Is God Evil?

[Goetian]

Jesus' death was the most horrifically evil thing that ever transpired in history.

Apparently, he HAD to die, for our sins. Well, sure, fair enough. The way this world works, only God could possibly pay the penalty.

But you know what? God's the one who made it that way in the first place! God could have made it so that our sins could be forgiven with a snap of his fingers. Or even that they didn't have to be forgiven at all.

Well, why didn't he? Obviously, if God is all good, then he made things the best that they could be. But he made it so that his SON had to die a horrible, bloody death on a cross. There is absolutely no way that's the best way of doing things. Anyone who could spare their son and chooses not to is plain sadistic.

And while we're at it, why is there ANY suffering in the world? Sure, some of it, like murder, comes from misuse of free will. That makes sense.

But what about things like hurricanes? Nobody willed those.

The only response I've heard to this is that God permits evil so that he can bring good from it. But that makes NO SENSE, because he could just as easily NOT permit evil and bring the same good from good.

There is no reason that evil should exist except that God wanted it to, which would make him evil.

Edited October 28, 2006 by Era Might

[Guest T-Bone]

[Farsight one]

No, you see, he didn't have to die. He chose to so that he could better show us how much he loves us.

[Goetian]

[quote name='Farsight one' post='1103403' date='Oct 28 2006, 06:16 PM']
No, you see, he didn't have to die. He chose to so that he could better show us how much he loves us.
[/quote]

It's not love to command your son to die a slow, painful death. That's disgusting.

[Veritas]

[quote name='Goetian' post='1103440' date='Oct 28 2006, 03:37 PM']
It's not love to command your son to die a slow, painful death. That's disgusting.
[/quote]

+

He DIDN'T command. Jesus made a free choice to do it -that's why we love him! He could have let us rot in the misery that is separation from God! Instead, he suffered in atonement for our sins (have you seen Narnia?).

[Thy Geekdom Come]

God allows free will because He wants to love us and wants to allow us to love Him back. This means that we must have free will, since love can only come from a free choice.

Free will also means that we can do evil, however. Evil results in suffering.

God came to save us and to show us His love. He loved us so much that He wanted to give us every opportunity to love Him, even the opportunity of sustaining His human life. We murdered Him instead. However, from that same act, He planned to restore us by offering His death as a sacrifice of love to the Father on behalf of humanity.

Necessary? Perhaps not. However, it was more perfect that Christ go to that even further extent in order to give us the greatest opportunity for love. Christ, being perfect, took the more perfect route.

[Veritas]

+

Peter Kreeft also wrote an excellent book called [u]The Problem of Evil[/u] :

Read Here:

[url="http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0019.html"]http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/...ion/re0019.html[/url]


God Bless You!

[Winchester]

Yes, you're right, God is evil.

You win, bask in victory.

[Guest JeffCR07]

Goetian, I am very interesting in discussing this topic with you, if it is something that you would like to explore with an open mind as well.

Your objection is a meaningful one, and it is something that has been discussed and meditated on by many of the Early Church Fathers and the Doctors of the Church. I will offer some responses that I hope will begin a fruitful discussion. Also, for the record, I am mainly speaking from an Anselmian/Thomistic basis.

There are three basic questions that you raise in your first post, the question of why physical evil (as opposed to moral and metaphysical evil) exists, the question of whether or not it would have been possible for God to save mankind without Christ's Incarnation, Passion, Death, and Resurrection, and the question of whether or not it is just for God to allow the death of his only Son.

I will deal with each of these in turn:

1.) The objection regarding physical evil seems to me to stem from an excessively humanistic worldview. Within Catholic and Orthodox Christianity, as well as the Coptic and Oriental Churches, it was not just man that fell from grace with the advent of original sin, but rather, the whole of Creation. Just as the existence of moral evil is the consequence of the fall peculiar to man, the existence of physical evil is the consequence of the fall that pertains to all of creation. This is why scripture says that "the wages of sin is death." The whole of Creation fell on account of sin, not just man, and this is evidenced by physical evil.

2.) Could God have saved mankind without the incarnation, passion, death, and resurrection of Christ? St. Anselm would say no, and this is because God is necessarily both Perfect Mercy and Perfect Justice. Now in the Fall, man lost his state of original justice, or his uprightness before the eyes of God. This uprightness was a grace given to us by God that was then subsequently cast aside through our free will. Now Perfect Justice demands that an injustice either be punished or rectified. So, it is necessary, because God is perfectly just, that we either be punished for our sin or that we give to God what we owe him (the uprightness that He gave us and expected us to keep). However, this is a dilemma because if we are to avoid punishment then it is necessary for us to give to God that uprightness that we owe to Him, and yet that is precisely what we lost during the Fall.

It is at this point that we must also consider that God is Perfect Mercy. Now Perfect Mercy demands that if there is a way for a wrong to be rectified without punishment, then this ought to be done. Can this be done, as you say, by God just "snapping his fingers?" No, because if [i]God[/i] does it, then it is not man giving to God what we owed Him, but rather, God restoring to us what we owed him in the first place. If we are not giving God what we owe Him, then Perfect Justice is being cast aside, and that is impossible.

So, it must be a [i]man[/i] that gives to God that uprightness that we owe Him. But no man has that uprightness. The only possibility is for God, who is necessarily upright, to actually become a man. When this happens, then we have a man who can render to God the uprightness that was cast aside in the Fall. Thus, the Incarnation was necessary. But what about His passion and death?

Here, Anselm does [i]not[/i] argue the way you have presented the issue above. God is not, for Anselm, a vengeful being that demands a blood debt in exchange for sin. He is not appeased by the suffering of His son. Rather, it was Christ's [i]obedience[/i] and uprightness that God desired. Now Christ was killed unjustly because He would not deny His own divinity. Obedience to the will of the Father involves standing up for the Truth despite what is done to you. Thus, Christ was "obedient unto death, even death on a cross." It was not the suffering, pain, and death of Christ that God the Father desired, but rather, it was His obedience, which was evidenced through His Passion.

Thus, Christ's death was necessary because a sinful world could not accept the Sinless Man, and so it demanded that He deny His own perfection. But precisely because He is perfect, he could never make that denial. Thus, his death was necessary only because if He was to be obedient to the Father, He would be killed for it.

3.) We now are prepared to give a definitive answer to your third question - was it just for God to allow the death of His only Son?

The answer is most certainly, yes. This is true for two reasons. First, the incarnation does not defy the Perfect Justice of God, for through it man is offering to God what he owes to God, namely, that uprightness that was cast aside by Adam. But the sinful world demanded that Christ deny his own divinity, and so it was necessary for him to suffer death at the hands of sinners if he was to be obedient to his mission of redemption. Thus, Christ's death was not willed for its own sake, but rather, it was the Obedience of Christ that was desired, which manifested itself in his willingness to accept death on the cross. Thus, God did not desire the suffering and death of His Son as such, but rather, He desired it insofar as they manifested the perfection of His obedience to the Father and Love for mankind.

The second reason that it was not unjust for God to allow the death of his only Son is because the Father and the Son are consubstantial. Thus, the Divine Will is one in the same for the Father and for the Son. Thus, whatever the Son wills, the Father must also will, and vice versa. Now Christ desired to suffer and die for mankind. Therefore, the Father must also will that Christ suffer and die for mankind, since the Divine Will is one in the Father and the Son. Moreover, no one would say that Christ was unjust in willing that He suffer and die for mankind, and, because the Divine Will is one in the Father and the Son, it is therefore impossible to say that the Father is unjust in willing for Christ to suffer and die for mankind.

I pray that you will thoughtfully read the above, and I hope to continue this discussion with you soon!

Your Brother In Christ,

Jeff

[aalpha1989]

And besides, if God WAS evil, who created the moral code? For God to be evil, there has to be a law higher than him, which implies an authority over him, which implies a god over him. God created the moral code, so he cannot break it. If he didn't create it, then someone had to. If no one created the moral code, then good and evil don't exist and your question is flawed.

[LuchaporElRey21]

Goetian,

The fact is that Christ does love you. He loves you so much that when He was on the cross, He thought of you. And I believe He has brought you to this point in your life, here with us.

All darkness becomes light when it is exposed to light. Take whatever dark thing that is haunting you and offer it to Him. Because His heart burns with love for you, and He is going to move Heaven and earth to bring you back to Him.

Jesus died for us because eternal justice demanded it. "The wages of sin is death.." but thanks be to God who has given us new life. Jesus IS God. And I don't think that someone who offers himself for others could be evil. He lays down His life as a friend for you, and love for a friend is the greatest love of all. I am sorry you think He is evil despite this.

God bless you brother. I am praying for you incessantly. Thinking God is evil is a horrible way to live life.

[Goetian]

Jeff,

I feel you've given a satisfactory answer to the objection about Christ, on ethat no one else has been able to provide. However --

Why did all of Creation fall with humanity?

No matter why it did, the fact remains that God could have created a universe in which creation would NOT fall with humanity.

[curtins]

I think you are confusing God bringing good out of evil with God actually being evil.

God brings good out of evil- ie Christ rising from the dead, firefighters bravery on 911. But God does not create the evil, however he allows it to happen.

[Groo the Wanderer]

[quote name='Goetian' post='1103527' date='Oct 28 2006, 07:47 PM']
Jeff,

I feel you've given a satisfactory answer to the objection about Christ, on ethat no one else has been able to provide. However --

Why did all of Creation fall with humanity?

No matter why it did, the fact remains that God could have created a universe in which creation would NOT fall with humanity.
[/quote]


Poo! Got here too late. Jeff stole my thunder...ah well.

Why did all of Creation fall with humanity? Good question and one that my classes have asked many times over the years.

In a nutshell, Creation was made for Man, not for God. We see this in Genesis where God gives Man dominion over the earth (creation). In the second creation account, God also allows Man to name all the animals. Let me ask you that have kids: why did you name your child? You did not consult me, did you? Why not? Because they are yours, of course. Man named the animals because Creation belongs to Man (in a stewardship sense).

Now then...Creation was created for Man to care for. It was created good, just like Man. Man was given dominion over it all. When Man sinned against God, Satan was allowed to enter the world. In essense, Man handed over dominion of the world to Satan. (Note that no matter who has dominion, Man or Satan, God still has veto power : ) Because of Satan's intense jealousy and hatred of Man, he was allowed to pervert the world as well, to an extent. Just like sin corrupted Man, sin corrupted Creation.

The good news is, that with Christ's death and resurrection, Satan's dominion over Creation has been broken (see Revelation). Now it is up to His Church (us) to work to fix the evil that has been wrought through the ages. One day, the Church will rise to meet the Lord when He comes again in glory and power, to present to Him the world once again. It will not be perfect yet, as we are not yet perfect, but Christ will make all of Creation perfect again and dwell with us. (see Revelation again).

hope this helps and God bless you and yours!

[Guest JeffCR07]

I will reply to both the question and the "fact" that you assert above.

First, Creation fell because man is a part of creation, and man fell. If you cut your finger and it gets infected, that infection affects the whole body. So too with man and creation. Man cannot fall without Creation being affected, because man is a part of creation, just as your finger is a part of your body.

Now, I would maintain that it is [i]not[/i] a "fact" that God could have created a universe in which creation would not fall. Man must be [i]free[/i] in order to fulfill the purpose that God intends for us (to enter into loving communion with Him), and if God creates a universe in which man cannot fall, then man is not free.

Your Brother In Christ,

Jeff