Does Evil Exist?
Published on September 8, 2007 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Religion
Got this story from a friend and thought it was quite thought provoking. Does evil exist or is it better stated that evil is just the absence of something good?



Let me explain the problem science has with religion." The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.

"You're a Christian, aren't you, son?"

"Yes sir," the student says.

"So you believe in God?"

"Absolutely."

"Is God good?"

"Sure! God's good."

"Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?"

"Yes."

"Are you good or evil?"

"The Bible says I'm evil."

The professor grins knowingly. "Aha! The Bible!" He considers for a moment. "Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?"

"Yes sir, I would."

"So you're good...!"

"I wouldn't say that."

"But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't."

The student does not answer, so the professor continues. "He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?"

The student remains silent.

"No, you can't, can you?" the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.

"Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?"

"Er...yes," the student says.

"Is Satan good?"

The student doesn't hesitate on this one. "No."

"Then where does Satan come from?"

The student falters. "From God"

"That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?"

"Yes, sir."

"Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?"

"Yes."

"So who created evil?" The professor continued, "If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil."

Again, the student has no answer. "Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?"

The student squirms on his feet. "Yes."

"So who created them?"

The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. "Who created them?" There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. "Tell me," he continues onto another student. "Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?"

The student's voice betrays him and cracks. "Yes, professor, I do."

The old man stops pacing. "Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?"

"No sir. I've never seen Him."

"Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?"

"No, sir, I have not."

"Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?"

"No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't."

"Yet you still believe in him?"

"Yes."

"According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?"

"Nothing," the student replies. "I only have my faith."

"Yes, faith," the professor repeats. "And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith."

The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. "Professor, is there such thing as heat?"

"Yes," the professor replies. "There's heat."

"And is there such a thing as cold?"

"Yes, son, there's cold too."

"No sir, there isn't."

The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. "You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees."

"Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it."

Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

"What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?"

"Yes," the professor replies without hesitation. "What is night if it isn't darkness?"

"You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word."

"In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?"

The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. "So what point are you making, young man?"

"Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed."

The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. "Flawed? Can you explain how?"

"You are working on the premise of duality," the student explains. "You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought."

"It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it."

"Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?"

"If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do."

"Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?"

The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

"Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?"

The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.

"To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean."

The student looks around the room. "Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?" The class breaks out into laughter.

"Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir."

"So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?"

Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.

Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. "I guess you'll have to take them on faith."

"Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life," the student continues. "Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?"

Now uncertain, the professor responds, "Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil."

To this the student replied, "Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil. Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God's love present in his heart. It's like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light."

The professor sat down.


"

Comments (Page 6)
7 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7 
on Sep 13, 2007
I'm curious....WHY is the way I talk about the Lord God so disturbing to you?


I just told you, because of what you sometimes say about Him. I am sure you mean well and good. but read what you say in comment # 56:



As you know, KFC and I are presently discussing certain Scriptural passages that pertain to God's desire that all be saved. #56 is a further explanation.


Even though Almighty God, His Laws, and written and oral Revelation is unchangeable, Christians believe we progress in the knowledge of the mystery of God, His Laws, as well as His Revelation.


Discussing Scripture and what it means and how it applys to daily living is one way Christians share their faith...and progress in the knowledge of the mystery of God.


on Sep 13, 2007
LULA POSTS:
I take it these messengers that you speak of here are God's prophets. In this case, yes, I agree the message is from God, therefore inspired and that it contains no error whatsoever. (btw, although every writer of Sacred Scripture was not a prophet per se, Christians believe every writer was inspired and that's why we believe the whole of Sacred Scripture is inspired, not just the words that Christ spoke directly.)

What anyone, anyone says, that is not a messenger or a prophet, cant be taken as sacred or divine regardless of what any Church, Mosque or Synagoue say. Period.

God do not allow regular humans to make sacred rules and concepts on His behalf.

You are equating a council of politicians and theologians with messengers and prophets and that is surely a great insult to the latters.


I am not equating anyone in the Church the God's prophets. I never have and never will. I am also not equating what anyone in the Chruch says or writes as sacred or Divine. I never have and never will.

All I have said is that when the Pope and the bishops in union with him declare or write in matters of doctrine (dogma)or morals ex cathedra, then as promised by Christ, and by the guidance of the Holy Spirit, we can be absolutely sure that what they have declared is without error; in other words it is the truth.
on Sep 13, 2007
LULA POSTS:
The Church's dogmatic statements are not the same as God's self-revelation. They are the medium through which Catholics place their faith in God. For example, the mystery of the Blessed Trinity which we've discussed at length is a Church dogma.


That is what i mean by "disturbing" lula.

The Church states a "Dogma" which is not based on any of God's Direct Revelation and the Dogma is called Scared just like God's revelations.

to me that is very disturbing because i think you mean well but these statements dont convey that at all. may be i am wrong. I hope others look at what you say with less scrutiny.


Think ALoud,

Thank you for thinking I mean well, I think the same of you.

Scrutiny is fine with me.

Speaking of scrutiny, look again at the parts I've highlighted.

and then go back to what I said earlier.

The basic doctrines, or dogmas of the Church are the verbal expressions of what God has revealed to us about our relationship with Him. The key characteristic of the Church's dogmas is that they agree with Sacred Scripture. The teachings spell out the unchangeable content of Revelation, translating into knowledge that we can understand. Church dogma is a statement of truth of God's self-communication and whose purpose is to bring Christ closer to us.


It's clearly stated that the Church's dogmas are not the same as God's Revelation rather they are verbal expressions based upon God's Revelation which is Sacred Scripture and Tradition.


The messengers are very few, like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph , Moses, Jesus, David, and all the other very special names we all know.


Now finally, I think I'm beginning to understand why you find what I say disturbing.

It's becasue you believe the Qur'an is God's direct Revelation which teaches something entirely different than Sacred Scripture which I believe is God's direct Revelation.

For example, whenever there are differences, the Qur'an trumps Sacred Scripture, right? All thinking and all interpretation must agree the Qur'an.

As long as I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ and the authenticity of Sacred Scripture and you believe in the teachings of Muhammad and the authenticity of the Qur'an, it's plain and simple, we'll not have agreement in any of these areas of discussion.

The teachings of the Qur'an are meant to be understood as Muhammad bringing the last revelation. That, in turn, means clearly to pass judgment on the Christian dogma of Christ's Divinity.

Here, you place our Lord and our God, Jesus Christ, as a mere messenger, as one in a line of God's prophets.

Now, to me that's disturbing!

on Sep 14, 2007
For example, whenever there are differences, the Qur'an trumps Sacred Scripture, right? All thinking and all interpretation must agree the Qur'an


That applies to all of God's revelations. I am not talking about one particular Revelation. God's Direct revelations Trumps everything else. Any interpretations must agree with what He said. This is supposed to be a given for any religion: The Original message IS the Criterion. Anything else is an opinion.


The teachings of the Qur'an are meant to be understood as Muhammad bringing the last revelation. That, in turn, means clearly to pass judgment on the Christian dogma of Christ's Divinity.

Here, you place our Lord and our God, Jesus Christ, as a mere messenger, as one in a line of God's prophets.

Now, to me that's disturbing!


Again, I am not discussing Qura'an. I am talking about the Bible itself which includes Torah and Ingil. You read What these two books say and interpret it in a completely different way from what the original texts say. That is my point regardless of what Qura'an say. The problem is that your intrpretation is based on what the writers of the bible say not on what Jesus himself said. Entrusting the message to his followers doesnt mean they have the authority to Add, Change or manipulate its meaning.

whether Jesus is a God or a Messenger is not the issue. That is not really important at all since it is related to who God is. That we all will know later. It doesnt affect His Commands, His Unique nature and so on. We all free to imagine God anyway we like. I have no problem with that at all.

When you say "God needs our help" it makes him a being who needs help, regardless of who He is, Jesus or otherwise. Same applies when you say He didnt Create Everything. These are the points i am talking about. The nature of God is something I dont think any human is qualified to even discuss. But then again that shouldnt affect the way we think of Him as ALL Mighty and All Knowing or Awesome as KFC like to say. If He is that, and i think we agree on it, then we cant say He needs help or He didnt Create everything. If we do, then we are contardicting ourselves.That is my point.

I think # 74 is a clear example of what I am talking about.

on Sep 14, 2007
I'm afraid the story is rather bad and teaches us nothing but bad logic.

It is true that there is no such thing as "cold" or "darkness". They are not opposites of "heat" and "light" but the absence. However, that doesn't prove or even imply that good and evil have the same relationship.

You can measure heat but you cannot measure cold. But you can measure good and you can measure evil. The absence of good is the same as the absence of evil, it is the absence of free will.

If I give a poor man a dollar, I am good. If I give him more, perhaps teach him to fish while feeding him, I am better. If I take his only dollar away from him, I am evil. If I murder him, I am more evil. If I ignore him and do nothing (assuming that nothing bad will happen to him because of my non-action), I am neither good nor evil. However, I can measure both good and evil. Evil is not the absence of good.

Evil is not the absence of G-d either. G-d made both good and evil. G-d created free will. Without free will there is no good or evil. A rock falls because of gravity, not because it wants to or because of malice or because it wants to help build a house in the valley. It just falls. The rock is neither good nor evil. It is not "evil" as in "absence of good", it is no moral agent at all. It gives a clear zero on the good-o-metre. Evil gives negative numbers.

The professor's brain and Jesus are both invisible to us, yet we can tell that the brain exists (the professor appears to use it) and we can assume that Jesus existed (why not). But to claim that either the professor's brain or Jesus, apart from existing, also have or had supernatural powers, that requires faith. Believing that they exist requires deducation or induction. It is a difference.

Also, evolution can be observed. I assume the author either didn't know or found the other statement more convenient for the flow. Evidence for animals that once have existed and today exist in other forms does exist and we can see it. You can also observe evolution in a lab in bacterial cultures. Heck, you can write a computer program that will simulate a system that kills of unfit agents and allows fitter agents to multiply and change and you will observe evolution there. Saying that evolution cannot be observed is ignorance.

As for the professor's argument about there being evil in the world while G-d doesn't act and hence He is not good, that has been rebuked a hundred years ago.

G-d did act.

He made us.
on Sep 14, 2007
LULA POSTS:
For example, whenever there are differences, the Qur'an trumps Sacred Scripture, right? All thinking and all interpretation must agree the Qur'an






Think Aloud Posts:

That applies to all of God's revelations. I am not talking about one particular Revelation. God's Direct revelations Trumps everything else. Any interpretations must agree with what He said. This is supposed to be a given for any religion: The Original message IS the Criterion. Anything else is an opinion.


THink Aloud,

This is all well and good, but it doesn't answer my question.





THINKALOUD POSTS:
The messengers are very few, like Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph , Moses, Jesus, David, and all the other very special names we all know.


LULA POSTS:
The teachings of the Qur'an are meant to be understood as Muhammad bringing the last revelation. That, in turn, means clearly to pass judgment on the Christian dogma of Christ's Divinity.

Here, you place our Lord and our God, Jesus Christ, as a mere messenger, as one in a line of God's prophets.

Now, to me that's disturbing!


Think alous posts:

Again, I am not discussing Qura'an. I am talking about the Bible itself which includes Torah and Ingil.


The word "Bible" to me is the OT and NT canon of Sacred Scripture. Sacred Scripture isn't limited only to the five Books of the Torah and the four Gospel accounts. Besides these there are 64 more Books, each and everyone of them written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit just as Moses, St.Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

Isn't it the teachings of the Qur'an that say that the Bible itself includes Torah and Ingil? That none of these other Books matter according to the Qur'an.
on Sep 14, 2007
Think Aloud posts:
whether Jesus is a God or a Messenger is not the issue. That is not really important at all since it is related to who God is. That we all will know later. It doesnt affect His Commands, His Unique nature and so on. We all free to imagine God anyway we like. I have no problem with that at all.





Maybe it's not the issue or important to you but it's EVERYTHING to me. Jesus Christ IS God and I am basing that more than on my own mere imaginings. The sacred text of St.John calls the Son of God "the Word".

"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was is the beginning with God; all things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life, and the Life was the light of men. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it."

Again, everything you argue comes from the basis of the teachings in the Qur'an. What the Qur'an says, goes with you...it trumps everything else. It's the last word. That's why you put Christ in the middle of a line-up of prophets, that's why you say it's not the issue or it's not important if Jesus is a God or a Messenger.

Of course it's of monumental importance to understand that Jesus Christ is God; it does indeed affect His Commands, His Unique nature and so on.


ThinkAloud Posts:

In the same paragraph, first you say this
"God ....regardless of who He is, Jesus or otherwise.


and then you say this:
The nature of God is something I dont think any human is qualified to even discuss.


Isn't this an example of you doing what you think shouldn't be done?

This has gotten nonsensical at this point.

As far as # 74 is concerned, we'll have to agree to disagree God created Satan and evil.
on Sep 14, 2007
LEAUKI POSTS:
Without free will there is no good or evil. A rock falls because of gravity, not because it wants to or because of malice or because it wants to help build a house in the valley. It just falls. The rock is neither good nor evil. It is not "evil" as in "absence of good", it is no moral agent at all. It gives a clear zero on the good-o-metre. Evil gives negative numbers.


Hello Leauki,

There is no doubt that free will figures into the evil vs good debate. Having said that, you'll have to come up with something better than an inanimate object such as a rock as an example to make your point. A rock has no free will, not life, not a conscience, not a soul, not good or evil.

G-d made both good and evil.


Please explain how, when, where, etc. Almighty God made evil. Genesis tells us everything He made was "good". I always thought evil entered the world when Adam and Eve committed Original Sin.

Also, evolution can be observed.


Yes, most agree that micro evolution, that is within the same kind or species can be observed.




on Sep 15, 2007
I always thought evil entered the world when Adam and Eve committed Original Sin.


yes Lula but I imagine he's saying because God created free will he in a sense created the availability of evil.

Evil comes from man who exercises his free will.

Also, evolution can be observed.


not macro evolution. There is nothing that I'm aware of that we can observe from one species to another. It's a matter of faith, not observance.
on Sep 16, 2007
This is all well and good, but it doesn't answer my question.


Yes it does. Every revelation trumps all of its interpretations that doesnt agree with it. Also each revelation trumps all others as far as the believers in it are concerned. Nothing wrong with that. Of course followers of each one Believe it is the ONE. We are not discussing that.

Isn't it the teachings of the Qur'an that say that the Bible itself includes Torah and Ingil? That none of these other Books matter according to the Qur'an.


Qura'an doesnt even address those 64 books. it only talks about Torah and Enjile.

It is me who believe that those 64 books are opinions of true believers but that doesnt make it Divine. i dont think the authors of those books intended them to be Divine either. Each religion has its own scholars, and their opinions are respected but not treated as divine. That is where you and I differ. In every religion there are scholars who among themselves differ in understanding of the same verse in any message. each of them is subject to be correct or not.

If you treat ALL of them as divine, that is where you get into contradiction. That is what i am trying to point out.
on Sep 16, 2007
Maybe it's not the issue or important to you but it's EVERYTHING to me. Jesus Christ IS God and I am basing that more than on my own mere imaginings. The sacred text of St.John calls the Son of God "the Word".


I didnt say it is not important to you. It is not relevent regarding the point we are discussing which is what God say and what attributes He has. For example how what He is relevent to whether He created everything or not?

Isn't this an example of you doing what you think shouldn't be done?


I dont think we as humans are capable of discussing God's Nature. By definition we are His creation, can a creation have a grasp of the Creator? i dont think so. You apparently think otherwise. I guess you have more trust in the human brain than I do.

What the Qur'an says, goes with you...it trumps everything else.


I never used what the qura'an said to argue about what the bible say. I am only pointing out the difference between what you say and what the Bible say. we can differ on that but not because i am refering to Qura'an. I am using the Bible itself in arguing what God said in the Bible and how you understand it.

on Sep 16, 2007
Genesis tells us everything He made was "good". I always thought evil entered the world when Adam and Eve committed Original Sin


you see what i mean here Lula?

yes Everything He made is "good". you take that as it must be good from our human perspective. But that is a very limited view of Good and Evil. God's view of good is certainly wider than ours. He only knows why an Evil is Good for the whole system of universe that He created. Why did He create germs and viruses?

For Evil to enter the world they MUST exist before they do that? dont you agree? They cant just enter while they were not there. Can they?

This has nothing to do with Qura'an. It is how you understand what the Bible say. The fact that He created everything Good, doesnt contradict that Evil is part of that. Why is Evil Good for the Universe He created? God only knows. May be it is a necessary requirement for the universe to operate. like how can we choose if there was no Evil? or how we appreciate health if there was no illnesses. or how can we recognize beauty if there was no ugliness and so on. Or may be it is something different entirely. God only knows what is the reason.

I look at it this way: Sometimes a designer (and i am sure it is more so for a creator)find it necessary to include in the design something that looks, to the casual observer, as very odd or bad or even Evil but the designer put it there for a reason i.e. to make the system works the way he wanted it to operate.

A very simple example we all know very well and curse vehemently is Software Crash. That is for sure an Evil code from the software engineer. But the engineer put it there to protect the rest of the system even though it sometimes results in losing all of your day's work. and may be you lose an important goal because of that. Still it was necessary to include that Evil code and it IS GOOD programming.
on Sep 17, 2007
LULA POSTS:
Genesis tells us everything He made was "good". I always thought evil entered the world when Adam and Eve committed Original Sin


THINK ALOUD POSTS:
yes Everything He made is "good". you take that as it must be good from our human perspective. But that is a very limited view of Good and Evil.


Well, if Genesis tells me that everything God made was "good", then since I believe Genesis is the Word of God, it's very easy for me to believe it is true. Therefore, based on Genesis, when I say that all God created was "good", that isn't my own persepctive, rather, all I'm doing is agreeing with God's own account as related in Genesis.

Of course, without doubt, God's view of good (and virtually everything else for that matter) is wider than mine, but all I'm going by is His word in Genesis.

He only knows why an Evil is Good for the whole system of universe that He created.


Think Aloud,

Here, you say "an Evil is Good"? No, it's not...evil is not good. No way, no how, no where is evil good.

Now with this you've added an entirely new premise to the discussion.

God didn't create evil, however, He permits it in this world.

God is Perfect and Infinite Goodness and everything that God created is "good". If He permits evil of any kind, it's only becasue He knows that He can draw greater good from it in the end.


Why did He create germs and viruses?

For Evil to enter the world they MUST exist before they do that? dont you agree? They cant just enter while they were not there. Can they?


To my way of thinking, He didn't create germs and viruses just as He didn't create evil.

In the case of human beings, these started with Adam misuse of his free will in disobeying and abandoning God.

In Genesis 2:12, God warned Adam that if he ate of the "tree of knowledge of good and evil" he would "surely die". The Hebrew translated, "you shall surely die", actually means, "dying you will die". In other words, immediate spiritual death would be followed by a process of physical decay eventually in bodily death. Up until this time of Adam's sin and God's punishment, there was no such thing as death, suffering, bloodshed and disease. All these came into the world as a consequence of sin.

Evil and it's manifestations can be explained and traced back to Adam's representative sin.
on Sep 18, 2007
Here, you say "an Evil is Good"? No, it's not...evil is not good. No way, no how, no where is evil good.

Now with this you've added an entirely new premise to the discussion.


you should have highlighted the whole sentence not just a part of it. I asked "...why an Evil is Good for the whole system ....?". From human's point of view, Evil can never be good. but from God's POV it must be part of the good since everything He craeted IS good. I gave you an example of that

God didn't create evil, however, He permits it in this world.


He didn't create germs and viruses just as He didn't create evil.


Let's for the sake of discussion say that your thinking is correct, the obvious question becomes: Who created them?

Lula, if it makes you more comfortable not to think about thes questions, it is ok. I just wanted to alert you to the problem that this way of thinking causes specially for people who dont believe in God.

Therefore, based on Genesis, when I say that all God created was "good", that isn't my own persepctive, rather, all I'm doing is agreeing with God's own account as related in Genesis.


No one is disagreeing with what God said. The question is what does that mean?. Good only from our human point of view which excludes Evil from good? or from God's point of view which is related to the whole system He created and that includes Evil as a necessary part for the Goodness of the whole system?

Evil and it's manifestations can be explained and traced back to Adam's representative sin.


again, no one disputes that. the question is where did this Evil come from?





on Sep 18, 2007
Here, you say "an Evil is Good"? No, it's not...evil is not good. No way, no how, no where is evil good.

Now with this you've added an entirely new premise to the discussion.


you should have highlighted the whole sentence not just a part of it. I asked "...why an Evil is Good for the whole system ....?". From human's point of view, Evil can never be good. but from God's POV it must be part of the good since everything He craeted IS good


Okay, fair enough. By saying an Evil is Good, I mistakenly thought you were intentionally adding a new premise to the discussion. I can see now that you aren't and we have some common ground on this point.

the question is where did this Evil come from?


To me, evil comes from sin and sin of angels is greater than that of Adam. The first sin entered into the world by Satan when He was cast down to earth. Sin is the greatest of all evils for all the other evils came into the world by sin...starting with Adam.

The punishment of Adam and Eve reveals to us the infinite justice of Almighty God. Their sin is the sin of the whole human race; therefore the evil consequences of their sin have passed down to all mankind. We are now all subject to suffering, disease and death and no one can attain to Heaven if our Divine Redeemer had not died for us.

Think of the many passions that hold sway over man..the countless diseases..and tears which are shed..the terrible disasters by fire water and earthquake, and war itself...all these are the consequence of sin...how terrible then is the justice of God?
7 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7