The PoE - Where did it start? God’s Problem of Evil

Once again, @peanut has provided a segue to the next step, which is actually the first step in understanding the solution to the Problem of Evil.

@Peanut said: “Perhaps they had to “sin” (minor edit) because God’s Redemption plan, planned before the creation of the world, would otherwise not come to fruition.

Jesus was the Lamb slain for sin before the foundation of the world. That sacrifice wouldn’t have occurred if Sin wasn’t meant to enter the world through Adam.”

This is the definition of the GPoE:

“In every case that God carries out His decree to create a rational person who has morally relevant freedom of choice, the possibility of evil comes into existence at that same time.”

God is the foundation and source of all true logic. Valid logic is good, and right, and true because God is good and right and true. Logic allows us to describe entailments that must be true, because of the truth value of a set of premises.

As an analogy, valid mathematics allows us to write equations and find a true answer. 5 + 3 always adds up to 8. Mathematics are also an outflow of God’s existence and nature.

A rational person is someone who uses logic, facts, and reason, rather than just emotion or impulse, to make sound judgments, solve problems, and understand the world.

GPoE is simply the recognition that when God creates a free-will, rational person (capable of reciprocal love), the possibility that that person will choose to make an evil choice is an unavoidable entailment. God cannot create a free rational person who cannot sin, by definition.

Many who address the “problem of evil” will point out that because humans have free will, evil seems inevitable. In Alvin Plantinga’s paper “God, Freedom, and Evil”, which he calls the “freewill defense” rather than a theodicy, he describes the dilemma in that way. This is a logically posterior approach.

The logically anterior approach is to recognize that in any possible world, with any possible rational person (angels, for example) that God might create, it holds true that the created rational person could possibly sin.

A possible person for whom this entailment would not hold would be deficient in some way, or still a baby. Like someone in a persistent vegetative state, or extremely low IQ, and so on.

This is a big deal. If God plans (as Peanut pointed out) for a bride for His son, a family of believers, eternal heaven of redeemed saints, then God is entailed, by His very nature (He cannot deny Himself) to provide a Savior. Planned from before the foundation of the world, again as Peanut pointed out. Our God is worthy! Praise His holy name! He knew the suffering that lay ahead, and He loved us so much!

All comments are welcome!

Your brother

Bro @Pater15
WOW! You sure are “spinning plates”. How many threads are you maintaining right now. I can’t keep track of which ones to respond to. I’m a simple man, I know.

I really thought we covered this idea, a while back, as we examined this revelation from Romans:

For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it in hope; because the creation itself also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption, the redemption of our body. (Rom 8:20-23)

Is this not what @Peanut is pointing out?

Additionally, just to make things “murkier”…
The final volume of a mixture containing 5 oz of methanol and 3 oz of water is approximately 7.74 fluid ounces, and not 8oz. So…

Why bring up this anomally? Because we have been instructed:

But Jesus looked at them and said to them, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” (Matthew 19:26 and Luke 18:27)

I’m suggesting, not everything that is considered impossible in the world in which we live and conduct our experiments is also impossible with God. I DO understand your insistence on “necessary logical entailments”, and I’m not discounting them. Only reminding us that in the metaphysical, strange things can still be true.

KP

Yes of course you are correct, we’ve had this discussion. And I appreciate your willingness to re-visit it.

We re-visit to establish the context of the PoE discussion, pointing out that there is a central reality that everything else falls out of.

With God, it’s impossible for Him to do anything that’s evil, tolerate any evil in His presence, tempt to evil - any of those things. But He loves so much, He demonstrates His love, redeeming a bride for His son from amongst evil doers, giving all who would believe eternal life with Him. That’s how He makes it possible.

Yep exactly - I agree.

With that as a beginning point, we’re turning to look at the persons He created. So that’s the process of our examination of humans. And I totally agree - a redeemed human is a different animal from an unredeemed. Our investigation centers on A&E because they were the first, created directly out of mud by God’s hands, and called “very good” by Him.

Spinning plates? Ha ha yeah, I’ve been spinning these plates in my head for going on 15 years now in some way or another.

And, notwithstanding some anomaly of material reactions, 5+3 is still always 8. You can count on that ha ha!

Your brother

a basic beginning fact is that Adam and Eve genuinely had ‘ free will ‘, they could choose to obey or to disobey God. They could freely and willingly love God, they were not programmed or compleled to love or to obey.

They were truly innocent as they did not not evil and being innocent they were manipulated by the devil into disobeying God.

A last point, not about how to answer the problem of evil but about the fact that we have answers to this question.

Its a question often thrown out by atheists, the problem of a Good God and evil/suffering.

While we have an answer the atheist doesn’t, he has to borrow Christian morality in order to have a standard of good/evil, but in assuming there is no God he has not only lost his benchmark but still has to resolve the problem of evil/suffering in the world.

1 Like

Bro. @Pater15

Yes, I see your point.

The nuance I was noticing was their familiar proclivity to disobey. No one has ever escaped the gravity of sin, not even our near-perfect prototype parents. We have far less excuse, and should feel far greater shame, we who have great advantages – warnings in the written Word of God, the failures of our ancestors, the perfect example of our Savior, and the indwelling seal of God Himself. We have supernatural safe-guards against sin, and we still fall into that hole from time to time. If we cannot seem to keep ourselves unspotted, apart from the cleansing grace of The Word, having learned full-well the eternal consequences (wages) of sin, how would we ever expect the most beautifully naïve teenagers to properly weigh the outcome of disobedience against the enticing promises it offered?

Just my morning think.
KP

1 Like

Hello my friend(s) I have an especially busy week - all day traveling today. I know it’s a low blow to start a thread(s) and not attend to them. I’ll jump in as I’m able!

Your brother

1 Like

No rush. We have eternity to dwell on these great truths.
Pleasant travels
KP