Is the Existence of Evil and an Omnibenevolent God Compatible?

DeletedUser8396

Guest
The topic: Is the Existence of Evil and an Omnibenevolent God Compatible?

The motion: This house believes that the existence of evil is not compatible with the existence of an Omnibenevolent (all-good), Omnipotent (all-powerful) God.

Details: An age old religious argument, so it feels right for this to be the starter. With strong points on both sides, there has never been one real clear answer. Due to the nature of the debate and the opponents of the motion having several counters, I will not be giving brief views of either side.

Stipulations:

Debate primarily centers around the Judeo-Christian God. Other Deities can be discussed, however, so long as they fit within the parameter of Omnibenevolent and Omnipotent.

Evil does not necessarily exist and is subject for debate should the argument be made. Unless challenged, the debate will assume that evil does exist.

Should one side be universally represented, I will take the opposing side (which I will quite enjoy for this one :p).

Stay civil and good debating!
 

DeletedUser

Guest
That would entirely depend on your definitions of evil and good, and whose perspective we are looking from.

For a human, evil done to us would appear to suggest the lack of benevolence, power, or knowledge of acts against us from a god.

For a god, ensuring that we never encounter challenges that we believe to be threatening would strip us of true fulfillment, and may not be benevolent. As such, simply not acting and allowing some evil may be the benevolent course, while allowing for an omniscient and omnipotent position.

Unless you can discern a time scale upon which to judge, a position from which to judge, and a logical scale upon which acts can be measured as amounts of good or evil, I must say that any discussion to be had will simply result in a discord of opinions due to the multifaceted nature of the question. Ultimately, any conclusions we can draw about the potential of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being will be moot, as it is simply not in our nature to comprehend such a possibility. Furthermore, if it is indeed a reality, rather than a possibility, a being of such immensity would likely act in ways that we cannot even perceive, as the implications of his actions would only be actuated over a time scale longer than we will ever grace the earth.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Why do we have so many debates about God? How many is this? The Third?
 

DeletedUser8396

Guest
Why do we have so many debates about God? How many is this? The Third?

The first, actually. Assuming we're counting the DnD only, which I am. Other debates in the Lit section aren't similar. Don't worry, we'll have some variety.
 

DeletedUser36436

Guest
Back on topic:

There is evil as everyone is different. Some people see evil as good and just- it's all perspective (an current example is ISIS as they think they are doing the right thing). The God, being omnipotent knows that these viewpoints exist and lets them carry on as there would be no difference without them. God does not suppress this as he values our beliefs, opinions and judgements. Everyone is evil in some way, and everyone is good in some way; which is shown through the Taoist religion.

Without evil, the world would be naïve and stupid and we would be no less than animals. As evil was introduced with Adam and Eve eating the apple of knowledge and so evil is a punishment for that original sin. In this way, evil does not exist as it is a judgement made by us on other acts as we were enabled to make this judgement by the eating of the apple.

Another reason evil exists is that God needs people to move on to heaven as soon as possible (as the Jehovah's witnesses believe)and evil is a method of doing so. God allows evil to keep the population on earth down and so that everyone has a chance to thrive.
 

DeletedUser27128

Guest
There is evil as everyone is different. Some people see evil as good and just- it's all perspective (an current example is ISIS as they think they are doing the right thing). The God, being omnipotent knows that these viewpoints exist and lets them carry on as there would be no difference without them. God does not suppress this as he values our beliefs, opinions and judgements. Everyone is evil in some way, and everyone is good in some way; which is shown through the Taoist religion.

This.
 

DeletedUser40768

Guest
For a human, evil done to us would appear to suggest the lack of benevolence, power, or knowledge of acts against us from a god.

For a god, ensuring that we never encounter challenges that we believe to be threatening would strip us of true fulfillment, and may not be benevolent. As such, simply not acting and allowing some evil may be the benevolent course, while allowing for an omniscient and omnipotent position.

Yeah I agree about allowing evil being the benevolent course.

There is evil as everyone is different. Some people see evil as good and just- it's all perspective (an current example is ISIS as they think they are doing the right thing). The God, being omnipotent knows that these viewpoints exist and lets them carry on as there would be no difference without them. God does not suppress this as he values our beliefs, opinions and judgements. Everyone is evil in some way, and everyone is good in some way; which is shown through the Taoist religion.

I wouldn't say ISIS doesn't know that what they are doing is wrong, that would be saying they are stupid. They just don't care and like to use violent means to accomplish their goals. That can also be shown in other religions outside of Taoist. Like in Christianity where we believe that God gave us free will. Which makes us capable of falling into temptation and doing what is wrong.

Without evil, the world would be naïve and stupid and we would be no less than animals. As evil was introduced with Adam and Eve eating the apple of knowledge and so evil is a punishment for that original sin. In this way, evil does not exist as it is a judgement made by us on other acts as we were enabled to make this judgement by the eating of the apple.

Not sure about that without evil thing. God is without evil and definitely wouldn't be considered dumb and stupid. I wouldn't say a punishment. More of a consequence resulting when a person goes against God. So things that lack God would be evil.


Raising your posts count again :p
 

DeletedUser36436

Guest
I wouldn't say ISIS doesn't know that what they are doing is wrong, that would be saying they are stupid. They just don't care and like to use violent means to accomplish their goals. That can also be shown in other religions outside of Taoist. Like in Christianity where we believe that God gave us free will. Which makes us capable of falling into temptation and doing what is wrong.

ISIS believes what they are doing is the right and just thing (apparently) which means that in their eyes the act is justified and therefore not evil in their eyes. If they saw what they are doing as evil or not right then Allah would shun them for committing such a sin. In the eyes of God, evil is sin and they would go to Jahannam because of it. If you are correct, they are not fighting for Islam but for their own gain- to be rulers of the IS.

The reason I picked out Taoism is because their religion is centred around this concept of good and evil being in everyone. It also has the most direct link to the point.

Not sure about that without evil thing. God is without evil and definitely wouldn't be considered dumb and stupid. I wouldn't say a punishment. More of a consequence resulting when a person goes against God. So things that lack God would be evil.

God is omnipotent and knows about evil and therefore is not stupid. It is defined as punishment by the Bible as we can feel pain and know our surroundings and are not in the garden of eden so it is a punishment. We ourselves make the judgement wether a person is evil as we were able to get the knowledge to do so. So, before we ate the apple all was good in the garden and there was no evil but once the apple was eaten, there was evil as we saw it for the first time. In fact, the only evil that existed before was curiosity, personified by the snake.
 

DeletedUser40768

Guest
ISIS believes what they are doing is the right and just thing (apparently) which means that in their eyes the act is justified and therefore not evil in their eyes. If they saw what they are doing as evil or not right then Allah would shun them for committing such a sin. In the eyes of God, evil is sin and they would go to Jahannam because of it. If you are correct, they are not fighting for Islam but for their own gain- to be rulers of the IS.

The reason I picked out Taoism is because their religion is centred around this concept of good and evil being in everyone. It also has the most direct link to the point.

Yeah I am more under the belief it is a person gain with using religion in an attempt to justify their ulterior motives. If you are right then they need to follow there own religion more closely, especially since the majority of Muslims condemn the way they go about doing things. If they believe it is justified well then they certainly are a different and radical sect.

The Taoism reference was fine, I was just agreeing and connecting it to another religion.

God is omnipotent and knows about evil and therefore is not stupid. It is defined as punishment by the Bible as we can feel pain and know our surroundings and are not in the garden of eden so it is a punishment. We ourselves make the judgement wether a person is evil as we were able to get the knowledge to do so. So, before we ate the apple all was good in the garden and there was no evil but once the apple was eaten, there was evil as we saw it for the first time. In fact, the only evil that existed before was curiosity, personified by the snake.

Ok so he would know but the people wouldn't know and would be stupid because they don't. I got it now. Though didn't you say originally the world would be without evil. So no one would know about it because it doesn't exist. Which is why I said God would be stupid if people were. Punishment as in a person punishes themselves by going against God. There is a place just as great (or better) as the Garden of Eden, it is called heaven. Earth is not a punishment, it is the proving ground that you can withstand evil and the place to exercise your free will. Actually speaking of that you can't exercise free will in heaven, so that would make them stupid. If you can't turn against God in Heaven that would mean they don't have free will correct?

I consider the story of Adam and Eve to be an allegory about our imperfect nature, and don't take it as literally as you said it. Guess that is why we think differently about the evil thing. Also I agree that God is omnipotent, don't want to make it seem as if I think otherwise.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser45380

Guest
Ok so he would know but the people wouldn't know and would be stupid because they don't. I got it now. Though didn't you say originally the world would be without evil. So no one would know about it because it doesn't exist. Which is why I said God would be stupid if people were. Punishment as in a person punishes themselves by going against God. There is a place just as great (or better) as the Garden of Eden, it is called heaven. Earth is not a punishment, it is the proving ground that you can withstand evil and the place to exercise your free will. Actually speaking of that you can't exercise free will in heaven, so that would make them stupid. If you can't turn against God in Heaven that would mean they don't have free will correct?

I consider the story of Adam and Eve to be an allegory about our imperfect nature, and don't take it as literally as you said it. Guess that is why we think differently about the evil thing. Also I agree that God is omnipotent, don't want to make it seem as if I think otherwise.

I have a different view of the meaning of free will in heaven. In heaven we will gain a new perspective on life. We will come to an understanding of Gods acts. Now on earth we don't understand all of Gods acts. In heaven we will have some sort of understanding of the events. Because of this new understanding we will make different choices in heaven. We won't lose our free will, however our new perspective will narrow our choices and we will be left with one option. Even Angels, who God created to serve Him, didn't always listen to God, and they do not have free choice.

Back to the topic. Based on my understanding of free choice in heaven, God is Omnibenevolent. God created everything and that includes our definition of good and evil. So therefore it would not be contradictory to say that there is an Evil and an Omnibenevolent God. To speak of one is to speak of the other. They are both referring to the same idea. As humans we can not fully understand God. To us, at times there appears to be many different faces of God. In the original hebrew text, the name of God changes. One of the names refers to when God is merciful and the other is when God is judging. In many other places God is called by various names regarding the different aspects . (Source: Wikipedia - Names of God in Judaism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Names_of_God_in_Judaism) This seems to be evidence that God is known by many different aspects. Therefore God can be known as Evil and Omnibenevolent.

(Side Question: Pebble, are we allowed to post links to sources in our comments? To tired at this time to look up the forum rules. I put it up, if not allowed please remove it.)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser40768

Guest
I have a different view of the meaning of free will in heaven. In heaven we will gain a new perspective on life. We will come to an understanding of Gods acts. Now on earth we don't understand all of Gods acts. In heaven we will have some sort of understanding of the events. Because of this new understanding we will make different choices in heaven. We won't lose our free will, however our new perspective will narrow our choices and we will be left with one option. Even Angels, who God created to serve Him, didn't always listen to God, and they do not have free choice.

If Angels do not have free will then that makes things interesting. As if they don't they should do by nature what they are supposed to do. Anything else suggests that free will is not a necessity to have a control over your decisions, if so then what is? Reading your perspective part, I can agree with that. Guess it is good I asked that question then lol
 

DeletedUser8396

Guest
We should determine the separation between good and evil, and how the individual perception's of which actions go under which category affect the situation.

Before we do that, however, we must make the argument that evil does in fact exist. And good, for that matter. As the argument stipulates the co-existence of an Omnibenevolent God and evil, were there a contradiction between the two, one would still exist without the other. So, as far as the argument is concerned, evil or an Omnibenevolent God exists, at the very least.

If the Omnibenevolent God exists, that means that He is all good. This then implies that good does exist. Good is defined as: "that which is morally right; righteousness"

Morally right. Right is defined as: "morally good, justified, or acceptable"

Morally justified or acceptable.

Now, assuming the God exists, and is omnipotent, He has the power to term actions as acceptable. This then means that all actions not deemed by the God as acceptable are either neutral or unacceptable.

Evil is defined as "profoundly immoral and malevolent"

Immoral is defined as "not conforming to accepted standards of morality"

Therefore, since any action not deemed acceptable by the God would be not conforming the the acceptable standard, any action outside of that deemed acceptable would most certainly be evil. Therefore, by the very defining of good, evil must exist. The omnipotent God cannot remove evil because evil is a definition of what is NOT acceptable. Even if He were to accept all actions as good, then all actions would be essentially neutral with no good or evil as no action is more or less morally reprehensible.

_______________________________________

From the other side - evil.

Were we to just assume evil to exist, and not stipulate the existence of an Omnibenevolent God, good would still necessarily exist.

If evil, instead of BEING DEFINED as what is NOT acceptable, instead DEFINES what is not acceptable, then good still necessarily exists for the same reasons evil exists in the prior section. All actions deemed evil (by whatever arbitrary power, natural or otherwise) would be unacceptable or not conforming to a neutral state of being or good state of being (should morality already be termed outright). If good is termed outright, then neutral actions would not be conforming to the standard and be termed evil. If morality not termed outright, all actions aside from evil would be defined as good due to their not conforming to that which is morally unacceptable.

This opposite of evil, good, should it be termed and all defining a single entity, were He to exist, would be an Omnibenevolent God. This being, were He Omnipotent, could not destroy evil as evil would be what provides things to define Him as good.

__________________________________

Either way, there cannot be a contradiction if either evil OR an Omnibenevolent God exists. The existence of evil does not contradict the Omnibenevolent God's omnipotence as by utilizing the omnipotence to remove evil, the God would be acting against His own nature by destroying His omnibenevolence. Due to this being a logical impossibility, it does not remove the God's omnipotence any more than God's inability to make 1+1=3 or inability to create a married bachelor.

Therefore, the existence of both is not a contradiction.
 

DeletedUser44426

Guest
Well what if there was a being that was Omnipotent that represented Evil? And i dont mean Satan, becuase he is apparently no match for God. If there is a good, and God is the Omnibevolent Entity that represents it, then there must be a being that is Omnipotent and as powerful as it is that represents evil. There is a yin to every yang.

And if the so called Omnipotent God cannot remove Evil becuase it is a definition to what is not acceptable, then that would not make it true God, that or their is a higher power(s) then it that controls or governs that Evil or Good is what is and whats not acceptable.


Hopefully this doesnt cause an uproar on this thread. I did not mean to offend anybody if you find anything i have posted offensive.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I believe you're quoting Epicurus?

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
 

DeletedUser33530

Guest
Well what if there was a being that was Omnipotent that represented Evil? And i dont mean Satan, becuase he is apparently no match for God. If there is a good, and God is the Omnibevolent Entity that represents it, then there must be a being that is Omnipotent and as powerful as it is that represents evil. There is a yin to every yang.

And if the so called Omnipotent God cannot remove Evil becuase it is a definition to what is not acceptable, then that would not make it true God, that or their is a higher power(s) then it that controls or governs that Evil or Good is what is and whats not acceptable.


Hopefully this doesnt cause an uproar on this thread. I did not mean to offend anybody if you find anything i have posted offensive.

I feel like pebble answered this in the post directly above it.
 
Top