinking its not even funny. Cant you just see ? Jesus christ !

[@notanemoprog]

It's not that simple. We are biologically, evolutionary predisposed for belief, that's why religion will never go away

[@totoro6214]

The more you analyze the christian story, the less it makes sense. I used to be a devout christian and led youth group for years until logic took over. So a perfect god exists for infinity, he's the beginning and the end.. yet for some reason decides to create this imperfect world. A world where he creates human beings in his image that would rather choose sin than god because they were innately designed to fail and easily shrouded by temptation and lies of satan. That's not free will in my book, that's just being tricked. Ask anyone if they were told that they were to be placed in garden of eden right now and had the choice, who in their right mind would choose sin?? Knowing that they could continue living in perfection vs being punished for eternity in hell???? God knew of all the things that will result from the creation of this world and chose to create it anyways knowing that he is bringing evil into existence where there was none at first. It was god and god alone that existed. Just the fact that he's allowing manifestation of evil in the world is a very strange thing to look past if he's to be all good, all knowing, and all powerful. Kinda petty if you ask me to create angels to worship him.. create human beings that for ages are suffering from the original sin which resulted in pain/suffering/diseases in the world. I don't hate God, I just don't really see how it's a legitimate possibility for the christian god to exist. I've read the bible front to back several times, often analyzing passages in original text. this book is absurd if you really have read it... especially the old testament when you compare it with the new.

[@playpaltalk]

I think it is impossible to believe in God without knowing and understanding how Satan was created. Consciousness is a gift from God to all of us.

[@simonhibbs887]

That's a very Christian view but belief in god extends beyond Christianity. Jews and Muslims have completely different ideas about satan for example, and then there's Hinduism, etc, etc.

[@kos-mos1127]

In order to believe in God there would have to be a well defined definition of God that can be tested.

[@playpaltalk]

@@kos-mos1127 Maybe when Satan is in control we can't see God.

[@kos-mos1127]

@@playpaltalk Another imaginary entity used to give an excuse as to why there is no evidence for another imaginary entity.

[@johnmatallana8106]

Adam and Eve were given a paradise never having known anything else other than full bliss and contentment. They did not understand what was given to them because they had no contrasting feeling to compare too. More like spoiled kids having not forgone hardship in which they grow up not valuing what was given to them. I also feel evil is that necessary feeling that needs to be present so that we may understand or appreciate its opposite feeling.

[@markstipulkoski1389]

I guess Adam and Eve story is the original version of the test where you leave your toddler alone in a room with a bunch of candy in front of them, and tell them to not touch it until you get back. I guess Adam & Eve failed that test and spoiled it for all of humanity. I guess Adam and Eves original sin was exacerbated by their children who had to inbred.