If God is omnibenevolent, then why is there evil in the world?

When people ask "If God is omnibenevolent, then why is there evil in the world?", the normal reply is "Because God wishes us to have free will. So He allows us the option to turn our backs against Him and thereby to bring evil into our lives."

My counter-point then is this:
God was the one who created the universe. So He defined what "Free Will" is, and what "evil" is. He *could* have created another form of free will which did not allow us to do evil - but He did not.

A response to *that* is to say "Yes. But God has a plan we cannot understand. All of this - including the form of free will He created in us - is part of that plan. And this plan is one that we cannot understand."

And my response to *that* is:
OK - but God also created our minds and our intelligence. He could also have made us in such a way as to have an understanding of His plan, and thereby removed the obvious cruely in giving us free will which neccessarily implies evil. But He did do that either.

2008-07-25T05:55:24Z

This either means that God is cruel, or that He did not create either our free will or our intellects. Neither of these options provides a God worth worshipping.

2008-07-25T05:56:02Z

PS - I previously asked this in Religion & Spirituality, but am interested to see what sort of answers are to be found here.

2008-07-25T06:17:32Z

Lori A:
Yes - but you didn't define what "freedom" means for you or for your son.

God didn't just create us - He created "freedom" too. And He *could* have created a different "freedom" (one we cannot conceive of, because it doesn't exist) that didn't permit suffering.

2008-07-25T06:24:27Z

dmathers11:

> "When you say that God could have shown us his plan, that would defeat the purpose of finding him for ourselves."

Yes - but only because of the nature of "knowledge" that God created.
He created us, and that version of "knowledge" *knowing* in his omniscience that a good number of us would fail, and would therefore (in His mercy) be forever damned.
Lovely.

2008-07-25T06:48:25Z

mondaycrusade1013:

Interesting... I hadn't heard of "theodicy" as a term for what I am saying.
I'm not sure I understand your point about coincidence though.

And IMO - *zero* Gods is plenty for this vast universe.

2008-07-25T07:11:57Z

cody a:

I hadn't considered that - that God *is* everything.
Of course, all that means is that whenever we do anything evil, it is effectively God being evil to Himself.
That's karma, I suppose - but also a bit masochistic.

2008-07-25T07:30:59Z

Shades of Bruno:

No. In my argument, God created *everything* - good and evil (which is, by definiton, disobeying God).

Special EPhex2008-07-25T10:15:47Z

Favorite Answer

May I add that God is omnipresent, thus any separation from 'us' and God is an illusion of the ego. The so-called 'evil' of the world is based on perception and conditional, and often we neglect to consider the omnipresence of God. Therefore the question would be, "why would God be 'evil' to Itself?", assuming you consider It omnipresent. The answer is that 'good' and 'evil' only have existence in the dualistic mind, and that we cannot presume to comprehend the omniscience of God, except by identifying with It.

20

Lori A2008-07-25T06:12:07Z

This may sound simplisitic but this is the way I see it... He wanted it to be a choice. Yes, this goes back to free will... I think it's like being a parent. Before I had a child I had my future child's life completely planned out. I spent alot of time thinking about what I would do to form the child to create the best possible outcomes. I purchased what I thought were the perfect teaching toys, clothes etc. After I had a baby I found out two things. First I found that the baby had his own plan. He very much has his own personality and although I can guide he just won't be forced. Second I found that because I love him and he's part of me I want him to explore who he is. This was kind of a big suprise to me. Now I want him to be totally himself with guidance from me. He will make mistake that I can't controll. He will make many more positive choices as a result of my guidance. Forcing someone to become what they aren't doesn't make someone change it just makes them angry and resentful.

10

shades of Bruno2008-07-25T07:26:23Z

Opposites exist by virtue of one another. You cannot have good in the absence of evil, just like you cannot have light where there is no darkness.

I take it that your position is that this 'God" created the Universe, but only the good in it not not evil, only the light but not the darkness - in that case ,only the darkness (and evil by analogy) will stand the test of absolute reality, since they will be eternal, but not the opposites. And how can you have an eternal or non-eternal quality that has a non-eternal or eternal quality for its opposite? But what we would have is even more impossible - that there be no opposite at all! Worse,"God" being 'Light' ,will be non-etenal too and inferior to darkness on the plane of reality, not to mention that he would have had the impossible task of creating himself.

I hope this helps.

.......GRIBBLIN: in that case, we should strive to commit evil so as to obey God. Is it not healthier and a freedom from all this philosophical jugglery in debating whether to credit or deny attributes to a creator, to hold that everything is eternal like the seed and the sprout? This is my view. A creator does not exist because it is not necessary that he exist.

11

cody a2008-07-25T06:50:04Z

I think the misconception is in the idea that people have of God being separate, or 'out there' somewhere. But he didn't just create everything, he is everything (and I hate using "He", but don't like using "It" either). So people wait for the God 'out there' to do something, instead of doing the right thing themselves, which is how God gets things done.

So just like with other things, if you use something for what it is meant to be used for, everything is good. (eg, use your time on this world to make it a better place) But if you use something for which it is not intended, you're messing up.

10

?2008-07-25T06:32:02Z

Oh pull-eazzzzzzze. You've got yourself in so many 'Catch 22's', you are arguing in favor of more and more limitations. The theories of why God created evil, or if he did (He created 'everything', right?), are grouped in a term of association: theodicy. Right out of the gate, we might inquire of the primitive societies, to gain perspective and move to higher and higher objective forms of development and organization. When you get to the level of 'Comparative Religion' you will come across every possible rational, and reasonable schools of thought. G*d, the God of Moses, the Trinity, the God of Christianity, and Allah of Islam, share in the granting of benevolence. But is every gift that is given you the charge of your theodicy? How about coincidence? Is One God enough for this vast universe and this troubled planet?
Argue against your limitations!!!

21
Show more answers (9)

Related Questions

God is omnibenevolent, then why is there evil in the world?If God is omnibenevolent, omniscient and omnipotent, why is there still evil in this world?Why does an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent being allow evil to be in this world?How can god be omniscient,omnipotent, and omnibenevolent with all the evil and pointless suffering on earth? ?is god omnipotent or omnibenevolent or omnipresent?

Trending Questions

What is your definition of racism?8 answersI love animals but eat meat, am I a bad person? ?6 answersWhy is abortion wrong ?6 answersWhat should I believe when I'm told that knowledge and/or art is there just to fill in the void of your life?7 answersIs it possible reality ultimately conforms to what we think it is?5 answers