If god is everything, doesn't that make him evil as well as good?

[RichardHresko]

the goverment doesn't create all that is.

the goverment governs with the consent (most often) of the plebians. The plebs
pay the goverment to look after them...

god on the other hand, creates innocent, uneducated beings, puts them, like children in a candy store, in a garden full of temptation. In that garden god puts a walking talking serpent who's only purpose is to corrupt the innocent.

and here are we, blamed because go was an irresponsible parent.

regards

God gave humans free will. To suggest that he should not have dones so is to say that we should not have been created to be as we are. But we, as is all of creation, are good. So saying we should not have been created as we are is tantamount to saying we are not good, which is a contradiction.

To argue that free will can be used incorrectly and that we therefore should not have it could be applied to other things as well. We can abuse our vision, touch, sexuality, eating, etc. How much should we cut off?

That we are ignorant one can not dispute. That we choose to remain ignorant is no one's responsibility but our own.

A good place to look that deal directly with these questions is Augustine's de libero arbitrio ("On Free Will (Choice)") Book III.xix.53.

[amanda_isabel]

God is everything, but what makes him divine is the balance between it all.

[Redzeppelin]

God is everything, but what makes him divine is the balance between it all.

By "everything" are you including evil? The "balance" concept is very Oriental, but that includes the "dark side." Are you suggesting something similar here?

[RichardHresko]

By "everything" are you including evil? The "balance" concept is very Oriental, but that includes the "dark side." Are you suggesting something similar here?

While I can not speak for amanda_isabel, one argument can be that she means everything that has substantial existence, which would exclude evil from the mix.

[Redzeppelin]

While I can not speak for amanda_isabel, one argument can be that she means everything that has substantial existence, which would exclude evil from the mix.

Evil is that which is contrary to God's character: He cannot "contain" evil within Himself - evil is a new creation that (by the very requirements of freewill and love) must potentially exist.

[RichardHresko]

Evil is that which is contrary to God's character: He cannot "contain" evil within Himself - evil is a new creation that (by the very requirements of freewill and love) must potentially exist.

On the issue of the creation of evil the Church Fathers and Aristotle would disagree. Evil cannot be a true creation since only God can create ex nihilo. Evil does not, according to this view, have substantial existence and therefore does not require a 'creator.' You are correct in saying that evil is contrary to God's character. In fact we can go further and say that because of God's essence being Being itself, he cannot contain evil, which is a form of non-being. Evil has no potentiality to exist since it cannot have existence of itself, only in something else. A crude example: a hole in a shirt is a real hole but it does not exist in itself, only in terms of the shirt.

[Redzeppelin]

On the issue of the creation of evil the Church Fathers and Aristotle would disagree. Evil cannot be a true creation since only God can create ex nihilo. Evil does not, according to this view, have substantial existence and therefore does not require a 'creator.' You are correct in saying that evil is contrary to God's character. In fact we can go further and say that because of God's essence being Being itself, he cannot contain evil, which is a form of non-being. Evil has no potentiality to exist since it cannot have existence of itself, only in something else. A crude example: a hole in a shirt is a real hole but it does not exist in itself, only in terms of the shirt.

Well said.

[Whifflingpin]

"Evil has no potentiality to exist since it cannot have existence of itself, only in something else. A crude example: a hole in a shirt is a real hole but it does not exist in itself, only in terms of the shirt."

Exactly the same could be said of goodness, so it is only a matter of faith or opinion that one can be said to be more real than the other, or that one might be described as a presence and the other as an absence.

Common experience, regardless of the opinions of some Church Fathers, is that evil, like good, is an active driving force, not a mere negative. Shaw(?) commented "for evil to triumph it is sufficient for good men to do nothing." This has the ring of truth, and implies that evil is independent and active.

[Redzeppelin]

"Evil has no potentiality to exist since it cannot have existence of itself, only in something else. A crude example: a hole in a shirt is a real hole but it does not exist in itself, only in terms of the shirt."

Exactly the same could be said of goodness, so it is only a matter of faith or opinion that one can be said to be more real than the other, or that one might be described as a presence and the other as an absence.

Common experience, regardless of the opinions of some Church Fathers, is that evil, like good, is an active driving force, not a mere negative. Shaw(?) commented "for evil to triumph it is sufficient for good men to do nothing." This has the ring of truth, and implies that evil is independent and active.

I disagree. C.S. Lewis lays out very nicely in Book II of Mere Christianity the problem with viewing good and evil and rival equals. In short form: bad cannot be bad in the way that good can be good. Most things we call "bad" in this world are not bad people pursuing badness for the sake of eing bad (though it is possible to pursue goodness for the sake of being good) - people who do bad things in this world are generally pursuing some good in a wrong way, for the wrong reason or to an unreasonable extreme. Bad is generally a perversion or degradation of good - not vice versa. Evil is parasite.

Next point: there is nothing positive about evil itself - just because evil can motivate good men to do something good, does not make evil a positive force.

The quotation is by Edmund Burke.

[Tournesol]

Hi! I might be able to offer a different stance, the Islamic perspective as to what the good-evil thing is, and what the purpose of evil is in this world.

So, according to Islam, both Adam and Eve were tempted by Satan [not a snake] in the Garden of Eden. As a punishment, God sent them to the earth, for a time. This time spent on earth is a trial period. God is testing us, humans, to see who is worthy of re-entering Paradise, and those who aren't worthy [who follow Satan] would enter the Hellfire.

So, while God CREATED satan, and the actions of satan, which are what we call evil, it is a means to an end, a test: it is a test of worthiness and of faith.
God just wants to know who will be faithful in Him, and who will pray to Him, and believe in Him, and turn away from evil and satan. Those people will be granted paradise. People who follow satan, will go to the hellfire.

I hope this offers an alternative perspective.

[RichardHresko]

"Evil has no potentiality to exist since it cannot have existence of itself, only in something else. A crude example: a hole in a shirt is a real hole but it does not exist in itself, only in terms of the shirt."

Exactly the same could be said of goodness, so it is only a matter of faith or opinion that one can be said to be more real than the other, or that one might be described as a presence and the other as an absence.

Common experience, regardless of the opinions of some Church Fathers, is that evil, like good, is an active driving force, not a mere negative. Shaw(?) commented "for evil to triumph it is sufficient for good men to do nothing." This has the ring of truth, and implies that evil is independent and active.

I don't see how one could in all seriousness maintain that the same could be said of goodness. Are we to believe that every empty space is merely a hole awaiting a shirt?

Common experience also tells us the world is flat, that the sun rises instead of the earth revolving, and that there is such a thing as centrifugal force (there isn't). That some perceive evil as an active driving force is not an argument that evil is such a thing.

[RichardHresko]

Hi! I might be able to offer a different stance, the Islamic perspective as to what the good-evil thing is, and what the purpose of evil is in this world.

So, according to Islam, both Adam and Eve were tempted by Satan [not a snake] in the Garden of Eden. As a punishment, God sent them to the earth, for a time. This time spent on earth is a trial period. God is testing us, humans, to see who is worthy of re-entering Paradise, and those who aren't worthy [who follow Satan] would enter the Hellfire.

So, while God CREATED satan, and the actions of satan, which are what we call evil, it is a means to an end, a test: it is a test of worthiness and of faith.
God just wants to know who will be faithful in Him, and who will pray to Him, and believe in Him, and turn away from evil and satan. Those people will be granted paradise. People who follow satan, will go to the hellfire.

I hope this offers an alternative perspective.

Thank you!
Does Islam have a position on God's omniscience? Your post implies that it does not. I am curious also as to the degree Avicenna and Averroes are considered mainstream in Islam now.
Thanks again!

[Tournesol]

God gave humans free will. To suggest that he should not have dones so is to say that we should not have been created to be as we are. But we, as is all of creation, are good. So saying we should not have been created as we are is tantamount to saying we are not good, which is a contradiction.

To argue that free will can be used incorrectly and that we therefore should not have it could be applied to other things as well. We can abuse our vision, touch, sexuality, eating, etc. How much should we cut off?

That we are ignorant one can not dispute. That we choose to remain ignorant is no one's responsibility but our own.

A good place to look that deal directly with these questions is Augustine's de libero arbitrio ("On Free Will (Choice)") Book III.xix.53.

I find your views to be quite interesting.
I agree with what you say.
In Islam, the belief is that humans have free will. Here is a quote from a book called 'Towards Understanding Islam' by S.A.A. Mawdudi:

" ‘Islam’ is an Arabic word and connotes submission, surrender, and obedience As a religion, Islam stands for complete submission and obedience to Allah [God] and that is why it is called ‘ISLAM’.
Everyone can see that the universe we live in is an orderly universe. There is law and order among all the units that comprise this universe.
EVEN in the human world the laws of nature are quite manifest. Man's birth, growth, and life are all regulated by a set of biological laws. He derives sustenance from nature in accordance with an unalterable law.

Man is so constituted that there are two aspects of his life: two distinct spheres of his activity. One is the sphere in which he finds himself totally regulated by the Divine Law. He cannot budge an inch or move a step away from it. Nor can he evade it in any way or from. In fact, like other creatures, he is completely caught in the grip of the law of nature and is bound to follow it.

But there is another sphere of his activity as well.
He has been endowed with reason and intellect.
He has the power to think and form judgments, to choose and reject, and to adopt and spurn. He is free to adopt whatever course of life chooses. He can embrace any faith, adopt any way of life and formulate his living according to whatever ideologies he likes. He may prepare his own code of conduct or accept one formulated by others. He has been bestowed with free will and can chalk out his own course of behavior.
In this latter aspect, he, unlike the other creatures, has been given freedom of thought, choice, and action.

Both these aspects distinctly co-exist in man’s life.

In the first he, like all other creatures, is a born Muslim, invariably obeys the injunctions of God, and is bound to remain so.
As far as the second aspect is concerned, he is free to become or not to become a Muslim.
Here he has been given the freedom of choice-and it is the way a person exercises this freedom, which divides mankind into two groups: believers and non-believers.

An individual who chooses to acknowledge his Creator, accepts Him as his real Master, honestly and scrupulously submits to His laws and injunctions and follows the code He has revealed unto man for his individual and social life, thereby becomes a perfect Muslim.
He has, so to say, achieved completeness in his Islam by consciously deciding to obey God in the domain in which he was endowed with freedom and choice.

Now his entire life has become one of submission to God and there is no conflict in his personality. He is a perfect Muslim and his Islam is complete-for this submission of his entire self to the will of Allah is Islam and nothing but Islam.

He has now consciously submitted to Him whom he had already been unconsciously obeying.
He has now willingly offered obedience to the Master whom he already owed obedience unintentionally. "

Follow the link for the complete book: it's excellent reading!

msite.com/books/tui/tui.html

[Whifflingpin]

RH: "Evil has no potentiality to exist since it cannot have existence of itself, only in something else. A crude example: a hole in a shirt is a real hole but it does not exist in itself, only in terms of the shirt."

Whiff: "Exactly the same could be said of goodness, so it is only a matter of faith or opinion that one can be said to be more real than the other, or that one might be described as a presence and the other as an absence."


RH: "I don't see how one could in all seriousness maintain that the same could be said of goodness. Are we to believe that every empty space is merely a hole awaiting a shirt?"

Ha ha - only Douglas Adams would know the answer to that one.
But there is still no particular reason (outside of some reilgious faith) to suppose that goodness has an existence any more or less independent than that of evil. Neither can function in itself - or maybe both can.


Whiff: "Common experience, regardless of the opinions of some Church Fathers, is that evil, like good, is an active driving force, not a mere negative. Shaw(?) commented "for evil to triumph it is sufficient for good men to do nothing." This has the ring of truth, and implies that evil is independent and active. "

HR: "Common experience also tells us the world is flat, that the sun rises instead of the earth revolving, and that there is such a thing as centrifugal force (there isn't). That some perceive evil as an active driving force is not an argument that evil is such a thing."

Of course it is an argument - not a proof, but at least basis for a working hypothesis. To deny the active power of evil is like denying the roundness of the earth having watched a ship go over the horizon. The evidence of evil is simply not accounted for by regarding evil as an absence or a void.

[RichardHresko]

I find your views to be quite interesting.
I agree with what you say.
In Islam, the belief is that humans have free will. Here is a quote from a book called 'Towards Understanding Islam' by S.A.A. Mawdudi:

" ‘Islam’ is an Arabic word and connotes submission, surrender, and obedience As a religion, Islam stands for complete submission and obedience to Allah [God] and that is why it is called ‘ISLAM’.
Everyone can see that the universe we live in is an orderly universe. There is law and order among all the units that comprise this universe.
EVEN in the human world the laws of nature are quite manifest. Man's birth, growth, and life are all regulated by a set of biological laws. He derives sustenance from nature in accordance with an unalterable law.

Man is so constituted that there are two aspects of his life: two distinct spheres of his activity. One is the sphere in which he finds himself totally regulated by the Divine Law. He cannot budge an inch or move a step away from it. Nor can he evade it in any way or from. In fact, like other creatures, he is completely caught in the grip of the law of nature and is bound to follow it.

But there is another sphere of his activity as well.
He has been endowed with reason and intellect.
He has the power to think and form judgments, to choose and reject, and to adopt and spurn. He is free to adopt whatever course of life chooses. He can embrace any faith, adopt any way of life and formulate his living according to whatever ideologies he likes. He may prepare his own code of conduct or accept one formulated by others. He has been bestowed with free will and can chalk out his own course of behavior.
In this latter aspect, he, unlike the other creatures, has been given freedom of thought, choice, and action.

Both these aspects distinctly co-exist in man’s life.

In the first he, like all other creatures, is a born Muslim, invariably obeys the injunctions of God, and is bound to remain so.
As far as the second aspect is concerned, he is free to become or not to become a Muslim.
Here he has been given the freedom of choice-and it is the way a person exercises this freedom, which divides mankind into two groups: believers and non-believers.

An individual who chooses to acknowledge his Creator, accepts Him as his real Master, honestly and scrupulously submits to His laws and injunctions and follows the code He has revealed unto man for his individual and social life, thereby becomes a perfect Muslim.
He has, so to say, achieved completeness in his Islam by consciously deciding to obey God in the domain in which he was endowed with freedom and choice.

Now his entire life has become one of submission to God and there is no conflict in his personality. He is a perfect Muslim and his Islam is complete-for this submission of his entire self to the will of Allah is Islam and nothing but Islam.

He has now consciously submitted to Him whom he had already been unconsciously obeying.
He has now willingly offered obedience to the Master whom he already owed obedience unintentionally. "

Follow the link for the complete book: it's excellent reading!

msite.com/books/tui/tui.html

This is an area in which I see virtually complete agreement between Islam and Christianity. Augustine, in developing his doctrine of free will, argues that true free will is to choose to follow the will of God. The reasoning goes as follows (somewhat simplified, but considering Augustine wrote over 5 million words I hope to be forgiven):
1. we have free will (I won't go into his proof of that, which is contained in de libero arbitrio
2. We exercise our free will to get what we desire.
3. we desire happiness.
4. True happiness is obtainable only from that which is eternally good and true and beautiful.
5. True happiness is therefore obtainable only by turning (technical term 'convertio' = converting ) to God.
6. Thus when we exercise our will in any other direction it is not truly our free will but an error in will. Just as tripping is not a voluntary motion.

True freedom, according to Augustine, is when we freely submit to God.
I look forward to reading the book you referenced. Thanks!