The Intellectual Problem of Evil Syllogism

[RighteousnessTemperance&]

Humankind was given dominion (sovereignty) over every creature, yet that creature may dominate humankind.

As Sovereign, God has ultimate control, yet as God He has given certain dominion over various aspects of the creation to act independently. Did not Adam and Eve act as independent free moral agents while in the Eden? By one man sin entered the world, as the consequence, of sin entering Eden, all have sinned.

Independent does not mean without accountability.

Consequences are ignored by evil. Yet, evil results in consequences.

Unless two agree they cannot walk together, therefore though both may walk, evil and good are not linked, the consequences are not linked, nor is their existence linked.

You seem to use the term “linked” differently than I; same for “dependent” & “independent.”

But your use of “sovereign” seems to coincide with a non-Calvinistic definition.

Bottom line from my understanding, God is good and operative everywhere. Therefore, evil is not and cannot be totally independent of God, as God restrains it as he sees fit, including in the final separation.

Evil did not exist with God when there was only God, therefore evil is dependent on God to ever exist in any way, shape, or form. Evil can only result (exist) if sovereign God sovereignly transfers some authority to another that is not intrinsically good.

 

[37818]

Don't need to name anything. That is not the question.

The question resolves to the very existence of God.

If evil must exist along with good, then God and evil existed together eternally.

But that is not Scriptural.

God is good.

God is eternal.

Evil is not eternal.

Therefore, good may exist without the presence of evil irregardless of some human philosophy.

God is infinite good. Evil cannot exist if there is only infinite good. In the New Heaven and Earth, finite good will be subject only to God's infinite good making evil impossible except in the eternal lake of fire where all evil will have been cast.

The problem of evil is the creation of finite good, which constitutes the creation of evil, Isaiah 45:7. The knowledge of good and evil was God's knowledge (Genesis 3:22).

 

[atpollard]

I see where several posts addressing my behavior, rather than the thread topic,which is deflection, not rebuttal.

The doctrine of reprobation is a bogus as a three dollar bill.

Your behavior is the problem since "the doctrine of Reprobation" is NOT the subject but rather is YOUR disruption of the subject (a Calvinist explanation of the Problem of Evil) with a blunt statement, oft repeated, that you refuse to support with either scripture of explanation.

 

[atpollard]

Therefore, good may exist without the presence of evil irregardless of some human philosophy.

Great discussion!

Pre-creation, did evil (that which is contrary to the attributes of God) not exist as an abstract possibility by virtue of God possessing His eternal, unchanging defining attributes? There may have been no beings that existed except God, so there was no reality of anything that could be contrary to God, but the mere existence of God creates the hypothetical possibility that something could oppose His nature. As soon as God created Angels, there then existed beings to make REAL the hypothetical possibility ... a third of the Angels chose to oppose God ... to be and act contrary to the immutable eternal Divine Nature. When God created man, all mankind then chose to be and act contrary to the immutable eternal Divine Nature.

So beings make EVIL a reality, but the immutable eternal Divine Nature makes EVIL a hypothetical possibility.

 

[37818]

Evil is not eternal not needing to be linked with good.

Evil is linked to created finite good. Isaiah 45:7.

 

[Van]

Your behavior is the problem since "the doctrine of Reprobation" is NOT the subject but rather is YOUR disruption of the subject (a Calvinist explanation of the Problem of Evil) with a blunt statement, oft repeated, that you refuse to support with either scripture of explanation.

Yet another against the man post, and devoid of on topic content.

First, see post #13, where I addressed the so called "problem of evil."
Second see post #14 where HankD introduced the concept of reprobation.
See post #31 where defined the Calvinist doctrine, because posters were misrepresenting the doctrine.

.

 

[atpollard]

Yet another against the man post, and devoid of on topic content.

First, see post #13, where I addressed the so called "problem of evil."
Second see post #14 where HankD introduced the concept of reprobation.
See post #31 where defined the Calvinist doctrine, because posters were misrepresenting the doctrine.

Yes, let us see:

POST #13

The same "Problem of Evil" canard is posted every few months.

And as pointed out above the attribute of God always treating his creation with beneficence is a fiction.

Why does God allow evil to exist? First the calamity brought to His creation by the environment is caused by God This harsh environment serves to facilitate people seeking God as a refuge.

But what about the evil that comes from people sinning? Why does God allow that? God's purpose in creation was to choose a people for His own possession. People that love God. And in order for people to choose God, they must also have the capacity to choose sin. A choice of one option is not a choice.

But what about the Fall, where people were not only able to choose sin, they we corrupted and predisposed to choose sin. Why did God allow or bring about the Fall? Remember when God made Gideon's army smaller to increase the glory of God's victory? The Fall makes our repentance bring more glory to God.

In summary, the "Problem of Evil" is a canard.

The OP stated that he had a FREE WILL answer for the "Problem of Evil" and wanted to invite people to offer a "CALVINIST" answer to the "Problem of Evil". So you responded with an answer that has NOTHING to do with Calvinism except to offer the FREE WILL answer that the OP poster already claimed to have.

So congratulations for avoiding what was asked and telling the OP what it already knew.

POST #14

Proverbs 16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

Your 'FREE WILL' bunny trail is attempted to to be refuted with a single verse of scripture. Rather than addressing the scripture, you simply respond with a version of "taint so".

POST #31

Yet another co-opting a word to push a destructive heresy. Calvinists believe you were saved (their doctrine of predestination) or damned (their doctrine of reprobation) from all eternity for all eternity, and there is nothing you can do about it for yourself or for your loved ones. They should call it their doctrine of futility.

You tell Calvinists what they believe without citing any authoritative Calvinist source, ending with a trolling insult. Even if correct (which it is not accurately presenting Particular Baptist Sotierology, making it a straw man) it does nothing to answer the question in the OP.

Let those reading along decide for themselves if you are advancing the OP or leading it down a bunny trail.

 

[37818]

I hold to the total absence of evil.

Then you deny the infinite good God's total omniscience.

 

[HankD]

POST #14
HankD said: ↑
Proverbs 16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.
Your 'FREE WILL' bunny trail is attempted to to be refuted with a single verse of scripture. Rather than addressing the scripture, you simply respond with a version of "taint so".

Seems so straight forward as to not need a responsive explanation.

 

[agedman]

Then you deny the infinite good God's total omniscience.

Not true.

Prior to “creating all things” did evil exist?

Nope.

Evil was created and God has total authority over.

Atpollard gave a philosophical view, but the hypothetical would have evil merely because God is good.

 

[agedman]

God is infinite good. Evil cannot exist if there is only infinite good. In the New Heaven and Earth, finite good will be subject only to God's infinite good making evil impossible except in the eternal lake of fire where all evil will have been cast.

The problem of evil is the creation of finite good, which constitutes the creation of evil, Isaiah 45:7. The knowledge of good and evil was God's knowledge (Genesis 3:22).

I agree except that I need to ponder the thinking of finite good was created which brought about the creation of evil.

I am balancing that thinking against a view of the creation involving the allowance of evil, rather then infinite good being limited or lessened to finite as if God places Himself in any manner in the finite.

 

[Van]

Yes, let us see:

POST #13
The OP stated that he had a FREE WILL answer for the "Problem of Evil" and wanted to invite people to offer a "CALVINIST" answer to the "Problem of Evil". So you responded with an answer that has NOTHING to do with Calvinism except to offer the FREE WILL answer that the OP poster already claimed to have.

So congratulations for avoiding what was asked and telling the OP what it already knew.

POST #14
Your 'FREE WILL' bunny trail is attempted to to be refuted with a single verse of scripture. Rather than addressing the scripture, you simply respond with a version of "taint so".

POST #31
You tell Calvinists what they believe without citing any authoritative Calvinist source, ending with a trolling insult. Even if correct (which it is not accurately presenting Particular Baptist Sotierology, making it a straw man) it does nothing to answer the question in the OP.

Let those reading along decide for themselves if you are advancing the OP or leading it down a bunny trail.

1) Labeling the biblical answer to the problem as a "free will" answer is twaddle. I did not mention "free will" but I did indicate total spiritual inability is invalid, and inconsistent with God's redemption plan as presented in scripture.

2) Labeling the biblical answer to the problem as a "free will" answer is twaddle. I did not mention "free will" but I did indicate total spiritual inability is invalid, and inconsistent with God's redemption plan as presented in scripture.

3) Then you deny your own doctrine.

Summary, I answered the problem of evil from scripture, and not from a Calvinist point or Arminians point of view. And I demonstrated the Calvinist doctrine of reprobation is a bogus as a three dollar bill, because God's redemption plan chooses individuals during their lifetime based on crediting their faith as righteousness.

 

[agedman]

Note how they repeat non stop their deflections, using against the man arguments repeatedly, trying to change the subject.

Reset

The bogus doctrine of reprobation claims some people were predestined to damnation before creation. However, no one was predestined to salvation or damnation before creation. God sets before us the choice of life or death and begs us to choose life. The bogus doctrine of reprobation is based on misunderstanding Ephesians 1:4, where God chose us in Him corporately as the target group of His redemption plan. 1 Peter 2:9-10 precludes our "individual" election before creation because we lived not as a (chosen) people before we were individually chosen, before we obtained mercy.

Can you actually prove “no one was predestined to damnation before creation?”

Seems I read John quoting Christ’s words to Nicodemus saying, “...are condemned already....”.

 

[Van]

Can you actually prove “no one was predestined to damnation before creation?”

Seems I read John quoting Christ’s words to Nicodemus saying, “...are condemned already....”.

Of course all enter the world condemned because of unbelief, but the bible teaches some repent and their faith is credited as righteousness.

The bible plainly teaches born anew believers are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, and born anew believers are predestined to be raised or changed in the twinkling of an eye in glorified bodies at Christ's second coming. In other to try to pour the bogus doctrine of Calvinist predestination into the text, they co-op "adoption" as also referring to being born anew, thus attempting a bogus backfit into the text. Twaddle

 

[atpollard]

Twaddle

“Twaddle”: Defined as a universal defense countering any statement that disagrees with the pontifications of Van.

 

[agedman]

Of course all enter the world condemned because of unbelief, but the bible teaches some repent and their faith is credited as righteousness.

We may disagree upon the how this is accomplished, but would agree that certainly some will become believers and enter the others will never believe and not enter.

The bible plainly teaches born anew believers are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, and born anew believers are predestined to be raised or changed in the twinkling of an eye in glorified bodies at Christ's second coming. In other to try to pour the bogus doctrine of Calvinist predestination into the text, they co-op "adoption" as also referring to being born anew, thus attempting a bogus backfit into the text. Twaddle

It is unfortunate that your response didn't support your assertions.

Being "conformed to the image" is not the same as being "transformed" or changed at Christ's coming. Two different activities.

Only orphans are adopted. Slaves to the enemy of Christ, are first purchased from that condition, removed and never returnable to that condition, then adopted or re-titled to a new condition.

Btw, this is not a "bogus doctrine of Calvinist" but that doctrine held pretty much held and taught by non-calvinist groups.

The fundamental problem of evil (that which this thread is working through) is a problem across the spectrum of any salvation scheme.

God would not have need of election, predestination, and other such had not God not created evil. Because such is the case, then God also specifically chose prior to "in the beginning" the purpose of both those created evil and those who would believe. Such was not "corporate" or even cooperative or collaborative. But such was of His good pleasure for His purpose.

 

[Van]

We may disagree upon the how this is accomplished, but would agree that certainly some will become believers and enter the others will never believe and not enter.

It is unfortunate that your response didn't support your assertions.

Being "conformed to the image" is not the same as being "transformed" or changed at Christ's coming. Two different activities.

Only orphans are adopted. Slaves to the enemy of Christ, are first purchased from that condition, removed and never returnable to that condition, then adopted or re-titled to a new condition.

Btw, this is not a "bogus doctrine of Calvinist" but that doctrine held pretty much held and taught by non-calvinist groups.

The fundamental problem of evil (that which this thread is working through) is a problem across the spectrum of any salvation scheme.

God would not have need of election, predestination, and other such had not God not created evil. Because such is the case, then God also specifically chose prior to "in the beginning" the purpose of both those created evil and those who would believe. Such was not "corporate" or even cooperative or collaborative. But such was of His good pleasure for His purpose.

1) Adoption refers to the redemption of our bodies, Romans 8:23. Pretty much all non-Calvinists agree with this verse.

2) Do not put the modern day meaning of "adoption" back into the NT text. The idea is granting the full rights of natural born child, which in our case is being raised in glorified bodies.

3) I demonstrated there is no "problem of evil" answering the issue in post #13.

4) As demonstrated by 1 Peter 2:9-10, God chose no individuals for salvation before creation because we all live "not as a people" and having "not obtained mercy."

5) The Calvinist doctrine of reprobation is as bogus as a three dollar bill, and is based on disregarding scripture after scripture, such as 2 Thessalonians 2:13, James 2:5, where we are individually chosen for salvation during our lifetime on the basis of God crediting our faith as righteousness. See Romans 4:4-5, 23-24

 

[Van]

“Twaddle”: Defined as a universal defense countering any statement that disagrees with the pontifications of Van.

Note I agree with Romans 8:23 and this view (adoption refers to our bodily redemption) is claimed to be a "pontification." They are long on casting aspersions, and short on biblical support, the hallmark of false teachings.

The bible plainly teaches born anew believers are predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, and born anew believers are predestined to be raised or changed in the twinkling of an eye in glorified bodies at Christ's second coming. In order to try to pour the bogus doctrine of Calvinist predestination into the text, they co-op "adoption" as also referring to being born anew, thus attempting a bogus backfit into the text. Twaddle = silly assertion

 

[agedman]

1) Adoption refers to the redemption of our bodies, Romans 8:23. Pretty much all non-Calvinists agree with this verse.

2) Do not put the modern day meaning of "adoption" back into the NT text. The idea is granting the full rights of natural born child, which in our case is being raised in glorified bodies.

3) I demonstrated there is no "problem of evil" answering the issue in post #13.

4) As demonstrated by 1 Peter 2:9-10, God chose no individuals for salvation before creation because we all live "not as a people" and having "not obtained mercy."

5) The Calvinist doctrine of reprobation is as bogus as a three dollar bill, and is based on disregarding scripture after scripture, such as 2 Thessalonians 2:13, James 2:5, where we are individually chosen for salvation during our lifetime on the basis of God crediting our faith as righteousness. See Romans 4:4-5, 23-24

Total distraction used to obfuscate.

 

[Van]

Total distraction used to obfuscate.

Post #13 demonstrates the "problem of evil" is a "total distraction used to disparage belief in God."