Comments on: The Problem of Evil Defined and Refuted http://www.imperishableinheritance.com/2005/the-problem-of-evil-defined-and-refuted/ Mon, 26 Jul 2010 17:21:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Apep http://www.imperishableinheritance.com/2005/the-problem-of-evil-defined-and-refuted/comment-page-1/#comment-6507 Apep Thu, 03 Jan 2008 02:00:45 +0000 http://www.siolon.com/lama/?p=63#comment-6507 so Chris how would you like to continue? Im glad you actually discuss this sensibly instead of just censoring me or insisting you are right without proving it. Its good for yourself to question or test your beleifs. so Chris how would you like to continue? Im glad you actually discuss this sensibly instead of just censoring me or insisting you are right without proving it. Its good for yourself to question or test your beleifs.

]]> By: Chris http://www.imperishableinheritance.com/2005/the-problem-of-evil-defined-and-refuted/comment-page-1/#comment-358 Chris Mon, 20 Jun 2005 03:00:10 +0000 http://www.siolon.com/lama/?p=63#comment-358 Evil does already exist? Are you denying in an existential fashion? No where in my analogy does it say that the father hit the child, where are you getting that? God is not the author of sin if nothing else on the bases of James 1:13. You need to explain your questions more. I did explain, through Biblical exposition, why God does indeed ordain evil. Evil does already exist? Are you denying in an existential fashion? No where in my analogy does it say that the father hit the child, where are you getting that? God is not the author of sin if nothing else on the bases of James 1:13.

You need to explain your questions more. I did explain, through Biblical exposition, why God does indeed ordain evil.

]]> By: Daniel http://www.imperishableinheritance.com/2005/the-problem-of-evil-defined-and-refuted/comment-page-1/#comment-343 Daniel Mon, 13 Jun 2005 03:42:58 +0000 http://www.siolon.com/lama/?p=63#comment-343 Good thoughts from a Calvinist perspective. However, it just doesn't work for me. The examples of Bill and the father presuppose that evil already exists. They don't explain why God should cause/allow evil to exist in the first place. In my opinion, it seems like a better illustration of your answer would be if God, as a father, hit his child 'causing his child's nose bleed and hurts the child further by stopping the bleed without anesthetic. Why did the father need to hit his child in the first place? Why would a loving father cause pain in order that he can later fix it? I don't know how you get around the logical conclusion that God is the author of sin. You've just redefined God's goodness. You've denied the first premise of the argument. "If God is perfectly good (omni-benevolent), He would desire to abolish evil." Now you have an all-powerful God, but He isn't good. Good thoughts from a Calvinist perspective. However, it just doesn’t work for me. The examples of Bill and the father presuppose that evil already exists. They don’t explain why God should cause/allow evil to exist in the first place. In my opinion, it seems like a better illustration of your answer would be if God, as a father, hit his child ‘causing his child’s nose bleed and hurts the child further by stopping the bleed without anesthetic. Why did the father need to hit his child in the first place? Why would a loving father cause pain in order that he can later fix it? I don’t know how you get around the logical conclusion that God is the author of sin. You’ve just redefined God’s goodness. You’ve denied the first premise of the argument. “If God is perfectly good (omni-benevolent), He would desire to abolish evil.” Now you have an all-powerful God, but He isn’t good.

]]>