bikebottles said:
Your poster is not checkmate:
http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-to-answer-why-would-god-allow-evil-68390/
My favorite point is #5 because none of us are without evil in our hearts.
Mittelberg told The Christian Post recently that in fact, it was the issue of evil that initially led the renowned author and scholar C. S. Lewis into atheism. However, upon further reflection, Lewis began to see that if there is no God, then there is no such thing as evil either.
"Evil can only be known and measured against a standard of good. Apart from God and the morality that flows from Him there is no standard – and therefore no evil either," he explained. "But we know in our hearts – it's inescapable – that evil is real."
"For example, when we hear about someone being raped or murdered we don't just think, 'I'd prefer that people wouldn't do such things.' No, we say, 'that was wrong' – especially if the crime was against somebody we knew. But when we say such things we're betraying the fact that we know there is a higher standard – one that goes beyond people's preferences of even society's self-imposed laws," Mittelberg illustrated. "This innate knowledge of morality standards points to the existence of a Moral Lawgiver."
Those three paragraphs are full of non-sequiturs. Why would the fact that "
there is a higher standard [of morality], one that goes beyond people's preferences of even society's self-imposed laws" have to "
point to the existence of a Moral Lawgiver"?
First of all, what
is evil? We define evil as that which is wicked and immoral. Saying "there is no evil without God" is like saying "there is no morality without God". A proposition which I vehemently challenge.
The best definition of morality I have ever found goes more or less like this: "moral is that which maximises the well-being of conscious creatures". Immoral, thus, is that which fails to maximise the well-being of conscious creatures, or to put it another way, that which makes them suffer.
How, then, can we possibly say that there cannot be an objective morality without a God? Let us assume for one second that God indeed does not exist. Would we then then not have good, objective reasons to say that raping someone isn't moral? Rape is immoral because it fails to maximise the well-being of conscious creatures. Period. Not because the celestial daddy says it is immoral. It just
is.
Now, as to the seven "points of light" mentioned in that article:
First point of light: the world is as Jesus predicted
Jesus said, "In this world you will have trouble;" it's good to know that we follow a Savior who really gets it – who sees this fallen world for what it is, and who (contrary to many other religious leaders) tells us the truth about it.
Really?? What is so special about that statement? Wouldn't
any sane human being at
any point of history be able to recognise that people are going to have trouble in this world?
Second point of light: evil was not created or caused by God
The Bible is clear: God is not the author of evil. But he did create us as real human beings with the ability to love and follow him … or not. Unfortunately we chose the "not," and brought sin and evil into the picture.
First, quoting the Bible is a non-argument. One would have to prove first that the Bible is something more than an ancient book in order for it to have any authority.
Secondly, the author is saying we humans are to blame for evil because we chose evil, in a direct reference to the original sin principle and the Genesis story where Eve eats from the forbidden Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.
That story seems extremely problematic and cruel to me. God basically baits Adam and Eve, then punishes them (and their entire species, including all the billions of unborn individuals!!) for doing something wrong
despite the fact that they did not know what they did was wrong.
It's like punishing a two-year-old kid for breaking a valuable china vase. You might have told him a thousand times not to touch anything, he is still a kid who doesn't know it's wrong to break things and can't comprehend it. It would be therefore wrong to, say, take away all his toys. The Genesis story is exactly the same.
Thirdly, once again, if God is omnipotent, then he could have chosen not to create evil.
Third point of light: the cause behind most suffering is human
While it doesn't remove the pain, it can be important to remind people who are tempted to shake their fists at God for the suffering in the world that the vast majority of human pain has been inflicted directly or indirectly by other humans.
That is irrelevant. Atheists don't refer to this kind of suffering when bringing up the argument of evil.
Fourth point of light: we live in a fallen world
There is also suffering due to what some call "natural evil" – pain that results from events and disasters that are not caused by humans. The Bible shows, however, that these are the result of the curse we live under due to human sin – see Genesis 3 and Romans 8.
This is probably the most twisted theistic argument I have ever heard...
Even if we assume, for the sake of argument, that humans are to blame for the existence of evil, how to explain then that there are children in many places of the world with a parasitic worm inside their eyeballs that slowly and painfully eats their eye out and leaves them forever blind? Is that child to blame for that? Are their ancestors to blame (and somehow he has to pay for it)? Couldn't God, who is almighty, have prevented that child from going blind in such a cruel way? This is just an example of many.
We somehow have to accept that a good, compassionate God cursed the entire human species to eternal suffering in the form of earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, viruses, cancer, tsunamis, tornados, hurricanes... What kind of twisted version of
good is that??
Again, if God is able to prevent that and not willing, then he isn't good. If he is willing but isn't able, then he isn't almighty.
Fifth point of light: God will finally judge evil
Some people criticize God (or those who believe in him), saying, "A good God would eradicate evil." My question for those folks is, "Okay, are you ready to be eradicated, since you – like me – are to some degree evil?" Seriously, I'm glad that, although God will judge and wipe out evil, he's chosen not to yet, out of patience for us and for our friends (2 Pet. 3:9).
Lol wut? And this is supposed to be your favourite argument?
If God eradicated evil, he would eradicate evil, not evil
and.
There might be evil in me, but there is also good. You might as well say "if God eradicated good, then he would eradicate you, since you -like me- are to some degree good".
If there's some rotten apples together with some good ones in one bag, you don't throw the whole bag away, do you?
Sixth point of light: God suffered too
It's easy to forget that the Holy God of the universe chose, out of love, to humble himself, become one of us, and ultimately to suffer in ways none of us every will (or ever could imagine) in order to purchase our redemption (Phil. 2). As a result, he can not only forgive our sins and freely give us salvation, but also sympathize with all we're going through (Heb. 4:14-16).
Again, an unfounded claim, and also a wicked one.
That's like the abusive father who hits their kids because he wants them to suffer like he has.
If someone has suffered a lot, then he should have
all the more reason to try and prevent others from going through the same suffering, since he knows first hand how bad it is.
Seventh point of light: God can bring good out of bad
Though this truth is often bantered about in ways that are insensitive to the person who is suffering, it is still true that while bad things happen to God's people, he promises that he'll bring good – sooner or later – out of everything we experience (Rom. 8:28).
Why not bring good to begin with and save us all the pain and suffering then?
Once again, though, a completely unsupported claim that doesn't even make sense.
As Hitch famously said, and this applies to the whole article, "that which is claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".