Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Do you remember the biblical Flood? That's the answer to your question.
But everything is relative. Therefore, theologians will tell you a fairy tale that God did good by cleansing the earth of sin.
But for whom did he do good? For Noah and his family, and for those who haven't been born yet.
It's about them, God has done good. What about those who perished in the flood? Is this a good thing for them?
These considerations relate to the condition that God exists. In fact, it does not exist, and the definition of good and evil was invented by man. But even in real life, good and evil among people are relative.
Relatively everything, so you should specify a specific situation… For example, if God destroys the Devil (does evil), then it will be good for people.
If God is the opposite of the Devil,then logically not. But there can be no evil without good. These are two opposites that define each other, like light and dark, cold and heat, truth and lies, etc. Everything that creates a struggle of opposites where one exists while the other exists… Moreover, all these concepts are very relative, depending on why ,to what, when and why they are applied. And this application, from a certain angle, may even be the opposite of its original meaning. This means that-yes. Can. It depends on why and for what purpose it is done. This once again confirms the relativity of the concepts of good and evil. Now imagine all this reasoning about the Devil. Can he,with free will, do good?… And then the most important conclusion will follow… What do you say, gentlemen thinkers?
You have a twisted understanding of free will.
God's free will, as the Scriptures make clear, is precisely to do no evil.
So doing evil would be against His (free) Will.
It turns out that for the sake of your will, He must do evil so that you satisfy your desire (“curiosity”). That is, He needs to go against His free will, for the sake of your will.
Where is the freedom here?
This is slavery.
You want It to be on your parcels.
You have a twisted logic if you don't understand it.
No, it can't. Can a normal person in their right mind put out their eye or saw off their leg? Well, God is much wiser and more perfect than a normal person. He doesn't do anything evil or stupid, he just can't.
No, it can't. He is by nature wise and perfect, and this basically negates any possibility of evil. Imagine, for example, a healthy person. Can he just gouge out his eye or saw off his leg?
Can you imagine the power of someone who created a universe with billions of stars like the sun? He is all-powerful, he can do anything. But Its essence is love, justice, kindness, righteousness,mercy. He does not allow accidents,does not make mistakes,does not forget or lose sight of anything.
He will not plan evil! (James 1: 13) All His intentions are to put an end to evil forever and bring back to the earth for people a peaceful, measured,happy life in good, clean conditions. (Revelation 21: 3-5)
Another question that comes from a wrong understanding of God. God is not some mind in time/space that can do something. GOD.IS. all. He is simply everything, you, me, the table, the bugs, the grass, the sky, the stars, the dust. God is everything. It doesn't do anything, it's there.
In addition to free will, God simply has freedom. The question is twofold. In Christianity, evil is resistance to God. God does not resist himself. That is, He has the potential to do anything, but the very act of doing evil by God is absurd. In addition, Christianity has an understanding of different degrees of freedom. The highest is not to want to do evil. To suggest that God is not supremely free is absurd. Hence the conclusion: God has no restrictions on the commission of evil, but under no circumstances can circumstances develop in such a way that God's free will is directed to the creation of evil.
Can. But he doesn't want to. Evil is destructive and contrary to common sense. God has a PERFECTLY healthy head and a clear mind. Therefore, He will not do the stupid things that are common to people with their primitive minds.
“I form light, and create darkness, and make peace, and bring evil; I, the Lord, do all these things.”
The Book of Isaiah
God is the Creator of everything, including evil.
Conditions: omnipotence, omnipotence, omniscience, free will. I propose to take the definition of good and evil as follows: performing the kindest action possible is absolute good. Doing the most evil thing possible is absolutely evil. I will allow myself to change your question without losing its meaning: Can an all-good, all-powerful, omniscient being with free will perform absolute good with every action and never commit evil?
Solution: Let's see if the conditions match the problem. For full compliance, they should not contradict each other. So:
Omniscience lets you know which action is good and which is evil. Free will-allows you to make an informed choice. All-goodness is the quality that determines that the choice will be made in favor of the kindest of all actions. Each of these qualities does not contradict the others and corresponds to the task. But then it's a little more complicated.
Omnipotence … It all depends on how we understand it. If omnipotence consists in performing all possible actions, then it contradicts omnipotence and free will. If omnipotence is the ability to perform any of all possible actions, then it does not contradict any of the previous conditions, which means that God can always do good and never do evil.
Whoa-whoa take it easy. God do evil…
And you understand that God is the criterion of good and evil. What he did, he did. It can be evaluated by us in terms of good and evil.
But the criteria are given by them themselves. That's the fun of it.
In general this is a classic Platonic from Eftifron 10a
It's like the Gods do good because it's good, or it's good because it's what the Gods do.
Plato there (in the person of Socrates, of course) gives such an answer that the idea of good is more primary. But for Christians, God is primary, therefore…