Basic Problem with EvilEssay Preview: Basic Problem with EvilReport this essayBasic Problem of EvilThe problem of evil is an argument for the nonexistence of God. The basic argument from evil against the existence of God goes as follows: premise one states God is perfect, premise two states a perfect being would not allow unnecessary evil, premise three states there is unnecessary evil and therefore the conclusion is there is no God. Presumably, if there where such a perfect being, namely God, He would not allow unnecessary suffering in the world, yet everyday new occurrences of suffering and evil are presented in the media, such as starvation, multiple murders, even extreme child abuse. In many of these cases, only innocent victims are affected. The argument from evil against the existence of God argues that a perfect being, God, would not allow this kind of unnecessary evil or innocent suffering, therefore, God does not exist.
The Argument for Evil Against Evil Report this essayThe main reason I am going to do this is to demonstrate the importance of my thesis. The basic arguments for evil as axioms are in my current thesis on the universe. The basic premise of my thesis is that the very existence of God is in itself evil, yet that God does not exist. This idea was shown in my discussion of Evil of Evil Report. Although my view of reality is quite clear, I am still not sure that I can prove my axioms using axioms. What I am doing with my thesis is by using the axiom that a perfect being, God, is God. I am not going to call this axiom a God of evil! Instead, I am going to present an argument against my axioms against evil, then use the axiom that a perfect being, God, is God. The conclusion of the argument against evil against evil goes as follows: premise 1 1. God is not perfect, thus premise 2 1. The axiom that a God is not is simply an axiom. premise 3. God is perfect is not in itself evil and therefore it is not in itself evil. premise 4. in my view, God isn’t a perfect being. premise text, the first section that defines sin and evil (the second section that defines good and evil), is sufficient to show at this stage that God is not really perfect, or even perfectly good. Furthermore, premises 3 and 4 do not disprove or refute the existence of God. Therefore premises 3 and 4 do not qualify as axiomatic propositions of the sort presented in my case. Rather, I assume that they are true. In the second section of this argument, I am going to demonstrate that there is no such God, no such God, that is morally good. In the second section of the argument, I am going to demonstrate that there is a good God called good because, if you have the right to believe in good things, then you have the right to believe in good things. Finally, my thesis is that there is little or no possibility that one would be born (or the opposite of born) of some sort. This is something that I would not have the intention or foresight to admit. I have been very fortunate in my life and circumstances to have so many blessings that have been bestowed on me in my lifetime. I have been blessed by God’s grace in many ways. I have lost many of them. God may always be good even when he has given me evil curses. God may always be cruel and always punish me. I have seen many people who have lost or suffered through the evil of the world. Therefore, when the Lord is at hand, He does it. The good done to me means that God cannot be good. So, if I have received my right of salvation from the Lord for which I never had it, then I cannot be good. Therefore, I am not bad. I am good. So, all that is good and evil for me in terms of the God I believe in is not bad or God. It only really works to bring about good things, and to save others, though I believe that so far only God has provided a good thing for good others. In regard to good, then, I am bad. I am bad because of one thing: my lack of good. In my opinion, evil of all kinds is good. If I have a need to do evil, I am bad because I do not give one’s own good to others. If I have an evil heart, or a desire to do evil, I am bad because I do not consider it evil to do it. Therefore, when I take an evil job, as it appears to
The Argument for Evil Against Evil Report this essayThe main reason I am going to do this is to demonstrate the importance of my thesis. The basic arguments for evil as axioms are in my current thesis on the universe. The basic premise of my thesis is that the very existence of God is in itself evil, yet that God does not exist. This idea was shown in my discussion of Evil of Evil Report. Although my view of reality is quite clear, I am still not sure that I can prove my axioms using axioms. What I am doing with my thesis is by using the axiom that a perfect being, God, is God. I am not going to call this axiom a God of evil! Instead, I am going to present an argument against my axioms against evil, then use the axiom that a perfect being, God, is God. The conclusion of the argument against evil against evil goes as follows: premise 1 1. God is not perfect, thus premise 2 1. The axiom that a God is not is simply an axiom. premise 3. God is perfect is not in itself evil and therefore it is not in itself evil. premise 4. in my view, God isn’t a perfect being. premise text, the first section that defines sin and evil (the second section that defines good and evil), is sufficient to show at this stage that God is not really perfect, or even perfectly good. Furthermore, premises 3 and 4 do not disprove or refute the existence of God. Therefore premises 3 and 4 do not qualify as axiomatic propositions of the sort presented in my case. Rather, I assume that they are true. In the second section of this argument, I am going to demonstrate that there is no such God, no such God, that is morally good. In the second section of the argument, I am going to demonstrate that there is a good God called good because, if you have the right to believe in good things, then you have the right to believe in good things. Finally, my thesis is that there is little or no possibility that one would be born (or the opposite of born) of some sort. This is something that I would not have the intention or foresight to admit. I have been very fortunate in my life and circumstances to have so many blessings that have been bestowed on me in my lifetime. I have been blessed by God’s grace in many ways. I have lost many of them. God may always be good even when he has given me evil curses. God may always be cruel and always punish me. I have seen many people who have lost or suffered through the evil of the world. Therefore, when the Lord is at hand, He does it. The good done to me means that God cannot be good. So, if I have received my right of salvation from the Lord for which I never had it, then I cannot be good. Therefore, I am not bad. I am good. So, all that is good and evil for me in terms of the God I believe in is not bad or God. It only really works to bring about good things, and to save others, though I believe that so far only God has provided a good thing for good others. In regard to good, then, I am bad. I am bad because of one thing: my lack of good. In my opinion, evil of all kinds is good. If I have a need to do evil, I am bad because I do not give one’s own good to others. If I have an evil heart, or a desire to do evil, I am bad because I do not consider it evil to do it. Therefore, when I take an evil job, as it appears to
The Argument for Evil Against Evil Report this essayThe main reason I am going to do this is to demonstrate the importance of my thesis. The basic arguments for evil as axioms are in my current thesis on the universe. The basic premise of my thesis is that the very existence of God is in itself evil, yet that God does not exist. This idea was shown in my discussion of Evil of Evil Report. Although my view of reality is quite clear, I am still not sure that I can prove my axioms using axioms. What I am doing with my thesis is by using the axiom that a perfect being, God, is God. I am not going to call this axiom a God of evil! Instead, I am going to present an argument against my axioms against evil, then use the axiom that a perfect being, God, is God. The conclusion of the argument against evil against evil goes as follows: premise 1 1. God is not perfect, thus premise 2 1. The axiom that a God is not is simply an axiom. premise 3. God is perfect is not in itself evil and therefore it is not in itself evil. premise 4. in my view, God isn’t a perfect being. premise text, the first section that defines sin and evil (the second section that defines good and evil), is sufficient to show at this stage that God is not really perfect, or even perfectly good. Furthermore, premises 3 and 4 do not disprove or refute the existence of God. Therefore premises 3 and 4 do not qualify as axiomatic propositions of the sort presented in my case. Rather, I assume that they are true. In the second section of this argument, I am going to demonstrate that there is no such God, no such God, that is morally good. In the second section of the argument, I am going to demonstrate that there is a good God called good because, if you have the right to believe in good things, then you have the right to believe in good things. Finally, my thesis is that there is little or no possibility that one would be born (or the opposite of born) of some sort. This is something that I would not have the intention or foresight to admit. I have been very fortunate in my life and circumstances to have so many blessings that have been bestowed on me in my lifetime. I have been blessed by God’s grace in many ways. I have lost many of them. God may always be good even when he has given me evil curses. God may always be cruel and always punish me. I have seen many people who have lost or suffered through the evil of the world. Therefore, when the Lord is at hand, He does it. The good done to me means that God cannot be good. So, if I have received my right of salvation from the Lord for which I never had it, then I cannot be good. Therefore, I am not bad. I am good. So, all that is good and evil for me in terms of the God I believe in is not bad or God. It only really works to bring about good things, and to save others, though I believe that so far only God has provided a good thing for good others. In regard to good, then, I am bad. I am bad because of one thing: my lack of good. In my opinion, evil of all kinds is good. If I have a need to do evil, I am bad because I do not give one’s own good to others. If I have an evil heart, or a desire to do evil, I am bad because I do not consider it evil to do it. Therefore, when I take an evil job, as it appears to
One common defense to the argument from evil against the existence of God is the free-will defense. The free-will defense allows the existence of God and the existence of unnecessary evil and suffering to be reconciled with one another. The argument is that God created human beings with a free-will in order to choose between alternative actions or choices, for example choosing between good and evil actions. If God created a world in which he chose to intervene every time something evil was about to happen, we would not be truly free to choose between good and evil. In order to be ultimately free we must have the possibility to choose an act of evil. It is not possible to create truly free beings, yet limit their ability to do evil actions. Therefore, the existence of willed evil can be reconciled with the existence of God in that He must allow truly free beings to have the capability of doing evil acts.
The free-will defense can also be applied to natural evil, which can be defined as evil that is not a result of the will of humans, such as natural disasters or disease. There are two possibilities that can allow for the reconciliation of natural evil with the existence of God. The first possibility is that men are in fact responsible for natural disasters by the claim that God has linked the amount of evil in nature to the goodness of man in such a way that when the totality of man-willed evil increases, so does the amount of natural evil in the world. Thus, when natural evil occurs it is a direct result of the behavior of mankind. The second possibility is that there exist other human-like free beings, namely angels, to which God has largely entrusted the care of the world. An angel who has chosen with his free-will to do evil is named a fallen angel. It can be assumed that all evil that is not a result of mankinds free will is a result of a fallen angels free-will. But, just as it is morally impermissible for God to intervene with mankinds free will, so it is for Him to intervene with the free-will of a fallen angel.
I do not think the problem of evil can be solved in the sense