Evil is not a problem. Your presupposition is.

[UnreasonableFaith]

Do you struggle to reconcile apparent ubiquitousness of evil with the existence of omnibenevolent god? Why would you then presuppose god's ombinebevolence? Why would you presuppose something that adds insult to injury? It's equivalent of presupposing that atoms don't exist and then trying to come up with explonations for all phenomenas that are best described by atomic model of matter. Obviously we don't do science job in this manner, we don't presuppose that something is true for the fact and then try to adjust everything else so that everything somehow holds water. Of course to some extent scientist try to find possible solution of the problem, but when it's clear it requires too much unjastified adjustments they dump it.

So if you admit that there in fact is evil, then why you still presuppose god is good? And yes, you're presupposing it Bible isn't proof at all in this case. If god is evil for example, it's obvious he would try to deceive us into believing he is good and wouldn't give away his real character.

You don't have even good reason to presuppose it, in case of logic for example we know it's unimaginable to us to not use logic, yet we can't account for it in any imaginable way so we presuppose it. But what reason other than "I would not like god to be evil" do you have to presuppose its benevolence?

[Harvey]

You don't have even good reason to presuppose it, in case of logic for example we know it's unimaginable to us to not use logic, yet we can't account for it in any imaginable way so we presuppose it. But what reason other than "I would not like god to be evil" do you have to presuppose its benevolence?

I think logic is one place to start. If we agree that the arguments for God's existence are successful in terms of convincing us of God's existence (or we are ourselves convinced of God's existence by our own personal encounters), then it only makes sense that an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent being would be good. First off, they wouldn't accomplish anything by being evil since they could satisfy whatever they wanted just by being omnipotent. In addition, being omnscient/all-intelligent they would know how pain affects sentient beings, and therefore they would be able to put themselves in that being's position to understand that "what it is like" is painful and therefore not desirable unless there was something more important to accomplish. An evil being would seem to lack such omniscient/all-intelligence.

I suppose it is still possible to be all-intelligent and omniscient and still be rotten to the core, but it also doesn't strike me as a consistent being since evil brings misery and misery means that there is something that the being is not able to have. But, they are omnipotent! So, it just some that an omnipotent would put themselves in a position where they lack.

Another major factor is that we know from our own experience that it feels good to help others. While this may not translate to a higher power, it is certainly possible that goodness and the byproduct of being good is a universal that applies to any type of being.

[UnreasonableFaith]

First off, they wouldn't accomplish anything by being evil since they could satisfy whatever they wanted just by being omnipotent.

I think I could ask the same about good. What does god acomplish by being good? What does god accomplish by anything? He already accomplished everything.

In addition, being omnscient/all-intelligent they would know how pain affects sentient beings, and therefore they would be able to put themselves in that being's position to understand that "what it is like" is painful and therefore not desirable unless there was something more important to accomplish. An evil being would seem to lack such omniscient/all-intelligence.

I don't quite understand that part. Omniscient evil god could put himself in position of human and experience how it is like to be affected by evil. So what? Why evil being would care about it?

Why you say evil being would lack omniscient? That's part that I don't understand at all. Is it conclusion from your previous statement that evil god would somehow care about other's people experience?

I suppose it is still possible to be all-intelligent and omniscient and still be rotten to the core, but it also doesn't strike me as a consistent being since evil brings misery and misery means that there is something that the being is not able to have. But, they are omnipotent! So, it just some that an omnipotent would put themselves in a position where they lack.

I have hard time with this passage too:/ How being evil puts one in position of not being able to have something? I don't understand what thing could you mean. I think what you meant is that if a being encounters evil it is likely to suffer misery. It's not the same case as simply being evil.

Another major factor is that we know from our own experience that it feels good to help others. While this may not translate to a higher power, it is certainly possible that goodness and the byproduct of being good is a universal that applies to any type of being.

How is it an objection? Evil god doesn't  exclude the existence of good in the same way as good god doesn't exclude the existence of evil. Also I could say the same about evil. We feel it's bad to harm others.

[Harvey]

I think I could ask the same about good. What does god acomplish by being good? What does god accomplish by anything? He already accomplished everything.

Psychological well-being in humans seems to be benefited by altruism and volunteerism from studies that have been done. Again, this might get back to a consistency thing where being able to see someone is in pain and relieving that pain is part of being able to see oneself in their shoes. Thus, God may himself "benefit" by being consistent. I put benefit in quotes since there just wouldn't exist another possible world where he just wouldn't be acting any other inconsistent way. This is what we ought to expect of a being that can only act in ways that are consistent with a higher being having this level of consciousness.

I don't quite understand that part. Omniscient evil god could put himself in position of human and experience how it is like to be affected by evil. So what? Why evil being would care about it?

Well, like I said, a being could be rotten to the core, but in that case the being would be acting inconsistently to what would be logical and hence contrary to being all-intelligent. It is not logically consistent to know that you gain nothing from torturing or allowing torture when you would gain by not torturing or allowing torture. As I said above, what a divine being would gain by being good is being consistent with how they would want to be treated if they were in those exact circumstances. After all, is this not one of the main reasons why we come up with human morality? Why would it be any different for an all-intelligent being? The only exception is that if by allowing torture a greater degree of happiness were to be achieved, and that suffering was a blip compared to an eternity of happiness, then it would make sense for such a being to temporally allow suffering.

Why you say evil being would lack omniscient? That's part that I don't understand at all. Is it conclusion from your previous statement that evil god would somehow care about other's people experience?

If an evil being were acting inconsistent to what they would want themselves, then either they wouldn't be a logical/all-intelligent being, or perhaps they simply lack omniscience like a full-blown omniscient being would possess.

I have hard time with this passage too:/ How being evil puts one in position of not being able to have something? I don't understand what thing could you mean. I think what you meant is that if a being encounters evil it is likely to suffer misery. It's not the same case as simply being evil.

Evil brings misery because it is destructive and eventually self-destructive. In the case of a divine being, by denying that aspect of doing harm when you, yourself, wouldn't want to be harmed, then you're being inconsistent. In that case, that is an inconsistent mind. An inconsistent mind brings misery because it starts wanting and not wanting similar things, and this brings lack of having something.

How is it an objection? Evil god doesn't  exclude the existence of good in the same way as good god doesn't exclude the existence of evil. Also I could say the same about evil. We feel it's bad to harm others.

The point is that we have evidence that doing intentional harm when there are no overall reasons to benefit those suffering leads toward a meaningless existence. Thus, there's no reason to not believe being good is the default state which leads to a more meaningful existence. The reason we have to think that evil (or co-existing of good and evil) is not a default state is that as I said above the evil leads to inconsistency which is contrary to what we mean by a default state. A default state is one of consistency. This is why God is a necessary being. He is completely consistent whereas a non-God conceivable reality is one in which is not consistent. Consistency and existence are intrinsically tied together. For example, if x=x and x=~x, then x doesn't exist since "~x" means that if we take x away. Thus, by saying x=~x we are saying that if we have x, and then take x away, we have the same situation if x would have been there. Thus, x doesn't exist. Similarly, if an inconsistent God (an evil god) were to exist, then it would be similar to x=~x. It cannot exist, which means that only God can exist since the only consistent reality is based on there being a consistent (all-good) God.

[jayceeii]

uf: Do you struggle to reconcile apparent ubiquitousness of evil with the existence of omnibenevolent god?

jc: Indeed, there is not one good man today, not one. Another way to put this is that there is no refuge for the truly good. Still another way is that the moment one becomes good, all jobs are denied. If you write down “goodwill” on a job application, you can forget it.

uf: Why would you then presuppose god's ombinebevolence?

jc: This is a valid question against the theologians, but especially when they haven’t proven themselves good. If they are not good, what does it mean if they say God is good?

uf: Why would you presuppose something that adds insult to injury? It's equivalent of presupposing that atoms don't exist and then trying to come up with explanations for all phenomena that are best described by atomic model of matter.

jc: Again, it’s a valid point. There is no goodness on Earth today, that points to God. Such goodness as exists is resolved in the quest of a selfish man, to raise a big family.

uf: Obviously we don't do science job in this manner, we don't presuppose that something is true for the fact and then try to adjust everything else so that everything somehow holds water.

jc: God’s goodness can be seen, but only by casting the eyes away from the human population. The human body itself is a masterwork, and the lands of the Earth, splendid.

uf: Of course to some extent scientist try to find possible solution of the problem, but when it's clear it requires too much unjustified adjustments they dump it.

jc: Since God’s goodness cannot be glimpsed through society today, anyone who glimpsed it would need to be self-established in bliss, considering God in Aloneness. The human society rejects such a one violently. Men want a God who is good to their desire.

uf: So if you admit that there in fact is evil, then why you still presuppose god is good?

jc: This is correct, the theologians have no basis except in scripture, to think God is good. I haven’t found one solid contribution by theologians, seeking a God of their imagination.

uf: And yes, you're presupposing it Bible isn't proof at all in this case. If god is evil for example, it's obvious he would try to deceive us into believing he is good and wouldn't give away his real character.

jc: This is true too, God could be a deceiver and even the angels can never fully know about this. They compile long lists of evidence, that eventually become all-compelling. Yet the statement presupposes there is some realm of cooperation with God today, when there’s absolutely none anywhere on Earth. Today all stand as foes of God and the future.

uf: You don't have even good reason to presuppose it, in case of logic for example we know it's unimaginable to us to not use logic, yet we can't account for it in any imaginable way so we presuppose it. But what reason other than "I would not like god to be evil" do you have to presuppose its benevolence?

jc: If God created the soul, He gave it the power of logic and other rational powers, though these are corrupted in impure souls and no longer seem to stem from God. Yet the basic point here is devastating against theologians, presuming God must be good when evil is all around them, as well as in them. God must be better than that kind of goodness.

[jayceeii]

You don't have even good reason to presuppose it, in case of logic for example we know it's unimaginable to us to not use logic, yet we can't account for it in any imaginable way so we presuppose it. But what reason other than "I would not like god to be evil" do you have to presuppose its benevolence?

I think logic is one place to start. If we agree that the arguments for God's existence are successful in terms of convincing us of God's existence (or we are ourselves convinced of God's existence by our own personal encounters), then it only makes sense that an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent being would be good. First off, they wouldn't accomplish anything by being evil since they could satisfy whatever they wanted just by being omnipotent. In addition, being omnscient/all-intelligent they would know how pain affects sentient beings, and therefore they would be able to put themselves in that being's position to understand that "what it is like" is painful and therefore not desirable unless there was something more important to accomplish. An evil being would seem to lack such omniscient/all-intelligence.

I suppose it is still possible to be all-intelligent and omniscient and still be rotten to the core, but it also doesn't strike me as a consistent being since evil brings misery and misery means that there is something that the being is not able to have. But, they are omnipotent! So, it just some that an omnipotent would put themselves in a position where they lack.

Another major factor is that we know from our own experience that it feels good to help others. While this may not translate to a higher power, it is certainly possible that goodness and the byproduct of being good is a universal that applies to any type of being.

hy: I think logic is one place to start. If we agree that the arguments for God's existence are successful in terms of convincing us of God's existence (or we are ourselves convinced of God's existence by our own personal encounters), then it only makes sense that an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent being would be good.

jc: There are proofs that claims of “personal encounters with God” occur completely within the soul of the entity, and are not authentic interactions with the Deity. There’s the further issue that Christians claim the Holy Spirit “lives in them,” which appears to be an admission God enters their minds. They haven’t seen this may be because of their weakness.

hy: First off, they wouldn't accomplish anything by being evil since they could satisfy whatever they wanted just by being omnipotent.

jc: Every human manifests evil every day, in the belief he is accomplishing something! Evil does not know itself as such. As humans imagine a “good God” helping them, if God complies this will create harm for the neighbor today and for future generations too. As humans recommend God’s actions through prayer and entreaty, they’re calling down evil. Furthermore the fact that evil exists proves God is not omnipotent, in the shallow way the theologians conceive of being able to do anything He likes. The souls have deficiencies.

hy: In addition, being omnscient/all-intelligent they would know how pain affects sentient beings, and therefore they would be able to put themselves in that being's position to understand that "what it is like" is painful and therefore not desirable unless there was something more important to accomplish. An evil being would seem to lack such omniscient/all-intelligence.

jc: The Holy Spirit has not been interfering with man’s inhumanity to man, which is my point about there being no evidence that God is good besides the human body itself, and the planet itself (considered without the human population). God watched as immense cruelty has been perpetrated in the wars, but also as the homeless are not truly assisted. The argument here appears to hold logic, but we can’t find the being who is fulfilling it. Humans have absolutely no trouble causing woe to others, in fact they rejoice about this!

hy: I suppose it is still possible to be all-intelligent and omniscient and still be rotten to the core, but it also doesn't strike me as a consistent being since evil brings misery and misery means that there is something that the being is not able to have.

jc: Again the hypothesis isn’t supported by facts, since in the human case the misery of others brings joy, which is the whole cause and problem of man’s inhumanity to man. If you’re claiming to be a different kind of person, proofs are required that are not being manifested anywhere on the globe, justifying my claim there’s not one good man today. A shallow conception of misery is presented here, as lack of the fulfillment of desire. More dreadful things are occurring in the human psyche, that I’d characterize generally as being overwhelmed by social duties, a need to face others, that the human body brings.

hy: But, they are omnipotent! So, it just some that an omnipotent would put themselves in a position where they lack.

jc: You can’t look at the conditions on Earth and make the claim God is trying to satisfy Himself thereby. Instead we’re going from crisis to disaster to worse crisis, all the while Judgment looms, after which it may be possible to say God has had enough of human evil. The argument presented here twists peculiarly, and it isn’t clear we are talking about God anymore, instead about a human and his desire. Just so, the theologians are casting their own self-image large, imagining what they’d do with “all power,” not seeking God. The premise here appears to be that God would be miserable, did He cause creatures misery; but such is not the experience of men, and God is certainly free of the creatures.

hy: Another major factor is that we know from our own experience that it feels good to help others. While this may not translate to a higher power, it is certainly possible that goodness and the byproduct of being good is a universal that applies to any type of being.

jc: Again, the proofs are lacking. I see no evidence of this on Earth. What we find in “volunteerism” is the same conceited pretense we find in Christian charity, throw the dog in the street some food and call yourself great. You get an entirely different type of society, from the roots up, when the people rejoice authentically to see another in joy.

[Maxximiliann]

First, a common misperception must be clarified first. Many think of Almighty God as the ruler of this world, the one who is in direct control of everything that happens. “Not one atom or molecule of the universe is outside his active rule,” said the president of one theological seminary. But does the Bible teach that?

Not at all. Many are surprised to learn what the Bible says about who really is the ruler of the world. 1 John 5:19 reveals: “We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the Evil one.” (WNT) Who is this Evil one? Christ Jesus identified him as none other than Satan the Devil himself. (John 14:30) But that makes more sense, doesn’t it? After all, Satan is cruel, deceptive, and hateful — traits that underlie many of the causes for the suffering people experience all across the globe.

Why, though, would God allow Satan to rule?

Let’s use an illustration to help us better understand what’s going on exactly. For instance, just how might an adoring and capable mother or father feel if suddenly charged with being negligent and deceptive with their young children as well as abusing their authority over them? Would they disprove those slanderous allegations by assaulting their accuser? Certainly not! Without a doubt, by responding like this, they would give credibility to the charges.

This depiction helps clarify Jehovah God’s strategy for managing the challenge raised against him at the dawn of man’s historical past in a region identified as Eden. There God Almighty announced to the very first pair of human beings, Adam and Eve, a fantastic undertaking. These were to fill up the globe, take care of it, and thus transform it into a worldwide paradise. (Genesis 1:28)

Truly being a big-hearted Father, Jehovah handed Adam and Eve an exquisite haven with all of its succulent fruits. Just one tree, though, was not in bounds for them — “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.” By avoiding this tree, Adam and Eve would indeed display their absolute trust in their Father, accepting that he had the right to determine that which was good and evil for his children . — Genesis 2:16, 17.

Lamentably, one amongst God’s spirit sons, inspired by the want to be worshiped, led Eve to mistakenly believe that when she consumed the outlawed fruit, she would never perish. (Genesis 2:17; 3:1–5) And so, this evil angel, Satan, flagrantly contradicted God, in effect calling him a liar! To boot, Satan proceeded to accuse God of withholding critical facts from Adam and Eve. Humanity, Satan suggested, could determine on their own what was good and what was bad. Stated more forcefully, Satan charged God of being an unfit Sovereign and Father insinuating that he could perform a significantly better job himself if only given a chance.

Through the use of these astute and fatal mendacities, this angel fashioned himself into Satan the Devil. (From the ancient Hebrew his name means “Resister the Slanderer.”) But how did Adam and Eve respond to these outrageous allegations from this complete stranger? Did the profound love and gratitude they felt for their Father compel them to defend His honor vigorously? Did they berate him for even daring to insinuate their Father was anything but a kind, generous and loving God?

Far from it. Tragically, these ingrates chose to side with Satan and turn their backs on God. — Genesis 3:6.

True, Jehovah could have eradicated these rebels right then and there but bear in mind, as we already saw with our representation above, these kinds of issues can never be worked out with violent retaliation. Take into account too that when Satan confronted God Almighty, many angels were paying close attention to what was happening in Eden.

And so, by enticing Adam and Eve into deciding on autonomy from their Maker, Satan established a family who would, in fact, not be self-reliant but, as you see, live under his thumb. Prompted consciously or unwittingly by their “father,” the Devil, this family would be made to adopt his standards and values. (John 8:44)

Still, might this way of life bring them true liberty as well as enduring happiness? Jehovah understood full well that it would never. Even so, he left the rebels to go after their ill-fated ambition, for only by doing so could the dilemma brought up in Eden find a resolution for all time.

So, for upwards of 6,000 years now, humankind has erected one society after another, experimenting with more and more varieties of rulership and rules of behavior. What do you think of the results? Are you overjoyed with the outcome? Would you say the human family is happy, undisturbed, and united? Undeniably, the answer is absolutely no! In its place, wars, famines, catastrophes, disease, together with the unspeakable loss of life has besieged humanity, inflicting “futility,” “pain,” and “groaning,” much like the Holy Bible reported long ago. — Romans 8:19–22; Ecclesiastes 8:9. The people of the world have ruined “their lives by their foolishness [but] then are angry at the LORD.” -Proverbs 19:3 (NLT) (Bracket mine.)

Nonetheless, some might wonder, ‘Why has God not averted these disasters?’ Honestly, that would certainly be an injustice, as it would undoubtedly blur the issue by creating the impression that rebelling against God is without dangerous repercussions. Accordingly, Jehovah has not been in the background protecting against all the crimes and calamities that result, explicitly or in a roundabout way, from disobedience to him. Jehovah could never be party to the fatal myth that Satan’s approach could turn out well!

Notwithstanding, Jehovah has not been apathetic to what has befallen his creation. Truth be told, since the rebellion in Eden, he has been very active. Case in point, he inspired Bible amanuensis to document his assurance that a future “seed” would undoubtedly overthrow Satan and his failed rulership. (Genesis 3:15) On top of that, via that Seed, God would constitute a governing administration, a heavenly Kingdom, which would bless obedient ones, end all causes of misery and even death itself. — Genesis 22:18; Psalm 46:9; 72:16; Isaiah 25:8; 33:24; Daniel 7:13, 14.

As a step towards the fulfillment of these wonderful promises, Jehovah sent to the earth the One who would become the Ruler of that Kingdom; this one being none other than Jesus Christ, his very own Son. (Galatians 3:16) In accordance with God’s purpose for him, Jesus focused his teaching on God’s Kingdom. (Luke 4:43) In fact, Christ provided a living preview of what he would accomplish as King of that Kingdom. He fed the hungry by the thousands, healed the sick, resurrected the dead, and even showed his power over the natural elements by calming a violent storm. (Matthew 14:14–21; Mark 4:37–39; John 11:43, 44) Concerning Jesus, the Bible states: “No matter how many the promises of God are, they have become Yes by means of him.” — 2 Corinthians 1:20.

All those who listen to Jesus and come “out of the world” — the system of things that is estranged from God and ruled by Satan — are welcomed into Jehovah’s family. (John 15:19) Love governs this global family of sedulous Christians committed to peace and marked by their determination to eradicate any trace of bigotry and racism from its midst. — Malachi 3:17, 18; John 13:34, 35. Instead of upholding the views and ideals of the present world, sedulous Christians support and proclaim God’s Kingdom in obedience to Jesus’ command recorded at Matthew 24:14.

Now think: Who preach the “good news of the kingdom” worldwide? Who have refused, as a global spiritual family, to engage in warfare or participate in divisive national/tribal disputes? And who let God’s Word guide their conduct whether its lofty standards are popular or not? (1 John 5:3)

If you haven’t already done so, you would do well to find these and join them.


Source

[jayceeii]

First, a common misperception must be clarified first. Many think of Almighty God as the ruler of this world, the one who is in direct control of everything that happens. “Not one atom or molecule of the universe is outside his active rule,” said the president of one theological seminary. But does the Bible teach that?

Not at all. Many are surprised to learn what the Bible says about who really is the ruler of the world. 1 John 5:19 reveals: “We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world lies in the power of the Evil one.” (WNT) Who is this Evil one? Christ Jesus identified him as none other than Satan the Devil himself. (John 14:30) But that makes more sense, doesn’t it? After all, Satan is cruel, deceptive, and hateful — traits that underlie many of the causes for the suffering people experience all across the globe.

Why, though, would God allow Satan to rule?

Let’s use an illustration to help us better understand what’s going on exactly. For instance, just how might an adoring and capable mother or father feel if suddenly charged with being negligent and deceptive with their young children as well as abusing their authority over them? Would they disprove those slanderous allegations by assaulting their accuser? Certainly not! Without a doubt, by responding like this, they would give credibility to the charges.

This depiction helps clarify Jehovah God’s strategy for managing the challenge raised against him at the dawn of man’s historical past in a region identified as Eden. There God Almighty announced to the very first pair of human beings, Adam and Eve, a fantastic undertaking. These were to fill up the globe, take care of it, and thus transform it into a worldwide paradise. (Genesis 1:28)

Truly being a big-hearted Father, Jehovah handed Adam and Eve an exquisite haven with all of its succulent fruits. Just one tree, though, was not in bounds for them — “the tree of the knowledge of good and bad.” By avoiding this tree, Adam and Eve would indeed display their absolute trust in their Father, accepting that he had the right to determine that which was good and evil for his children . — Genesis 2:16, 17.

Lamentably, one amongst God’s spirit sons, inspired by the want to be worshiped, led Eve to mistakenly believe that when she consumed the outlawed fruit, she would never perish. (Genesis 2:17; 3:1–5) And so, this evil angel, Satan, flagrantly contradicted God, in effect calling him a liar! To boot, Satan proceeded to accuse God of withholding critical facts from Adam and Eve. Humanity, Satan suggested, could determine on their own what was good and what was bad. Stated more forcefully, Satan charged God of being an unfit Sovereign and Father insinuating that he could perform a significantly better job himself if only given a chance.

Through the use of these astute and fatal mendacities, this angel fashioned himself into Satan the Devil. (From the ancient Hebrew his name means “Resister the Slanderer.”) But how did Adam and Eve respond to these outrageous allegations from this complete stranger? Did the profound love and gratitude they felt for their Father compel them to defend His honor vigorously? Did they berate him for even daring to insinuate their Father was anything but a kind, generous and loving God?

Far from it. Tragically, these ingrates chose to side with Satan and turn their backs on God. — Genesis 3:6.

True, Jehovah could have eradicated these rebels right then and there but bear in mind, as we already saw with our representation above, these kinds of issues can never be worked out with violent retaliation. Take into account too that when Satan confronted God Almighty, many angels were paying close attention to what was happening in Eden.

And so, by enticing Adam and Eve into deciding on autonomy from their Maker, Satan established a family who would, in fact, not be self-reliant but, as you see, live under his thumb. Prompted consciously or unwittingly by their “father,” the Devil, this family would be made to adopt his standards and values. (John 8:44)

Still, might this way of life bring them true liberty as well as enduring happiness? Jehovah understood full well that it would never. Even so, he left the rebels to go after their ill-fated ambition, for only by doing so could the dilemma brought up in Eden find a resolution for all time.

So, for upwards of 6,000 years now, humankind has erected one society after another, experimenting with more and more varieties of rulership and rules of behavior. What do you think of the results? Are you overjoyed with the outcome? Would you say the human family is happy, undisturbed, and united? Undeniably, the answer is absolutely no! In its place, wars, famines, catastrophes, disease, together with the unspeakable loss of life has besieged humanity, inflicting “futility,” “pain,” and “groaning,” much like the Holy Bible reported long ago. — Romans 8:19–22; Ecclesiastes 8:9. The people of the world have ruined “their lives by their foolishness [but] then are angry at the LORD.” -Proverbs 19:3 (NLT) (Bracket mine.)

Nonetheless, some might wonder, ‘Why has God not averted these disasters?’ Honestly, that would certainly be an injustice, as it would undoubtedly blur the issue by creating the impression that rebelling against God is without dangerous repercussions. Accordingly, Jehovah has not been in the background protecting against all the crimes and calamities that result, explicitly or in a roundabout way, from disobedience to him. Jehovah could never be party to the fatal myth that Satan’s approach could turn out well!

Notwithstanding, Jehovah has not been apathetic to what has befallen his creation. Truth be told, since the rebellion in Eden, he has been very active. Case in point, he inspired Bible amanuensis to document his assurance that a future “seed” would undoubtedly overthrow Satan and his failed rulership. (Genesis 3:15) On top of that, via that Seed, God would constitute a governing administration, a heavenly Kingdom, which would bless obedient ones, end all causes of misery and even death itself. — Genesis 22:18; Psalm 46:9; 72:16; Isaiah 25:8; 33:24; Daniel 7:13, 14.

As a step towards the fulfillment of these wonderful promises, Jehovah sent to the earth the One who would become the Ruler of that Kingdom; this one being none other than Jesus Christ, his very own Son. (Galatians 3:16) In accordance with God’s purpose for him, Jesus focused his teaching on God’s Kingdom. (Luke 4:43) In fact, Christ provided a living preview of what he would accomplish as King of that Kingdom. He fed the hungry by the thousands, healed the sick, resurrected the dead, and even showed his power over the natural elements by calming a violent storm. (Matthew 14:14–21; Mark 4:37–39; John 11:43, 44) Concerning Jesus, the Bible states: “No matter how many the promises of God are, they have become Yes by means of him.” — 2 Corinthians 1:20.

All those who listen to Jesus and come “out of the world” — the system of things that is estranged from God and ruled by Satan — are welcomed into Jehovah’s family. (John 15:19) Love governs this global family of sedulous Christians committed to peace and marked by their determination to eradicate any trace of bigotry and racism from its midst. — Malachi 3:17, 18; John 13:34, 35. Instead of upholding the views and ideals of the present world, sedulous Christians support and proclaim God’s Kingdom in obedience to Jesus’ command recorded at Matthew 24:14.

Now think: Who preach the “good news of the kingdom” worldwide? Who have refused, as a global spiritual family, to engage in warfare or participate in divisive national/tribal disputes? And who let God’s Word guide their conduct whether its lofty standards are popular or not? (1 John 5:3)

If you haven’t already done so, you would do well to find these and join them.


Source

The problems of the world stem from God’s lack of authentic guidance in the religions. Or more properly, God decided not to bestow this guidance, giving up on authentic guidance. Men have been coddled and told fantastic fairytales, but the real meaning of the Garden of Eden fable is that men would make themselves the standard, deciding what good and evil are without allowing God’s input. God didn’t even try. It was known any such efforts would be doomed to failure, or have worse repercussions than no acts at all.

To offer some obvious examples, we don’t even know whether God approves of universal healthcare. We don’t know that He is definitely against war. If He had advice about how humans could overcome warlike tendencies, it wasn’t given. God gave no advice about the best political system, despite knowing human nature very well. No solutions have been presented for poverty or famine. We can ask too why there are different religions, and why none of these religions deals adequately with the others.

[Tom Paine]

You don't have even good reason to presuppose it, in case of logic for example we know it's unimaginable to us to not use logic, yet we can't account for it in any imaginable way so we presuppose it. But what reason other than "I would not like god to be evil" do you have to presuppose its benevolence?

I think logic is one place to start. If we agree that the arguments for God's existence are successful in terms of convincing us of God's existence (or we are ourselves convinced of God's existence by our own personal encounters), then it only makes sense that an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent being would be good. First off, they wouldn't accomplish anything by being evil since they could satisfy whatever they wanted just by being omnipotent. In addition, being omnscient/all-intelligent they would know how pain affects sentient beings, and therefore they would be able to put themselves in that being's position to understand that "what it is like" is painful and therefore not desirable unless there was something more important to accomplish. An evil being would seem to lack such omniscient/all-intelligence.

I suppose it is still possible to be all-intelligent and omniscient and still be rotten to the core, but it also doesn't strike me as a consistent being since evil brings misery and misery means that there is something that the being is not able to have. But, they are omnipotent! So, it just some that an omnipotent would put themselves in a position where they lack.

Another major factor is that we know from our own experience that it feels good to help others. While this may not translate to a higher power, it is certainly possible that goodness and the byproduct of being good is a universal that applies to any type of being.

Morality, good and evil, empathy, conscience all make perfect sense in evolutionary terms. However, on creationism, evolution is just a misconception and even if we accept that humans are evolved beings. God would still not be. So what sense does it make that a non evolved being would be empathetic or have any kind of conscience that would motivate it to be good? Isn't the projection of these human characteristics onto God kind of illogical? as such, I don't see any reason why we should presume that God is morally good. I'd also posit that the God depicted in much of the OT is anything but morally good.

[jayceeii]

Morality, good and evil, empathy, conscience all make perfect sense in evolutionary terms. However, on creationism, evolution is just a misconception and even if we accept that humans are evolved beings. God would still not be. So what sense does it make that a non evolved being would be empathetic or have any kind of conscience that would motivate it to be good? Isn't the projection of these human characteristics onto God kind of illogical? as such, I don't see any reason why we should presume that God is morally good. I'd also posit that the God depicted in much of the OT is anything but morally good.

Looking around for evidence that God is good or evil, the only evidence for evil is the works of men. Pull all humans save one out of the picture, and you’ve got an excellent body on a fantastic planet. To fail to understand the excellence of the human body is to fail to find basic joy in existence itself, which is to say one is more or less an ornery, cantankerous entity never pleased even by the superlative leaps this body supplies over the lives of the animals. Even pleasure is denied to animals, but it is not enough for man.

I’d say further that the goodness of God is outside the human purview. We can see from the paucity of the religious revelations that God has not respected man, which is to say He has not asked man to join intelligently in His project of building worlds for the long-term. God has judged men too evil to cooperate with Him, long before the Judgment the Bible foretells. All human ideation regarding God’s goodness takes place from lives that are fundamentally destructive, no one granting future generations the right to happiness.