Does Evilness around the World disprove God?

[Sami Zaatari]

salam to all! (except aaron and mtaffi and others like them :giggling: )

as you know atheists always say well how can God exist when there is so much violence and bad things happening in the world, from this they say God cant exist.

now an atheist will also say that evilness also shows that if God does exist he is incompetent since what is he doing cant he control his people!

http://muslim-responses.com/Does_Evilness_disprove_God/Does_Evilness_disprove_God_

this rebuttal throws this argument in the garbage bin and shows how contrdictory and inconsistent the atheist claim is!

 

[NoName55]

edit:

salam to all! (except aaron and mtaffi and others like them

)

why? did mtaffi nick your toys and gave them to Aaron?

 

[Isambard]

salam to all! (except aaron and mtaffi and others like them :giggling: )

as you know atheists always say well how can God exist when there is so much violence and bad things happening in the world, from this they say God cant exist.

now an atheist will also say that evilness also shows that if God does exist he is incompetent since what is he doing cant he control his people!

http://muslim-responses.com/Does_Evilness_disprove_God/Does_Evilness_disprove_God_

this rebuttal throws this argument in the garbage bin and shows how contrdictory and inconsistent the atheist claim is!

The arguement that you address doesnt apply to Islam, it applies to Christianity because of the doctrine of original sin and Jesus needed for forgiveness etc.

Evil dispelling God in regards to Islam can be highlighted in terms of non-man-made evils such as natural disasters, disease, etc.

Unlike christian doctrines, there is no original sin to contradict free-will in Islam, so why then have natural disasters, disease etc? No matter how righteous a community is, if a tornado blows thru it, itll be destroyed and its people killed. The Spanish Flu was indifferent to age, gender, religion or righteousness in killing its victems. What possible purpose is there for this?

Then there is the evil done in the name of God, both Islamic and otherwise. Why would God send down a set of rules that were so vague that so many would kill themselves over?

The strongest case in the arguement however are biological sociopaths. They are people literally born without a conscience or ability to sympathize. Their brains are often of a different structure than a normal human brian. In essence, (if he exists) God created evil men without the ability to change.

Anyways, I never liked the whole "evil disproves God" arguements. There are far more effective methods for disproving Allah. I would be more impressed if you had a response to the relativity of what constitues as evil.kay:

 

[ranma1/2]

salam to all! (except aaron and mtaffi and others like them :giggling: )

as you know atheists always say well how can God exist when there is so much violence and bad things happening in the world, from this they say God cant exist.

now an atheist will also say that evilness also shows that if God does exist he is incompetent since what is he doing cant he control his people!

http://muslim-responses.com/Does_Evilness_disprove_God/Does_Evilness_disprove_God_

this rebuttal throws this argument in the garbage bin and shows how contrdictory and inconsistent the atheist claim is!

it depends on the god.
all loving, all powerful all good god yes.
One that is not all 3 of these. No.

 

[Malaikah]

Unlike christian doctrines, there is no original sin to contradict free-will in Islam, so why then have natural disasters, disease etc? No matter how righteous a community is, if a tornado blows thru it, itll be destroyed and its people killed. The Spanish Flu was indifferent to age, gender, religion or righteousness in killing its victems. What possible purpose is there for this?

This reply would be relevant... it is with respect to the tsunami that happens a few years ago.

Question: In the recent Tsumani disaster, some people who had weak eman, had their faith shaken and it made them question the existence of God. Many of them in utter disbelief, attribute dhulm (transgression) to Allah, saying: How can Allah do this to us? How can we best answer this disbelief.

Answer: Firstly, as Muslims we must always think the best of Allah and know that Allah is the Just, the Wise and that his wisdom is greater than anything we can ever imagine. It is a part of our faith to never question something that happens, and to recognize that this is a part of Allah’s Wills, and no matter how devoid of good it might seem to us, Allah always has a reason for allowing something to happen.

We might not recognize the good that might come from it, but that is because, as humans, we have little foresight, whereas only Allah truly understands the wisdom and benefit behind something has tragic as the tsumani. The benefit that comes from it must be for the ‘greater good’, i.e. the good in it out ways the harm.

The story of Khidr (`alaihis salam) and Musa (`alaihis salam), mentioned in Surat Al-kahf is an excellent example of this. Allah had willed for a child to die, something which would be considered heartbreaking by many, especially the parents, and some weak in imam might actually turn against Allah is confront by such a calamity. However, in the particular story mentioned in the surah, the death of the child was actually a blessing to the parents, since if he had grown up he would have been a source of despair for them. Instead, Allah allowed the child to die in a state of innocence, protecting him from becoming an evil person in adulthood and protecting his parents from his evil, while replacing the child with another child who would be a source of comfort for the child.

The parents might not have known about the wisdom in this act, but the message is clear- a Muslim must place his faith in Allah and know that the calamity befalling him must only be for good, and also that is he is patient, Allah will expiate his sins via the sin. Thus, even though we might not be able to find a wisdom, we must accept that it is there and that Allah knows best what it is.

When a calamity befalls the ummah*, it might be that Allah is trying to preserve one of the five universal matters. So, with the example of the tsunami, a major sacrifice of life was made, and it must have been to preserve the deen** in some way, since the deen is the only matter that ranks higher than life.

Lastly, we know from the hadith of the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, that a Muslim who dies from drowning has the status of martyrdom, may Allah have excepted from them!

And Allah knows best.
​

*Nation, i.e. the Muslims collectively.
**religion/way of life, i.e. Islam

Then there is the evil done in the name of God, both Islamic and otherwise. Why would God send down a set of rules that were so vague that so many would kill themselves over?

It isn't vague, it is crystal clear, but people can twist anything if it meets their needs.

 

[asadxyz]

salam to all! (except aaron and mtaffi and others like them :giggling: )

as you know atheists always say well how can God exist when there is so much violence and bad things happening in the world, from this they say God cant exist.

now an atheist will also say that evilness also shows that if God does exist he is incompetent since what is he doing cant he control his people!

http://muslim-responses.com/Does_Evilness_disprove_God/Does_Evilness_disprove_God_

this rebuttal throws this argument in the garbage bin and shows how contrdictory and inconsistent the atheist claim is!

AA:
Being a muslim you should know where Allah promised that He will remove Evil from the world.If there is such Ayaa,I will be pleased to see.
It is the duty of human being to get rid of evils and keep peace and tranquility.
Allah has given us complete guidance about what to do and what not to do.
He who does good job ---------> rewarded
He who does evil job -----------> Punished
Best of luck

 

[Trumble]

this rebuttal throws this argument in the garbage bin and shows how contrdictory and inconsistent the atheist claim is!

Hardly.. there are far stronger versions of the - centuries old - free will defence against the problem of evil (such as Plantinga's), and even they are inconclusive... and note that even if they weren't the most that could be demonstrated is God can't be 'disproved' by the problem of evil, not that His existence is proven. The major purely logical flaw with 'your' approach is the assumption that absence of evil and free will are incompatible. An assumption is all it is. I exhibit "free will" in deciding to buy my daughter a gift. I exhibit "free will" in choosing whether to buy her a doll or a teddy bear. Neither choice is evil whatever your opinion on "good or bad" is likely to be. You, in fact, create a huge strawman yourself. In the context of this argument it is completely irrelevant whether Islam, Christianity or whatever teaches whether mankind is 'perfect' or not. The point is that an omnipotent God could have created them that way, and you fail to demonstrate that lack of free will must be a necessary consequence.

What is "good and bad"? You mention "fornication, strip clubs, drugs, and alcohol" as instances in which free will can be exhibited. Fine. What about earthquakes, fire, famine and flood? What "free will" have 'I' shown watching my family slowly starve to death? What "free will" would 'I' have had in being gassed to death, will millions of others, in Nazi concentration camps? Or maybe 'I' could be a child in Afghanistan and my limbs are blown off by a stray American bomb - what "free will" do 'I' show to deserve that?

Do you have any idea how painful it can be to die from some forms of cancer, Sami? Excepting, maybe, some cancers that are linked to lifestyle, nobody who gets them does so through "free will". A God might want them to to die to enter Paradise, but why should they suffer so? A 'test'? Of what? Is it entertainment for Him? Surely not, He is supposed to be benevolent, not a sadist. The 'rebuttal' collapses.

 

[Malaikah]

You are forgetting, Trumble, that God did not force this upon us, rather it is a Muslims belief that ALL of mankind accepted the offer. There can be no blame on God.

 

[Trumble]

You are forgetting, Trumble, that God did not force this upon us, rather it is a Muslims belief that ALL of mankind accepted the offer. There can be no blame on God.

Why should there be any 'offer'? Which "all of mankind" accepted it? I didn't. Where is the contract? Why should those of us who came afterwards be bound by what our ancestors did? Why was the "offer" necessary when God, being omniscient, would know the answer before even putting the question? Why could He not avoid choices that did not involve so much unnecessary pain and misery?

Sure, you can no doubt provide answers to all of those, albeit not ones I would find convincing. The point is, though, that your point is purely faith based with no non-religious source to support it. Against that you have the pain and suffering you see in the news, and indeed in people around you, every day. Suffering that a benevolent, omnipotent, God could have easily stopped without compromising free will even if you insist it must be preserved.

 

[Malaikah]

Why should there be any 'offer'? Which "all of mankind" accepted it? I didn't. Where is the contract? Why should those of us who came afterwards be bound by what our ancestors did?

We were created to worship Allah. Allah has His reasons for giving us the offer, I do not know what they are, other than that we were created to worship Him. I don't need to know anything else, if Allah did not tell us, then we do not need to know.

The point is that we agreed. you might not like it know, but you obviously had no problem with it when it was offered. It was a verbal agreement, and we all agreed to it, you and me both, I'm not sure of the details... it has something to do with us all being taken out of Prophet Adam and asked.

The point is, though, that your point is purely faith based with no non-religious source to support it.

*States the obvious*. You are asking a question about God and suffering, of course I am going to answer based on my religion. I don't need non-religious evidence, for religious issues we deal with religious evidence.

Against that you have the pain and suffering you see in the news, and indeed in people around you, every day. Suffering that a benevolent, omnipotent, God could have easily stopped without compromising free will even if you insist it must be preserved.

He does not want to stop it for a reason. He has His reasons, even if He doesn't share then with you and me (see my first post in this thread). this life was never designed to be perfect and care free- that is what Paradise is for. This life was created as a test, and there is no test in a life that is worry free.

Ultimate justice will be served by God, even if we have to wait a while to receive it.

 

[Trumble]

*States the obvious*. You are asking a question about God and suffering, of course I am going to answer based on my religion. I don't need non-religious evidence, for religious issues we deal with religious evidence.

Sami's 'rubuttal' was supposed to be on the basis of "logically studying and examining the facts", not on faith. It must be so for any atheist - his intended target - to take it seriously. Unless he can actually prove God exists, anyway.

The 'fact' is that I did not agree to this arrangement, or least I have no recollection of same - the idea that I and everybody else have somehow forgotten that we made a compact with God is so absurd it can be dismissed instantly. The 'fact' is that there is no evidence anybody has ever agreed to it. I understand your position, but a purely faith based view is useless as a counter to a logical, philosophical argument as all your opponent has to do is refuse to accept your premises.. which, when there is nothing whatsoever from non-religious sources to support them (and judging from your post even religious sources don't seem to have half the answers), is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. The 'rebuttal' fails just as much now as it always has - Sami is presenting (one side of) a very old argument!

 

[Malaikah]

Okay, I thought the argument was addressed to my own argument.

By the way Trumble, do you remember the day you were born, or the first few years of your life? I doubt it. Does they mean they never happened? Nope. Just like the agreement- we don't remember it, but it happened.

But, of course, you don't even believe in God, let alone the agreement... so never mind. One day you shall come to know...

 

[sevgi]

Sami's 'rubuttal' was supposed to be on the basis of "logically studying and examining the facts", not on faith. It must be so for any atheist - his intended target - to take it seriously. Unless he can actually prove God exists, anyway.

The 'fact' is that I did not agree to this arrangement, or least I have no recollection of same - the idea that I and everybody else have somehow forgotten that we made a compact with God is so absurd it can be dismissed instantly. The 'fact' is that there is no evidence anybody has ever agreed to it. I understand your position, but a purely faith based view is useless as a counter to a logical, philosophical argument as all your opponent has to do is refuse to accept your premises.. which, when there is nothing whatsoever from non-religious sources to support them (and judging from your post even religious sources don't seem to have half the answers), is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. The 'rebuttal' fails just as much now as it always has - Sami is presenting (one side of) a very old argument!

adding to what sis malaikah said..

the argument is a faith based one...it is an account of faith...it may be inetrpreted in many ways...but logically..i dnt think so..

i think what u are actually after i sproof that such an agreement was ever made. any proof we exhibit will instantaneoulsy be eradicated by any non-muslim...

to look for logic in such a faith based and supernatural account is in itself illogical.

 

[Skavau]

One of the most repeated claims and arguments by atheists to disprove the existence of God is the evil we see around the world. They often bring up war, torture, famine, rape, and all other forms of evil and then say well if God existed then none of this would be happening!

The opening paragraph is at fault. The Problem Of Evil proposes that if an omniscient and omnibenevolent God exists then there would not be injustice and moral evil throughout the world that we inhabit.

The Problem Of Evil does not disprove the concept of a God in its entirety.

They claim how can a perfect all-loving merciful God exist when such things are happening. Some of them then deduce from this that if God does indeed exist then he is doing a very bad job, and has messed everything up, and therefore is not even in need of worship nor attention since he cannot control his own creation.

Right. The more notable point though is that it is in contradiction with the attributes of the Theistic God.

The argument may sound appealing, however so the argument is a fallacy from the start, since it is using the fallacious method which is called "appealing to emotions" basically the person arguing here is appealing to a persons emotions rather than actually logically studying and examining the facts.

Except the the inconsistencies with the state of the world and the self-proclaimed attributes of God equal the fact which bring up the proposal of The Problem Of Evil .

Secondly the person arguing this case has committed a second fallacy, which is "straw man", basically the person who is making this argument has distorted and twisted what Islam really teaches about God and how he does things.

Actually, no. It isn't doing that at all. The Problem Of Evil does not necessarily have to focus on any Islamic teaching ideals. It only has to focus on the attributes of the traditional theistic God and then contrast them with the reality of human existence (or the existence of the planet).

Now what does Islam teach about God and his creation? Islam teaches us that God is perfect, he has no defects, he is free from all error and mistake, however so as far as creation goes then creation is not perfect, nor is creation free from error and mistakes.

Then 1 or 2 is the case.

1. God deliberately established creation in error (and therefore holds a fair amount of blame for establishing the circumstances of existence)

2. God made an error and the creation was not perfect. This cannot be so though as God is omniscient and therefore incapable of making a mistake, therefore 1 must necessarily be the case.

Hence when humans commit evil, and commit major sins, such as murder, mass thievery, and other major acts of evil this has nothing to do with God, it is not God's fault, it is the fault of that human being

Except that in a multitude of ways, it is precisely the fault of God. God created us (assuming God exists) and therefore is entirely responsible for the state of affairs that we live in.

A possible person named X in any world would always in all scenarios torture person B in scenario C. This is an immoral action and it is from person X himself, however - the existence of X is contingent and God does not need to create X. The circumstances of the action are also meaningless and also do not need to be actualised. God being omniscient would be able to prevent such moral evil and given benevolence would therefore prevent such evil.

This argument is entirely applicable in the case of all free actions. If person X tortures B then person X is creating circumstances for B For instance X actualises the circumstance of torturing and are responsible for such a circumstance. However though, the nature of person X and his response to scenario C is in question. It is clear that we have the makings of a causal chain here, with each free action being caused by the person's nature and the circumstance, the circumstance being caused by another free person, etc... until we reach the point where God begins this chain. God could have chosen to create another chain where it leads to virtue and would have been within God's power to do so and therefore God is ultimately responsible for the actions X

God is free from what this evil person has done because God does not sanction nor call for it.

But God creates it and with full knowledge of the results. God understands it its entirety what the eventual result of all 'free' actions will result in which brings into argument the next issue of actual free-will in the face of omniscience.

Now the atheist will resort to another tactic, after you tell him this he will say "well if God is perfect, all powerful, then why does he not make his creation perfect? Why does he allow such things to happen?"

Sort of.

Now the atheist is committing another major problem. Many will notice atheists often mock Islam for having so many rules on what to do and what not to do, they claim it is like a dictator. However so the atheist now wants God to become a complete dictator and control us humans and make us perfect!

Except that perfection in this case is being used to separate moral evil from moral righteousness. The point is that the existence of moral evil in any circumstance invalidates the case for benevolence in God, or the existence of a benevolent God itself.

God gave man free will, hence when you sin, and commit evil, it is because God gave you free will to do what you want, so basically the atheist now wants God to go back on giving us free will and to turn us into controlled robots!

We can now discuss the contradiction between free-will and omniscience.

Premise 1: Allah is Omniscient (Allah knows every event, every outcome and every fact)
Premise 2: Choice involves more than a single outcome. (If real choice exists then there must be the possibility to exist more than one resulting action from a consideration. For example if I decide to tie my shoes, then I should be equally able to decide otherwise. There should be an existing possibilities of me either tying my shoes or not tying my shoes which necessarily must result from my own choices for this to be an action of independent thought.)
Premise 3: Free-Will involves the ability to exercise choice (If Free-Will is asserted to exist amongst us, then there must be necessarily, the ability to uphold real choice (as highlighted above). I must have the ability to choose between action A and action B through my own ability to make real choice.)

A: Allah is proclaimed to be omniscient (Premise 1). Allah therefore knows the outcome of every action, event and has knowledge of every fact.
B: A human choice is an event. If I decide to go to the shops, then I am initiating a state of affairs.
C: If Allah knows the outcome of every event then he knows the outcome of every single human choice. (Premise 1)
D: If Allah knows the outcome of any future choice by any being, then the outcome described is the only possible outcome because:

D1: If any outcome from a human choice was different than Allah's knowledge then Allah would be wrong. This contradicts Premise 1​

D2: If Allah was wrong then Allah would not be omniscient.​

E: If any choice has only one outcome then there is no choice at all. (Premise 3) (Free Choice relies on the ability to do otherwise. Free-Will relies on the ability of choice. Both are made redundant by the existence of omnipotence contained within a single source (in this scenario: contained within God). If God is omniscient then God necessarily knows the result of all actions within humanity. If all actions within humanity are known then there is no such things as Free-Choice since the outcome has already been pre-seen. If this is the case then there is no Free-Will because Free-Will is dependent upon the ability to exercise choice.)
F: If every choice has only one outcome then there is actual no choice at all, only events.
G: If Allah is omniscient, then every choice is no choice at all. (Omniscience necessitates the ability of knowledge of all outcomes: past, present and future. This also necessarily leads to God knowing all future events that will happen. If all future events are known to happen, then all human choices are also known to happen. If all human choices are known to happen and cannot change then they lose the status of 'choice' and simply become rendered into events. As Premise 3 states, choice relies on the possibility of more than one specific outcome. If only a specific outcome can happen then there is no choice, only consequences of events. Only under omnipotence can this happen as all future 'choices' would already be known by the source which possesses omnipotence.)

If Allah is omniscient, then there is no free-will at all.

Also what is good and bad? When an atheist says why doesn't God stop all the bad evil going around the world what exactly is the atheist referring to? Because to a Muslim evilness includes fornication, strip clubs, drugs, and alcohol, yet to most atheists these things are okay and are not evil!

This is simply an unsubstantiated generalisation.

So therefore if the atheists want to stop the evil around the world, then the first thing they should do is accept God, accept his rules, accept his laws, accept everything he has told you, and after this they should call people to the same thing, because evil will only end when the entire society finally obeys God and his rules as they should be obeyed, yet hardly anyone is doing that and this is why the world is so corrupt.

Except that you must provide reason to believe in your understanding of what a God potentially is. You must provide moral reason, empirical evidence and/or unrivaled logic which verifies the necessity of a God, more specifically Allah.

Answer: Firstly, as Muslims we must always think the best of Allah and know that Allah is the Just, the Wise and that his wisdom is greater than anything we can ever imagine. It is a part of our faith to never question something that happens, and to recognize that this is a part of Allah’s Wills, and no matter how devoid of good it might seem to us, Allah always has a reason for allowing something to happen.

This is a great shame.

We might not recognize the good that might come from it, but that is because, as humans, we have little foresight, whereas only Allah truly understands the wisdom and benefit behind something has tragic as the tsumani. The benefit that comes from it must be for the ‘greater good’, i.e. the good in it out ways the harm.

The harm is not necessary if an omniscient and benevolent God exists.

The story of Khidr (`alaihis salam) and Musa (`alaihis salam), mentioned in Surat Al-kahf is an excellent example of this. Allah had willed for a child to die, something which would be considered heartbreaking by many, especially the parents, and some weak in imam might actually turn against Allah is confront by such a calamity. However, in the particular story mentioned in the surah, the death of the child was actually a blessing to the parents, since if he had grown up he would have been a source of despair for them.

This is unjust. This contradicts the assertion of free-will. The child in this story has been willed to die and has been seen to be a 'source of despair'. If there is free-will then how could it be the case that the child in this story could only actualise a specific state of affairs from his or her own choice? Choice depends on the ability to freely choose between any number of actions in any given circumstance. This is undermined in its entirety here.

Allah allowed the child to die in a state of innocence, protecting him from becoming an evil person in adulthood and protecting his parents from his evil, while replacing the child with another child who would be a source of comfort for the child.

Given Allah is omniscient and supposedly concerned for the affairs of humankind, then Allah could just as well ensure the children does not grow up to become evil, but instead grows up to become virtuous.

When a calamity befalls the ummah*, it might be that Allah is trying to preserve one of the five universal matters. So, with the example of the tsunami, a major sacrifice of life was made, and it must have been to preserve the deen** in some way, since the deen is the only matter that ranks higher than life.

It however, was completely unnecessary considering the omniscience of Allah.

You are forgetting, Trumble, that God did not force this upon us, rather it is a Muslims belief that ALL of mankind accepted the offer. There can be no blame on God.

In the case of Allah's existence, it is entirely Allah's fault. He actualised all states of affair and therefore began the causal chain.

It is also completely false to state that mankind accepted the offer.

We were created to worship Allah. Allah has His reasons for giving us the offer, I do not know what they are, other than that we were created to worship Him. I don't need to know anything else, if Allah did not tell us, then we do not need to know.

But the more important point is that you claimed we accepted the offer.

When did we accept it?

The point is that we agreed. you might not like it know, but you obviously had no problem with it when it was offered. It was a verbal agreement, and we all agreed to it, you and me both, I'm not sure of the details... it has something to do with us all being taken out of Prophet Adam and asked.

If I agreed in such circumstances I am unaware of it and Allah would have known my eventual disagreement with the 'offer' and therefore he is forcing it upon me under pain of hellfire?

He does not want to stop it for a reason. He has His reasons, even if He doesn't share then with you and me (see my first post in this thread). this life was never designed to be perfect and care free- that is what Paradise is for. This life was created as a test, and there is no test in a life that is worry free.

The test is completely meaningless. God knows the result of all events and we have no free-will to do anything other than what God knows so under Islam there is no meaning to any test.

 

[sevgi]

lets think of the titanic....

lets take an ideal case...coz thats what God is claimed to be.

was the titanic not perfect? yes.it had no flaws.(so to speak)God is also perfect so his creations must be perfect.

he chose ppl to board it..he gave some the opportunity and also gave them free will.

then what happened. ppl boarded it.
a stupid guy, believes in himself too much, and makes the ship go faster in order to reach its destination sooner.there is your 'evilness'...

then..external factor jumps in...ice berg...the ship is going to fast to swerve in time..so bang...shipwreck...dead ppl...

God put that berg there right?he put that man on that ship right? he created that man flawed right?

whos fault is it? there are three options..1)God. 2) the evil man aboard. 3) the ice berg.
all signs point bak to God coz he is the creator of all and is meant to be flawless...

so what do we say? that god doesnt exist...or that god is evil.

there is howvever..something called common sense and good moral.

god is kind enuf to give his creations free will...isnt that nice of him. noone would like their free will taken away. so we say thank u to god,...

then we move on...and see all these bad things hapening in the world...oh no.ppl are using their free will in a bad way. this is becoz god is testing all to see if they are worthy for heaven...

is it his fault that we utilise our gift of free will for evil doings? we are meant to be greatful for being given this gift.

it slike a kid drawing on the walls and when mummy comes and gives u a death stare, u stupidly point at the non-existent imaginary being next to u...or in another case, u say god gave me these hands so he made me do it!!!

if he took it away, we'd hate him...he gives it to us, we hate him...man...tough croud.....besdies hating him...we say he doesnt exist....

maybe soon he will give up on us and forget that we exist...

 

[Skavau]

was the titanic not perfect? yes.it had no flaws.(so to speak)God is also perfect so his creations must be perfect.

I believe the Titanic did have flaws actually.

he chose ppl to board it..he gave some the opportunity and also gave them free will.

He chose them to board it? Where is their choice in this then?

then what happened. ppl boarded it.
a stupid guy, believes in himself too much, and makes the ship go faster in order to reach its destination sooner.there is your 'evilness'...

then..external factor jumps in...ice berg...the ship is going to fast to swerve in time..so bang...shipwreck...dead ppl...

God put that berg there right?he put that man on that ship right? he created that man flawed right?

Ultimately, God is entirely responsible for the state of affairs concerning the Titanic crash. He did not have to create the Titanic less so need to create the Iceberg. He started the causal chain.

whos fault is it? there are three options..1)God. 2) the evil man aboard. 3) the ice berg.
all signs point bak to God coz he is the creator of all and is meant to be flawless...

God is the cause of both the iceberg and the evil man aboard.

so what do we say? that god doesnt exist...or that god is evil.

A lot more options than that.

god is kind enuf to give his creations free will...isnt that nice of him. noone would like their free will taken away. so we say thank u to god,...

Of course this is irrelevant and impossible. God still caused all states of affairs and still had foreknowledge of what all events would result in. This brings me back to the Free-Will vs. Omniscience contradiction.

Omniscience necessitates the ability of knowledge of all outcomes: past, present and future. This also necessarily leads to God knowing all future events that will happen. If all future events are known to happen, then all human choices are also known to happen. If all human choices are known to happen and cannot change then they lose the status of 'choice' and simply become rendered into events. Choice relies on the possibility of more than one specific outcome. If only a specific outcome can happen then there is no choice, only consequences of events. Only under omnipotence can this happen as all future 'choices' would already be known by the source which possesses omnipotence.

So there is no Free-Will. I address this a lot more in my previous post on this thread.

then we move on...and see all these bad things hapening in the world...oh no.ppl are using their free will in a bad way. this is becoz god is testing all to see if they are worthy for heaven...

Ignoring that the concept of Hell is completely unjust - the complete lack of free-will in the Islamic world view makes all 'tests' by God completely meaningless being all events known.

 

[sevgi]

I believe the Titanic did have flaws actually.

thats why i said 'so to speak...u must read all the way thru.

He chose them to board it? Where is their choice in this then?

the next sentence sates..he gave them the opportunity..u must read all the way thru.

Ultimately, God is entirely responsible for the state of affairs concerning the Titanic crash. He did not have to create the Titanic less so need to create the Iceberg. He started the causal chain.

thats what i said...

God is the cause of both the iceberg and the evil man aboard.

thats what i said...u must read all the way thru,,..i said all signs point to God

A lot more options than that.

what are they?

Of course this is irrelevant and impossible. God still caused all states of affairs and still had foreknowledge of what all events would result in. This brings me back to the Free-Will vs. Omniscience contradiction.


Omniscience necessitates the ability of knowledge of all outcomes: past, present and future. This also necessarily leads to God knowing all future events that will happen. If all future events are known to happen, then all human choices are also known to happen. If all human choices are known to happen and cannot change then they lose the status of 'choice' and simply become rendered into events. Choice relies on the possibility of more than one specific outcome. If only a specific outcome can happen then there is no choice, only consequences of events. Only under omnipotence can this happen as all future 'choices' would already be known by the source which possesses omnipotence.

So there is no Free-Will. I address this a lot more in my previous post on this thread.

this is where we part in our views,,,i say he also caused free will

Ignoring that the concept of Hell is completely unjust - the complete lack of free-will in the Islamic world view makes all 'tests' by God completely meaningless being all events known.

if u wanna go on believeing that u dnt have free will go for it (thats ur free choice)...i love my free will and my democracy and all that individualist stuff...i still dnt get what u believe in if u dnt believe in free will..?

you seemed to repeat everything i had said and meant all the way thru...untill free will...but u werent aware of it...

 

[Skavau]

thats why i said 'so to speak...u must read all the way thru.

I have a habit of responding to each point bit by bit.

the next sentence sates..he gave them the opportunity..u must read all the way thru.

See above.

thats what i said...

See above.

thats what i said...u must read all the way thru,,..i said all signs point to God

See above.

what are they?

Any. The conclusion could be that an omniscient and benevolent does not exist. Perhaps the conclusion is that a malevolent God exists instead.

The Problem Of Evil only address benevolence and omniscience.

this is where we part in our views,,,i say he also caused free will

How?

There is a contradiction between free-will and omniscience. You have not addressed that contradiction I have outlined.

if u wanna go on believeing that u dnt have free will go for it (thats ur free choice)

I do believe I have Free-Will, for I do not adhere to the Islamic world view or any similar world view with the same circumstances.

The argument is that the Islamic world view has no free-will.

i love my free will and my democracy and all that individualist stuff...i still dnt get what u believe in if u dnt believe in free will..?

Did you even read what I typed regarding it? I said that Free-Will is impossible in the Islamic World view because of the contradiction with an attribute of God: omniscience. I will copy it out again so you can address it.

Omniscience necessitates the ability of knowledge of all outcomes: past, present and future. This also necessarily leads to God knowing all future events that will happen. If all future events are known to happen, then all human choices are also known to happen. If all human choices are known to happen and cannot change then they lose the status of 'choice' and simply become rendered into events. Choice relies on the possibility of more than one specific outcome. If only a specific outcome can happen then there is no choice, only consequences of events. Only under omnipotence can this happen as all future 'choices' would already be known by the source which possesses omnipotence.

 

[sevgi]

I have a habit of responding to each point bit by bit.


See above.

fair enuf

See above.
fair enuf

See above.

fair enuf
Any. The conclusion could be that an omniscient and benevolent does not exist. Perhaps the conclusion is that a malevolent God exists instead.

The Problem Of Evil only address benevolence and omniscience.

i was putting forward options as to who could be blamed for the titanic affair...not how else we can define god in order to come up with new options.
How?

There is a contradiction between free-will and omniscience. You have not addressed that contradiction I have outlined.

omniscience is the ability to know all...etc.

in islam, we believe that god knows what choice we are gna make...but does not intervene in any way...we pre destines our life..putting in forks along the way, at which we, using our free will, make a choice, and continue or lives...its like those goosebumps books we used to read in primary school...
I do believe I have Free-Will, for I do not adhere to the Islamic world view or any similar world view with the same circumstances.

The argument is that the Islamic world view has no free-will.
see above
Did you even read what I typed regarding it? I said that Free-Will is impossible in the Islamic World view because of the contradiction with an attribute of God: omniscience. I will copy it out again so you can address it.

yes i did...i just wanted u to expand...i think there was a misundastanding so...fair enuf...

Omniscience necessitates the ability of knowledge of all outcomes: past, present and future. This also necessarily leads to God knowing all future events that will happen. If all future events are known to happen, then all human choices are also known to happen. If all human choices are known to happen and cannot change then they lose the status of 'choice' and simply become rendered into events. Choice relies on the possibility of more than one specific outcome. If only a specific outcome can happen then there is no choice, only consequences of events. Only under omnipotence can this happen as all future 'choices' would already be known by the source which possesses omnipotence.

i agree BUT........

They can be changed in islam...oh uve got that all wrong,...they dnt need to be altered coz we make them ourselves...but yes, god knows what we will chose as i stated above...in islam there is a nite called the 'baraat' night..wen we believe a stamp is put on the fate of every individual for that year to come...any prayers made, any charity given etc before that, or throughout that year yeild the potential to change or even eradicate what god has written down...
(sorry to confuse u)
also we belieev that it is all written as we live it...but god knows what we will chose.its not written and stamped like a stage script...where in the world did u get that idea?

 

[Md Mashud]

Lets make this simple. Does the existance of God have any correlation or means for a World to be without evil? Ofcourse not. So, to answer your initial question, No.

Also, someone has not grasped this freewill thing. Just because God know's what you will do doesn't mean you did not decide to do it - its not a complex subject.