God is Evil...

[Rageofangels777]

So, I had a conversation at work, and the guy said that he couldn't believe in God, because how would a God of love let young children die.

I thought about it, and then replied with something that ended with him saying what I said made sense. In the past I've never really had a good reply, but this time around it all sort of made sense in my head (I guess it could have been God led...)

My answer was,

"Okay, so I'm God and I'm going to make sure that no children under the age of one die. That way it will prove that I'm a loving God. Unfortunately there's a kid who's one year and a day old, and he dies. How is that fair? All those kids are safe up until their first birthday, and then straight away this poor little kid dies and leaves his family heartbroken.
Okay, so I'm going to not let any kids under 4 die. Unfortunately, there's a kid who dies when he's 4 years and one day. How is that fair?
Okay, so no kids die at all. But a newly married couple are about to embark on a life together, when the husband dies! How is that fair? Millions upon millions of couples have great lives, how is it fair that this couple couldn't experience that!
Where does this stop?
It only stops at perfection. It only stops at a perfect world where no one is harmed, injured or in pain, if it stops anywhere before then, then it would be unfair to someone. This world is a fallen world, brought about by sin."

My colleague agreed with what I said, which was better than I thought!

I know that Stephen Fry's biggest issue about 'God' is that very same thing. If there was a God then why would he do this, that or the other.

What does everyone think of my answer, and would it help anyone who's struggling with all the problems and illnesses in the world?

 

[Who Me]

Why do people die?
We all live as if we are living forever, so why do we die?

He doesn't believe in God because of death, horrible things, evil etc etc.
So there is no God, now how does he 3xplain what ever it is that is his reason for not believing in God.

Put him on the spot, ask what do you believe about God, life the universe etc ?
When he's finished talking ask, what evidence do you have for your beliefs?

Be sure that you can answer these questions without saying faith or belief.

 

[Runningman]

So, I had a conversation at work, and the guy said that he couldn't believe in God, because how would a God of love let young children die.

I thought about it, and then replied with something that ended with him saying what I said made sense. In the past I've never really had a good reply, but this time around it all sort of made sense in my head (I guess it could have been God led...)

My answer was,

"Okay, so I'm God and I'm going to make sure that no children under the age of one die. That way it will prove that I'm a loving God. Unfortunately there's a kid who's one year and a day old, and he dies. How is that fair? All those kids are safe up until their first birthday, and then straight away this poor little kid dies and leaves his family heartbroken.
Okay, so I'm going to not let any kids under 4 die. Unfortunately, there's a kid who dies when he's 4 years and one day. How is that fair?
Okay, so no kids die at all. But a newly married couple are about to embark on a life together, when the husband dies! How is that fair? Millions upon millions of couples have great lives, how is it fair that this couple couldn't experience that!
Where does this stop?
It only stops at perfection. It only stops at a perfect world where no one is harmed, injured or in pain, if it stops anywhere before then, then it would be unfair to someone. This world is a fallen world, brought about by sin."

My colleague agreed with what I said, which was better than I thought!

I know that Stephen Fry's biggest issue about 'God' is that very same thing. If there was a God then why would he do this, that or the other.

What does everyone think of my answer, and would it help anyone who's struggling with all the problems and illnesses in the world?

I like your answer, but to add to that we are made of the same physical matter that is bound to the same laws of physics that all other matter is. Physics don't discriminate so it isn't an inherently evil system. We tend to assign evil to things that seem harmful or unfair to us, then apply a different standard when the same things happen to something we see as less important.

Our sense of what is justice doesn't match our perception because we assign value different to different people and things. Who ever mourned the death of a flea? Why do people care less when an evil person dies compared to a baby? It's all about a bias we have.

I personally believe, and others may disagree here and that's okay, that God is not evil and that He is great for giving us this opportunity to live. I see it that this is God's world, we just live and die in it.

 

[for_his_glory]

Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

The evil that God has created are His righteous judgements that come upon those who are not obedient to His commands. It's like that of the10 plagues in the book of Exodus as Pharaoh oppresses Israel while taken them into captivity as even though God gave him a chance to let them go he refused so God's punishment came against Egypt.

The same with many battles we read of in the OT that came against God's people as all is done in righteous judgement of God to show He is the Great I Am, Exodus 3:10-15.

So will it also be in the end of days.

 

[tdidymas]

So, I had a conversation at work, and the guy said that he couldn't believe in God, because how would a God of love let young children die.

I thought about it, and then replied with something that ended with him saying what I said made sense. In the past I've never really had a good reply, but this time around it all sort of made sense in my head (I guess it could have been God led...)

My answer was,

"Okay, so I'm God and I'm going to make sure that no children under the age of one die. That way it will prove that I'm a loving God. Unfortunately there's a kid who's one year and a day old, and he dies. How is that fair? All those kids are safe up until their first birthday, and then straight away this poor little kid dies and leaves his family heartbroken.
Okay, so I'm going to not let any kids under 4 die. Unfortunately, there's a kid who dies when he's 4 years and one day. How is that fair?
Okay, so no kids die at all. But a newly married couple are about to embark on a life together, when the husband dies! How is that fair? Millions upon millions of couples have great lives, how is it fair that this couple couldn't experience that!
Where does this stop?
It only stops at perfection. It only stops at a perfect world where no one is harmed, injured or in pain, if it stops anywhere before then, then it would be unfair to someone. This world is a fallen world, brought about by sin."

My colleague agreed with what I said, which was better than I thought!

I know that Stephen Fry's biggest issue about 'God' is that very same thing. If there was a God then why would he do this, that or the other.

What does everyone think of my answer, and would it help anyone who's struggling with all the problems and illnesses in the world?

In addition to that, how does he know that those dead young children were permanently put out of existence? How does he know that they didn't go to heaven and their spirits grow up in the care of angels? Or that they won't be raised from the dead in glory? The original statement shows a very dim view of God, the universe, and the spiritual realm.

But calamity exists because we live in a sinful world, and moral evil exists because of Satan and because people choose to disobey God's commands.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

So, I had a conversation at work, and the guy said that he couldn't believe in God, because how would a God of love let young children die.

I thought about it, and then replied with something that ended with him saying what I said made sense. In the past I've never really had a good reply, but this time around it all sort of made sense in my head (I guess it could have been God led...)

My answer was,

"Okay, so I'm God and I'm going to make sure that no children under the age of one die. That way it will prove that I'm a loving God. Unfortunately there's a kid who's one year and a day old, and he dies. How is that fair? All those kids are safe up until their first birthday, and then straight away this poor little kid dies and leaves his family heartbroken.
Okay, so I'm going to not let any kids under 4 die. Unfortunately, there's a kid who dies when he's 4 years and one day. How is that fair?
Okay, so no kids die at all. But a newly married couple are about to embark on a life together, when the husband dies! How is that fair? Millions upon millions of couples have great lives, how is it fair that this couple couldn't experience that!
Where does this stop?
It only stops at perfection. It only stops at a perfect world where no one is harmed, injured or in pain, if it stops anywhere before then, then it would be unfair to someone. This world is a fallen world, brought about by sin."

My colleague agreed with what I said, which was better than I thought!

I know that Stephen Fry's biggest issue about 'God' is that very same thing. If there was a God then why would he do this, that or the other.

What does everyone think of my answer, and would it help anyone who's struggling with all the problems and illnesses in the world?

Hello Rageofangels777.
The answer is God didn't let "it" (injustice, unfairness, child abuse) happen to His own Son. Mankind did. And the loving perfection seen in Him by not exacting justice against sinners should cause sinners to shake. The reason they're not afraid is because they really don't believe Jesus beat death.
Nobody can top that!

 

[Josef]

So, I had a conversation at work, and the guy said that he couldn't believe in God, because how would a God of love let young children die.

I thought about it, and then replied with something that ended with him saying what I said made sense. In the past I've never really had a good reply, but this time around it all sort of made sense in my head (I guess it could have been God led...)

My answer was,

"Okay, so I'm God and I'm going to make sure that no children under the age of one die. That way it will prove that I'm a loving God. Unfortunately there's a kid who's one year and a day old, and he dies. How is that fair? All those kids are safe up until their first birthday, and then straight away this poor little kid dies and leaves his family heartbroken.
Okay, so I'm going to not let any kids under 4 die. Unfortunately, there's a kid who dies when he's 4 years and one day. How is that fair?
Okay, so no kids die at all. But a newly married couple are about to embark on a life together, when the husband dies! How is that fair? Millions upon millions of couples have great lives, how is it fair that this couple couldn't experience that!
Where does this stop?
It only stops at perfection. It only stops at a perfect world where no one is harmed, injured or in pain, if it stops anywhere before then, then it would be unfair to someone. This world is a fallen world, brought about by sin."

My colleague agreed with what I said, which was better than I thought!

I know that Stephen Fry's biggest issue about 'God' is that very same thing. If there was a God then why would he do this, that or the other.

What does everyone think of my answer, and would it help anyone who's struggling with all the problems and illnesses in the world?

Hey All,
Your answer was tremendous Ragofangels.
That is exactly how to answer that.

Make them play God, and ask them: When is it OK to let people die, and still be loving?
Is there an easy answer to that?

I believe God takes these little ones early because they are special.
That is how they should be honored.

Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz

 

[Vinny37]

...

Your argument, “Where does this stop?”, has weight. C S Lewis covered it more in The Problem of Pain. I hope that your colleague will see that his second-hand argument against God is a smokescreen.

Philosophically the issue is not even about a type of god, unless we are Hindus, in which case we would say that gods & goddesses are judged by an absolute moral standard separate to them. To Hinduism, with Heiser we would say that that standard is God. Though C S Lewis (Mere Christianity, ch.1) did often speak in the populist voice of polytheism, he was very helpful here.

“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet.

Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too—for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist—in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless—I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality—namely my idea of justice—was full of sense.

Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.” Lewis had hit an awkward standard in a standardless atheism. Indeed an accusation always implies a standard.

Years later Lewis cracked the code which had puzzled him for decades: viz, does God command certain things because they are right, or are they right because God commands them? (see The Poison of Subjectivism, in Christian Reflections). The first (compulsion) implies an absolute standard beyond him to which he gives voice (and might not always comply); the second (choice) implies an arbitrary standard, as if he could have equally commanded murder and prohibited healing. The breakthrough is consonance: he is societal, triune; he does what he is; he commands us to do, morally, what he is, ie to be like him. Thus God loves not because he is a god of love, but because he is love, and being such he gives love and calls us to give love: morality is societal. To say that he is unloving in effect denies any objective meaning to the term, loving.

 

[tdidymas]

Your argument, “Where does this stop?”, has weight. C S Lewis covered it more in The Problem of Pain. I hope that your colleague will see that his second-hand argument against God is a smokescreen.

Philosophically the issue is not even about a type of god, unless we are Hindus, in which case we would say that gods & goddesses are judged by an absolute moral standard separate to them. To Hinduism, with Heiser we would say that that standard is God. Though C S Lewis (Mere Christianity, ch.1) did often speak in the populist voice of polytheism, he was very helpful here.

“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. What was I comparing this universe with when I called it unjust? If the whole show was bad and senseless from A to Z, so to speak, why did I, who was supposed to be part of the show, find myself in such violent reaction against it? A man feels wet when he falls into water, because man is not a water animal: a fish would not feel wet.

Of course I could have given up my idea of justice by saying it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too—for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist—in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless—I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality—namely my idea of justice—was full of sense.

Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.” Lewis had hit an awkward standard in a standardless atheism. Indeed an accusation always implies a standard.

Years later Lewis cracked the code which had puzzled him for decades: viz, does God command certain things because they are right, or are they right because God commands them? (see The Poison of Subjectivism, in Christian Reflections). The first (compulsion) implies an absolute standard beyond him to which he gives voice (and might not always comply); the second (choice) implies an arbitrary standard, as if he could have equally commanded murder and prohibited healing. The breakthrough is consonance: he is societal, triune; he does what he is; he commands us to do, morally, what he is, ie to be like him. Thus God loves not because he is a god of love, but because he is love, and being such he gives love and calls us to give love: morality is societal. To say that he is unloving in effect denies any objective meaning to the term, loving.

It would be nice if everyone accepted this. But for someone to rethink their opinion or philosophy, they have to admit they could be wrong. Such seems to be impossible for some people. Self-righteous judgment is a powerful stronghold.

 

[I's2C]

Perhaps one of top 10 most asked questions. What if GOD interfered; and the baby HE saved grew up and became a mass murder, the people who died at his/her hands at White Throne judgement they would say why did you interfere? My wife/husband/son/daughter would have lived if you didn’t.

Only GOD knows the souls that are placed in these bodies. GOD does not interfere in life being a fair and just GOD has to let man do what man’s going to do, so at White Throne judgement they can’t say HE interfered. What HE did for 1 HE would have to do for all to be fair, if that happened HE might as well of created robots because it ceases to be free-will at that point.

GOD only interferes with those who have a pre-destined, pre-determined event to take care of the Business of GOD. Their destiny that they agreed to do in 1st age. Such as Paul whose free will was to destroy the Christian Church, but His destiny was to be a fighter for Christianity. I can 100% guarantee they volunteered to do it in 1st age, for GOD never makes anyone do anything they don’t want to do. I am witness to many things GOD has done for me, maybe not what I expected or wanted but it certainly was the right thing, for GOD knows what we are in need of much better than we do.

CHRIST had a similar question from disciples when the tower Siloam fell and killed 18 people. They asked CHRIST if they sinned more than others and why they were killed. Luk 13:4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?

Luk 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Accidents happen and we all need to repent often because we never know when our time is up. These flesh bodies as magnificent as they are, were created in this flesh age for all to be tested who they follow once and for all-Satan or GOD. Because of man’s actions this earth has become poisonous and full of dangers and people get sick, some by their own actions and some just for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. They age, get sick, and easily destroyed are only meant for a short time. Our true bodies, only the consuming fire of GOD the creator (ELOHIM) can destroy.

The very moment the silver cord parts we instantly return to GOD; some on the right side of gulf and un-repentant to the left side. The innocent at the feet of GOD, returns to GOD in their perfect beautiful Ruach that GOD created us in. No more pain or suffering, are there waiting for the judgement of those who done them wrong. Time means nothing to the spiritual and if wrongly done they will be there as witness to the one who did it.

It reminds me of when this couple who tortured an adopted daughter and eventually murdered her and buried her in back yard. Christians even asked why GOD would allow this to a child. For 1 wasn't GOD it was this evil couple; GOD has to let man do the evils THEY DO, not GOD, so that people see that evil does exist. This 1 child gave her life and lived through hell but because of her story; how many countless others were saved by people learning the evils of this couple who were about to do over and over if they were not stopped. She, at the feet of GOD feels no more pain but that couple will live the rest of their life in self torment and after. Just as the rich man who gnashed his teeth because of separation from GOD on the left side, sees Lazarus in peace in harmony and comfort in the bosom of Abraham.

Isa 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

evil=rah raw-aw translated -tumult; if you cause enough trouble to the innocent; God will cause you some problems is what he is saying, GOD is incapable of creating evil!!! Satan and People who cause evil- you become GODLESS and the evil that comes to you is caused by your own creation. GOD does step in once and awhile to cause some chaos or tumult that you yourself caused. Without GOD and those who refuse to love GOD will invite calamity of your own making.

I believe some souls are so good that they are taking soon after birth or even in the womb because they are just too good to go through this life. Only GOD knows the souls HE places in this brief short flesh age; only HE knows what they did in 1st age.

Jer 23:38 But since ye say, The burden of the LORD; therefore thus saith the LORD; Because ye say this word, The burden of the LORD, and I have sent unto you, saying, Ye shall not say, The burden of the LORD;

GOD does not bring burdens on people, but if you blame HIM for burdens you, yourself caused, HE says HE will forsake you and you will become a perpetual shame and wallow in calamity without help from HIM. Even then HE will not bring your burdens but without GOD you are in some deep calamity of your own making.

 

[Hopeful 2]

It would be nice if everyone accepted this. But for someone to rethink their opinion or philosophy, they have to admit they could be wrong. Such seems to be impossible for some people. Self-righteous judgment is a powerful stronghold.

Are you saying that you could be wrong ?

 

[tdidymas]

Are you saying that you could be wrong ?

I was wrong about many things, and God has corrected me. Oh, but I guess you were joking? If not, then you could be wrong, too.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

What HE did for 1 HE would have to do for all to be fair, if that happened HE might as well of created robots because it ceases to be free-will at that point.

This is the exact opposite of what the gospel says, because when a person comes to faith in our Lord, others are blessed by His Spirit in us.

GOD only interferes with those who have a pre-destined, pre-determined event to take care of the Business of GOD.

But we were enemies of God once. We're not anymore because Jesus interfered with mankind and death. The only business God had with me before that was damnation.

Their destiny that they agreed to do in 1st age. Such as Paul whose free will was to destroy the Christian Church, but His destiny was to be a fighter for Christianity. I can 100% guarantee they volunteered to do it in 1st age, for GOD never makes anyone do anything they don’t want to do. I am witness to many things GOD has done for me, maybe not what I expected or wanted but it certainly was the right thing, for GOD knows what we are in need of much better than we do.

CHRIST had a similar question from disciples when the tower Siloam fell and killed 18 people. They asked CHRIST if they sinned more than others and why they were killed. Luk 13:4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?

Luk 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

I'm just curious, but it sounds like you submitted yourself to Gods' will instead of your own when something didn't turn out like you thought. That's exactly what Paul did, although our meek and mild Savior did give him a whole lot of encouragement. ?

Siloam wasn't because those people deserved death anymore than we do. It's strange. David said,

Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. Psa.51:2-3 KJV

I've committed sins I know I'm forgiven for, but I remember them and that's not a bad thing. It's a humbling thing.

It's very sad how the defenseless in this world are abused. It's sickeming. How vile when God watched it happen to His own Son,

The LORD preserveth the strangers; he relieveth the fatherless and widow: but the way of the wicked he turneth upside down.
Psa.146:9

Sinners may never get a Siloam, but we will all face Him in judgement.

 

[Fastfredy0]

It only stops at perfection. It only stops at a perfect world where no one is harmed, injured or in pain, if it stops anywhere before then, then it would be unfair to someone. This world is a fallen world, brought about by sin."

What does everyone think of my answer, and would it help anyone who's struggling with all the problems and illnesses in the world?

Well, considering that people are tormented for eternity one can come to the conclusion that "perfection" is never reached given your implied definition of perfection. Then there is the deeper question of why did an almighty God allow evil to enter into His creation in the first place?
There are many theodicies to try to explain the presence of evil. It is said to be the Achilles heel of Christianity.

God’s response to “why Job suffered” (technically, God is the first cause and therefore His actions are not caused)

Job 38:1 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind and said: 2 “Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge? 3 Gird up now your loins like a man, and I will demand of you, and you declare to Me. 4 Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth? Declare to Me, if you have and know understanding. 5 Who determined the measures of the earth, if you know? Or who stretched the measuring line upon it?

Job 38:6-39 – God expounds further upon his majesty and Job’s feebleness.

Job 40:1 And the Lord said to Job: 2 “Shall a fault-finder contend with the Almighty? He who argues with
God, let him answer it.”
Job 40:3-5 Job has no answer to God’s question
Job 40:6-41 – God expounds further upon his majesty and Job’s feebleness.
Job 42:1-6 therefore I [Job] despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes.”

 

[Hopeful 2]

I was wrong about many things, and God has corrected me. Oh, but I guess you were joking?

eh...a little bit.

If not, then you could be wrong, too.

It wouldn't be the first time.

 

[journeymanisnothing]

Job repented in dust and ashes after seeing God. John likened Isaiahs' vision of God to seeing how Jesus suffered.
Only difference is "save his life" (Jb.2;6) wasn't stipulated for the Lamb.

 

[tdidymas]

Only GOD knows the souls that are placed in these bodies. GOD does not interfere in life being a fair and just GOD has to let man do what man’s going to do, so at White Throne judgement they can’t say HE interfered. What HE did for 1 HE would have to do for all to be fair, if that happened HE might as well of created robots because it ceases to be free-will at that point.

I object to this particular assertion. "Fair" by what standard, and who decided? Paul states "let God be true, though every man be found a liar." Since people are fallen beings, it is natural for them to judge others, and even God, based on their own understanding of how things work in the world, this is why Paul argues that people commonly judge God (Rom. 3:4).

But since God is sovereign over everyone and everything, God doesn't HAVE to do anything according to man's assessment. God can do whatever He wants to do, and He is still absolutely right about it, even when men judge Him as evil. But I'll use your argument that "God has to let man do what man's going to do." Yes, true that God does let man do what man wants to do (although He doesn't have to), but this results in the spiritual corruption that is described in Rom. 3:10-18. And since NO ONE seeks for God (3:11), then God has to interfere in what man does in order to save anyone.

Furthermore, God does NOT have to have mercy on everyone equally, because mercy is an EXCEPTION to justice, and does not follow any form of justice or fairness, especially by man's assessment. In fact, God is not obligated to save anyone at all, but He does choose to save some, according to His merciful kindness. And we know that since most people will not be saved, that God exacts justice on those people who are culpable for their sin and incur the righteous judgment of God. But for those whom He chooses to save, He bestows enlightenment, wisdom, goodness, love, and everything holy. It's called grace, and it is special to those who believe in Jesus (but is not received by unbelievers).