The debate "If God existed there wouldnt be as much evil as there is" was started by
June 28, 2020, 8:29 pm.
9 people are on the agree side of this discussion, while 21 people are on the disagree side.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
diecinueve posted 7 arguments to the agreers part.
Hi42069 posted 1 argument, Nemiroff posted 4 arguments, Anushaavula posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
diecinueve and 8 visitors agree.
Hi42069, Nemiroff, Anushaavula, saswati, britishwolf and 16 visitors disagree.
natural disasters are necessary for a functioning world. earthquakes are caused by geothermal activity that is necessary for life for example. natural disasters arent even that deadly most of the time. things could be much worse.
How are a benevolent God and natural disasters compatible?
What's wrong with him being discovered by us? We could happily live in a world where God stops evil.
well eliminating disease may have broader consequences for biology. let us look at a specific example: cancer.
cancer is caused by mutations. too stop cancer good would have to end evolution. or he would have to intervene in each individual case and remove the cancer. if he does so, he runs a high risk of being discovered by us, which could have grave consequences as he clearly chose to keep his existence hidden.
so which solution do you recommend so that we can explore the consequences of such massive intervention.
Being able to help someone without losing anything and not doing it is bad. God allows us to suffer even though he can help us without any effort, therefore God is bad.
Teachers test students for a benefit (that they learn). Any benefit that God wanted to obtain could obtain it without making us suffer. Teachers cannot make all students learn without testing, God can.
god wanting us to triumph independently would not be a benevolent God? i disagree.
or a god who wants to test us is not benevolent? are teachers evil?
please explain yourself!
God could stop natural disasters and murderers
our evils are in our hands exept the natural disasters... there is nothing to do with god..
then he wouldn't be a benevolent god
so rather than set up a utopia from the beginning, you think god should actively intervene at all times to ensure his pets are taken care of?
what if this world is a test and not a paradise? or if god wants us to triumph independently and not be endlessly dependant on magic daddy?
the world would be the same only when someone is going to get sick, God would avoid it, when there is going to be a natural disaster in a populated area, God would avoid it.
We wouldn't have to surrender any control, God would be the one to stop criminals like a superhero. Freedom ceases to be good when it hurts others. It is obvious that we should not have freedom to kill, so God would not allow it.
i mean a benevolent god
perhaps this world has the ideal freedom to risk ratio
how would a world without disease or predation function on a biological level?
how would a world without natural disasters function on a physical level?
how many people (%) die from natural disasters or disease compared to totals?
how much control would we have to surrender for every murderer to somehow get caught before the act?
is it not possible that a good god would want for us to have free will, and a world that is understandable to us so we can learn and grow?
If there was a omnibenevolent god sure. But he's not depicted as omnibenevolent in the Bible, that came later when philosophers tried rationalising him as a maximally great being.
It does not define whether said God is Malevolent or Benevolent. So how can we predict "Gods" intent or actions
there would be no disease, there would be no natural disaster, the murderers would be stopped before killing
how much evil should their be?