Why Did God Have to Make Evil?

[Voter]

Maybe my baby analogy was flawed, as babies don't really know anything. Let me use a new analogy in its place -- say you're the father of a mentally handicapped kid, who is a normal kid in every other way besides his conscious, for he can not tell right from wrong. You tell him not to eat the last slice of pizza from the fridge, but his friend comes along and convinces him to. Would you punish him, even though he lacks any way to tell what's right from what's wrong?

There's a contradiction in your scenario. You say I tell him, but then say he lacks any way to tell. You even used the same word. Same with A&E.

[Sophus]

How were they to know that disobeying was wrong if they didn't know that anything was wrong?

Again, there are different kinds or levels of knowledge. They did have some understanding. Otherwise, why didn't they eat of the tree until they were tempted? If their lack of understanding was as complete as you conclude, they would have been eating at random, and the temptation would have had no effect.

Some understanding of what? Right and wrong or the command to not eat from one tree? As far as we know they were eating at random anything they found in the garden since they were allowed to eat anything... but from one tree.

Will such a tree exist in Heaven? If not, why? Why didn't God simply not plant this tree in the Garden to begin with? Why would you want to go to Heaven if - apparently by your logic - a close relationship with God cannot exist there because there is no evil in Heaven?

[LegendarySandwich]

Maybe my baby analogy was flawed, as babies don't really know anything. Let me use a new analogy in its place -- say you're the father of a mentally handicapped kid, who is a normal kid in every other way besides his conscious, for he can not tell right from wrong. You tell him not to eat the last slice of pizza from the fridge, but his friend comes along and convinces him to. Would you punish him, even though he lacks any way to tell what's right from what's wrong?

There's a contradiction in your scenario. You say I tell him, but then say he lacks any way to tell. You even used the same word. Same with A&E.

How would he know it's right to follow what you say?

And you would punish him, then?

[Voter]

How would he know it's right to follow what you say?

Trust derived from our relationship.

And you would punish him, then?

Possibly. Punishment over pizza seems unlikely, but suppose he had food allergies and so it was important for him to obey me on the issue of food. Then, yes, I would likely punish.

[Voter]

Some understanding of what? Right and wrong or the command to not eat from one tree?

Both I suppose.

As far as we know they were eating at random anything they found in the garden since they were allowed to eat anything... but from one tree.

Yes, which again shows that they had some level of understanding.

Will such a tree exist in Heaven? If not, why? Why didn't God simply not plant this tree in the Garden to begin with?

As already explained, to make a complete or more complete revelation of himself, in order to allow a deeper relationaship with us.

Why would you want to go to Heaven if - apparently by your logic - a close relationship with God cannot exist there because there is no evil in Heaven?

This isn't apparent from my logic, as we will already have the knowledge of these characteristics of God. They don't need to be repeated for eternity.

[LegendarySandwich]

How would he know it's right to follow what you say?

Trust derived from our relationship.

And you would punish him, then?

Possibly. Punishment over pizza seems unlikely, but suppose he had food allergies and so it was important for him to obey me on the issue of food. Then, yes, I would likely punish.

But he doesn't know that it would be morally wrong to eat from the fridge (if we assume that disobeying your parents is a sin). Consider that he could also be naive (as Adam and Eve seemed to be) -- he follows your directions at first, but then his friend comes and along and convinces him that nothing would go wrong if he ate the slice of pizza. If he has no sense of right and wrong, and he's been convinced by his friend to do something bad, why would you punish him?

[Thumpalumpacus]

If he has no sense of right and wrong, and he's been convinced by his friend to do something bad, why would you punish him?

And punish him, to wit, by throwing him in the oven until he dies.

Yeah, that's just.

This entire argument is silly, because AD, Achronos, and Voter aren't going to change their minds no matter what we say until the injustice strikes them directly; and perhaps not even then.  They're too emotionally invested in their belief systems to ponder the thought of rebuilding their entire outlook.  I can understand that; deconverting was a pretty scary thing for me, too.

[TheJackel]

Just so Voter and AnimatedDirt know the definition of Omniscience, we should post it here from them:

Omniscience (pronounced /É'mˈnɪsiÉ™ns/)[1] (or omniscient point-of-view in writing) is the capacity to know everything infinitely

The worst part about this is that it's an impossible attribute that self-collapses. Hence the paradox: "Can you know how to create something that you do not already know", or Can you know how to create knowledge?

And when you take omniscience and try to apply it to some entity that you claim created everything to which includes you, it becomes rather laughable in regards to good/evil or sin. And that is because a said being that would infinitely know everything would infinitely know the past and future of and on everything..INFINITELY! What does this mean? It means there can be no "Free Will", or even freedom of choice. Said deity would have known everything man would ever do, or say in exact infinite detail to every thought and emotion before man was ever created. This just means your purpose was nothing more than a prefabricated puppet in a puppet show. But hey, the sucky thing for your GOD is that existence is nothing more than an infinite rerun tv show. It's existence has thus become irrelevant and without purpose since it would be omniscient. It would have done everything, created everything, judged everything, felt everything, seen everything, heard everything, known everything infinitely, and repeated the above infinitely over and over and over again!

Also, there is a minor glitch in that concept because logic would suggest the following paradox:


If you knew infinitely everything, could you create or do anything at all? It seems that suggesting a GOD that is not bound to time to where it's infinitely old, and infinitely older according to the present could not possibly have created anything. Under this argument everything would have just been existent without creation with an entity that would have just been existent that knows it all. And how exactly would an entity create that which it self requires to exist anyways?

What's also interesting is that Omniscience would be equivalent to Solipsism.

Anyways,

I do not worship things as GODS. Especially things that have obviously been said to have intentionally killed something. What most Christians don't get, it's that Christianity is really about unquestionable servitude to power. That is exactly what it is from cover to cover.

[Sophus]

Will such a tree exist in Heaven? If not, why? Why didn't God simply not plant this tree in the Garden to begin with?

As already explained, to make a complete or more complete revelation of himself, in order to allow a deeper relationaship with us.

Then heaven has but a mere shallow relationship. You're also implying God was not powerful enough to make a deep relationship possible without hell, sin, suffering and the creation of evil.

Why would you want to go to Heaven if - apparently by your logic - a close relationship with God cannot exist there because there is no evil in Heaven?

This isn't apparent from my logic, as we will already have the knowledge of these characteristics of God. They don't need to be repeated for eternity.

Then why not eliminate evil right now since we already have knowledge of his wonderful narcissistic characteristics?

[AnimatedDirt]

Just so Voter and AnimatedDirt know the definition of Omniscience, we should post it here from them:

Omniscience (pronounced /É'mˈnɪsiÉ™ns/)[1] (or omniscient point-of-view in writing) is the capacity to know everything infinitely

Oh my...with this new information, I may have to change my mind on everything!

[Sophus]

Just so Voter and AnimatedDirt know the definition of Omniscience, we should post it here from them:

Omniscience (pronounced /É'mˈnɪsiÉ™ns/)[1] (or omniscient point-of-view in writing) is the capacity to know everything infinitely

Oh my...with this new information, I may have to change my mind on everything!

Wouldn't omniscience, especially in the case TheJackel point out, result in infinite boredom? Why does God have such a fuse toward "evil sins" if he has forever since known they will occur and according to his book) be overcome?

And that's another question: is all sin evil?

[TheJackel]

Just so Voter and AnimatedDirt know the definition of Omniscience, we should post it here from them:

Omniscience (pronounced /É'mˈnɪsiÉ™ns/)[1] (or omniscient point-of-view in writing) is the capacity to know everything infinitely

Oh my...with this new information, I may have to change my mind on everything!

If you don't believe in Solipsism or the concept that GOD is existence itself to where everything is made of GOD, and all knowledge and information is possessed by said deity, you surely would need to reconsider your position. Because under this argument, you are at best nothing more than the figment of your GODS imagination. It's like GOD worshiping itself


However, all purpose is lost under Omniscience since all has been done and known infinitely. And it would be infinitely powerless to change that. Thus the Christian GOD is technically a logical fallacy. It's ruled itself irrelevant. We may as well just put this on the mythical wall right next to all the Greek GODS, or even Peter Pan.

So the big question is for Voter and Animated Dirt:

Is your GOD "IN" existence, or is your GOD the sum total of all existence? One will nullify it as being a GOD btw, while the other will make all things GOD. Crazy little quagmire theists get themselves into

[Thumpalumpacus]

Just so Voter and AnimatedDirt know the definition of Omniscience, we should post it here from them:

Omniscience (pronounced /É'mˈnɪsiÉ™ns/)[1] (or omniscient point-of-view in writing) is the capacity to know everything infinitely

Oh my...with this new information, I may have to change my mind on everything!

Agreeing on definitions is one of the standard preliminaries of a debate.  Can you not acknowledge it in a civil manner?  Sarcasm won't advance the discussion.

[LegendarySandwich]

Just so Voter and AnimatedDirt know the definition of Omniscience, we should post it here from them:

Omniscience (pronounced /É'mˈnɪsiÉ™ns/)[1] (or omniscient point-of-view in writing) is the capacity to know everything infinitely

Oh my...with this new information, I may have to change my mind on everything!

"Logical paradoxes and absurdities? No problem for me!"

[Voter]

How would he know it's right to follow what you say?

Trust derived from our relationship.

And you would punish him, then?

Possibly. Punishment over pizza seems unlikely, but suppose he had food allergies and so it was important for him to obey me on the issue of food. Then, yes, I would likely punish.

But he doesn't know that it would be morally wrong to eat from the fridge (if we assume that disobeying your parents is a sin). Consider that he could also be naive (as Adam and Eve seemed to be) -- he follows your directions at first, but then his friend comes and along and convinces him that nothing would go wrong if he ate the slice of pizza. If he has no sense of right and wrong, and he's been convinced by his friend to do something bad, why would you punish him?

Already answered. What part don't you understand?