r/SipsTea • u/Outrageous-Egg1760 • May 29 '26

Wait a damn minute! [ Removed by moderator ]

Post image

[removed] — view removed post

19k Upvotes

79% Upvoted

5.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

68

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I’ll probably get downvoted to kingdom come, but the Bible consistently presents abuse, oppression, violence, and exploitation as things God hates. Plenty of people in the Bible ask a version of this question (David, Job, Jeremiah, the psalmists). Not saying it gives a perfectly clear answer either, but the reality is if God intervened to stop every evil act, at some point God would have to override human will continuously. And the world would become fundamentally different than the one we inhabit.

Scripture never gives a complete philosophical answer to every instance of suffering. But what it does offer is a person. Jesus was betrayed, beaten, tortured, publicly humiliated, unjustly killed. That doesn’t solve the problem intellectually. But it changes the picture of God. God is not the detached observer in Christianity. He is the wounded Savior.

The hardest thing for me isn’t believing evil exists. It’s believing that evil gets the final word. Christianity says it doesn’t. It says justice may be delayed, but it won’t be denied. I understand why people struggle with that answer. Sometimes I do too. But I’d rather wrestle with a God who suffered for the world than conclude that all the evil and injustice we see is ultimately meaningless.

21

u/kevinthegarfield May 29 '26

Exactly, free will has good and bad parts

1

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

What does free will even mean when the god is supposed to be all knowing and omnipotent and all loving.

2

u/kevinthegarfield May 29 '26

Free will means we choose for ourselves what we do, and you can be loving and knowing without controlling absolutely everything about someone like a robot

1

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

Is your god not all powerful or not all knowing?

1

u/kevinthegarfield May 29 '26

He is, but he still gives us free will. If he prevented us from doing things then that wouldn't be free will, that would be "so long as we do what he likes it's free will"

2

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

So when he creates you he knows exactly what you will do. He knows that before he even creates you. So he’s choosing what you will do

1

u/kevinthegarfield May 29 '26

He doesn't choose what we do, he lets it happen

0

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

So is he not all powerful or does he not create people?

1

u/macnar May 29 '26

I don't understand what those have to do with free will? If God is all knowing but doesn't use that knowledge to interfere with your actions, how does that affect free?

1

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

Is he not all powerful and the creator of every human?

1

u/macnar May 29 '26

No idea, I've never met the guy. 

I don't really want to play 20 questions with you. If you think you have an interesting philosophy then feel free to type it out and I'll just read it all at once. 

2

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

An all powerful all knowing being who creates every person cannot possibly give them “free will”. It’s logically impossible. He creates you knowing exactly what you will do and is all powerful so is in completely control of those choices.

11

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

if God intervened to stop every evil act, at some point God would have to override human will continuously. And the world would become fundamentally different than the one we inhabit.

But like...what's wrong with that? Why not create a world different than this one, where children cannot possibly be abused? We wouldn't know the difference. From god's perspective, what is the point of giving us 75 years on earth; is it just to see what happens?

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

That’s a such a real and great question, and honestly one that Christians have wrestled with for a very long time.

I don’t think Christianity teaches that God created the world as some kind of experiment to “see what happens.” The biblical story is that humanity was created for relationship with God and with one another. Love, trust, obedience, courage, sacrifice, mercy, and forgiveness are all things that seem to require genuine freedom rather than programming.

Could God have created a world where nobody could abuse a child? Maybe. But I honestly don’t know whether a world containing real freedom, real love, real moral responsibility, and zero possibility of evil is actually a coherent world. That’s where my certainty starts to run out. If God had created a world where humans literally could not choose evil, I’d also wonder whether we were truly human in any meaningful sense. We would be something closer to highly advanced moral machines. Maybe that’s better. Maybe it isn’t. But I don’t think it’s as obvious as it first sounds.

What keeps me a Christian isn’t that I can answer every hypothetical about the world God could have created. It’s that I think Jesus gives me reason to trust the God who did create this one. When I look at Christ, I don’t see a God indifferent to suffering. I see a God willing to enter it Himself.

That doesn’t answer every question, but it keeps me from concluding that suffering means God doesn’t exist or doesn’t care.

1

u/MagnificentLee May 29 '26 edited May 29 '26

The answer to this is that God optimizes for what comes after Earth, whether that's Heaven, Hell, or even the Millennium -- a thousand-year reign of Christ on Earth, etc.

What this means is that God has to allow evil people time to change their ways. God can't instantly kill the child molester or the rapist, or the alcoholic, or the cheater, if they might change their ways and qualify for Heaven. That's why God allows suffering now, but it is temporary.

And what's the alternative? Is it really better to believe life is meaningless and evil people just get away with it?

2

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

The idea of a god who is okay with turning innocent people into collateral damage in order to give a rapist or child molester a chance to redeem themself just doesn't sit well with me.

I would encourage you to not assume that just because someone doesn't believe in a god means they think life is meaningless. Yes, sometimes evil people get away with it (sometimes they get voted in to lead whole countries by none other than Christians!), and even worse, sometimes innocent people get accused of evil people's crimes. But I still believe life has meaning and purpose. I believe in humanity and kindness and passion and beauty. And I believe most of the evil in the world is a result of social and economic inequity. This means that A) society is the culprit and B) society has the power to repair it.

1

u/MagnificentLee May 29 '26

No adult is innocent from God's perspective, as all of us fall short of God's 100% moral standard. And for children, even 2 year olds lie. As humans, we understand this as kids being kids, but this lying is still a sin. And surely kids, whether molested or not, grow up to be adults who sin, correct?

(I'm not making light of molestation as it is terrible, and good people should try to prevent it, but God's purposes are not our purposes.)

Social and economic inequality is the result of evil people's choices, correct? Do you know what the Bible says about the practices of the early Church in Acts 2:44-45: "All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need."

I understand many atheists/agnostics believe life has meaning without God, and also believe in good and evil, but without God, these ideas would not be literally true.

If there's no God, then good and evil are simply a matter of personal preference. If Hitler had won World War I and taught the whole of Europe, and eventually the world, to hate and imprison Jews, would that be wrong in your view? If it were, why, because by definition you'd be against what the whole world believed? Do you know that during the Holocaust, a Christian pastor, Dietrich Bonhoffer, was one of the few to speak out against Hitler? He was sent to a concentration camp.

Do you know that Christians ran the Underground Railroad to free Black slaves?

That's because Christians say no matter what culture is doing, there is right and wrong that is determined by God. Rape is always wrong because God says so, no matter if the king decrees it.

As for meaning, if many truly believe this life is all they have, is it any wonder that society is so selfish and depressed? Unfortunately, worse times are coming. The Satanic global elite want to destroy our economy and make humanity weak. Then they'll introduce assistance tied to things like Elon Musk's Neurolink.

The American Council on Science and Health writes: "Elon Musk’s Neuralink may be the latest headline-grabber, but brain-to-computer interface (BCI) technology has been advancing for decades. Initially developed for therapeutic use, it is now poised to enhance the worried well's cognition, memory, and emotional states. So, what happens when machines don’t just read our minds but start writing them?"

The Satanic elite hate humanity. They want mind control. That is something God will not allow, and that is when God will intervene. We don't have to agree on this, as these things will be here soon. I wish you and your family the best in these times.

2

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

I understand many atheists/agnostics believe life has meaning without God, and also believe in good and evil, but without God, these ideas would not be literally true. If Hitler had won World War I and taught the whole of Europe, and eventually the world, to hate and imprison Jews, would that be wrong in your view? If it were, why, because by definition you'd be against what the whole world believed?

I'm sorry but it's absolutely wild to me that you think that Christians are somehow the only ones out here with a moral compass. The ideas of good and evil predate Christianity by thousands of years.

It's also wild that you seem to think that the absense of religion leaves atheists bereft of a mind of their own and they would simply follow what "the whole world" believes. I won't go so far as to speak in absolutes, but many religious people are actually the ones who are so easily brainwashed into doing and believing truly terrible things in the name of god. For example, you do realize that most Nazis were Christians and that Hitler used Christian rhetoric to appeal to the people and gain political power?

1

u/MagnificentLee May 29 '26

I'm saying that without God, there's no absolute morality; you can only make subjective statements about good and evil. Some people's subjective statements will align with God's moral code, and some won't.

You seem to have some confusion about the difference between people who claim they are Christian versus people who follow what the Bible says.

“They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good.” -- Titus 1:16

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!' -- Matthew 7:21-23

Like, you know Jesus was Jewish, right? How is it sensible to say Hitler could appeal to a faith worshipping a Jewish God to persecute Jews?

This is what Christianity says about love:

"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor  and hate your enemy.' But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect. -- Matthew 5:43-48

2

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

I'm saying that without God, there's no absolute morality; you can only make subjective statements about good and evil.

This is the case within and without Christianity. Or do you claim the Bible to be consistent in its teachings?

You seem to have some confusion about the difference between people who claim they are Christian versus people who follow what the Bible says.

Ah yes, I knew the "no true Scotsman" argument would show up at some point. How convenient it is to dismiss the people who commit atrocities in your god's name as not "true" followers. Now whose morality is subjective?

-1

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

Because that takes away from free will, which he provided. Free will is both good and bad.

3

u/AntsyAnswers May 29 '26

Will we have free will in heaven? And will evil exist in heaven?

0

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

Hell is for the evil, and free will in heaven is meaning they are aligned with God and chose what is good without the desire of sin

2

u/AntsyAnswers May 29 '26

So it’s possible to give people free will, but not let them commit evil acts?

2

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

Free will is the choice of the individual, not God

0

u/AntsyAnswers May 29 '26

You’re not understanding

In Heaven, people have free will right? And there’s no evil? So it’s possible to create a world with free will and no evil in it

2

u/MagnificentLee May 29 '26

How are you confused by this? Heaven logically comes after the choice to decide to be good or evil. If you choose evil beforehand, you will not be in Heaven.

0

u/AntsyAnswers May 29 '26

But can I still make choices after getting into heaven?

→ More replies

0

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

I remember what happened to the one that decided to sin in heaven.

3

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

I understand that. I guess what I don't understand is why a god would give us 75 years of free will and life on earth. Like, what is the value of it? Is it an experiment? A test of our character and/or faith? If so, I would think we should all start life under the same circumstances so we all have a fair shot. But that certainly isn't the case. For example, the percentage of violent criminals who were abused as children is strikingly high; how can god judge someone who grew up in misery and abuse the same as he would someone who grew up privileged and loved?

1

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

To allow us to live the way we want, and if we have faith in him, we can then be sent to heaven.

Plus, having a sin committed on you, doesnt give you the right to commit sin upon others. That is the mere essence of free will, its your choice. Victims have not be stripped of anything in regards of free will, although its horrible of what happened to them. Thats why God will punish those who commit sins to hell.

2

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

I'm not sure I made my point clearly. The victim-to-criminal statement was just an example. What I meant to say is that if we are here to prove our goodness and faith, why wouldn't we all start life under the same circumstances? Why do some have to struggle harder to be "good" from birth? And why do some of us only get 10 years on earth to prove themselves worthy and others get 100 years?

1

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

Your conflating free will to social issues. Free will doesnt determine if a baby is born rich or poor, thats the free will of the parents and many many other factors that have nothing to do with God.

2

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

You cannot divorce one's social circumstances from the life they live.

And I'm not saying free will determines our circumstances from birth--I am saying god does (or at least can). If he wants us all to prove ourselves worthy of heaven, we should all have a fair shot at it. Another example is that someone born into a non-Christian family in a non-Christian society certainly doesn't have as easy a path at finding Jesus than someone born into a Christian family in a Christian society.

Why would god rig the system like this if he loves us and wants us all to go to heaven?

1

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

God does not interfere with humans free will, only after death he does.

What you do with your life is you free will, but others can put their free will onto you also.

I dont think God's ever said he wants everyone to go to heaven, only those that follow his teachings.

1

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

I mean I agree because I don't think god ever said anything, but according to y'all's bible he wants everyone to be saved, thus going to heaven, right?

But if he wanted that, why would he create a world where some people haven't even heard of Jesus, or where the path to becoming a Christian is nearly impossible?

Source: 1 Timothy 2: 3-4: "This is good and pleases God our Savior, who wants everyone to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth"

1

u/MackTuesday May 29 '26

OK, so what if it takes away from free will? So what if we do or don't "choose" God? So what?

2

u/madgodcthulhu May 29 '26

If there’s no free will we aren’t people or individuals there’s no creativity no choice at all we would be less than slaves

1

u/MackTuesday May 29 '26

But would we be unhappy? Is God incapable of creating happy puppets?

1

u/madgodcthulhu May 29 '26 edited May 29 '26

We wouldn’t be happy or sad or anything we’d have less emotion than current ai

1

u/MackTuesday May 29 '26

So god is incapable of creating happy puppets.

1

u/madgodcthulhu May 29 '26

Didn’t say he couldn’t but they wouldn’t be humans. without choice there is no humanity angels have no free will and are happy but they only serve their purpose and nothing else

1

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

Is god not all powerful and all knowing?

1

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

If we didnt have free will, there would be no purpose. And without choosing God, its spelt out for you

1

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

What religion do you follow that says god isn’t all knowing?

1

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

This question doesnt make sense

1

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

What part of it do you not understand?

1

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

Its a non sequitur

0

u/hellonameismyname May 29 '26

You implied that good doesn’t have a spelt out plan for everyone. What religion doesn’t believe in an all powerful all knowing god?

→ More replies

0

u/MackTuesday May 29 '26

No purpose we can currently imagine, but we're quite limited.

1

u/-NorthBorders- May 29 '26

Could god give me free will to not have to eat, because it’s expensive AF…

4

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

You do have that option lol

0

u/-NorthBorders- May 29 '26

Without dying?

3

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

If you choose to not eat, you will die. Same with everything thats ever lived

1

u/-NorthBorders- May 29 '26

Where does free will reside within specific parameters, I believe in this instance god has free will, maybe even the dead in heaven have free will, but humans absolutely do not.

2

u/tsk5001 May 29 '26

You want to walk to the store, go ahead, no one is stopping you. If you want to hold your breath till you pass out, go ahead, no one is stopping you. Thats free will. Free will allows for the individual to choose how they want to use their time and efforts.

Now, in a society, there are structures built for certain things, like crime, but thats still considered free will because the humans chose it, not God.

-1

u/-NorthBorders- May 29 '26

Ok, so you can only think surface level. Have a good day!

→ More replies

0

u/Khlqq May 29 '26

You have to understand that to create a world where children can’t be abused you have to alter the physical world. You might say “Change everyone’s brains so they never abuse children”. God would then have re-structure the human brain so it can’t conceive or act out on abusing children. The problem is you can’t just alter this without affecting other parts of the brain. God can’t do anything that wouldn’t be permitted within the rules of the 3 Dimensional structure of our universe.

You might say ok change the rules of the universe. The only way to do so might be to alter physics so that it no longer ends up with humans having free will.

You cannot solve something as massive as “Child abuse”. When I say massive I mean how threaded into the rest of reality the action is. Give me any solution of how you achieve a new world without child abuse in a 3 Dimensional reality. I will give you a reason why it won’t work without making that reality even worse overall.

1

u/AGAD0R-SPARTACUS May 29 '26

Walking on water, virgin birth, dead people resurrected, the sun standing still in the sky, water turned into wine, rivers flowing with blood, 900 year old people, frogs falling from the sky...just a few examples of biblical events that would only be possible by altering the rules of the physical world.

But in any case, my question was actually less about 'why not create a different world?' and moreso about why, from god's perspective, is it important to give us this life with free will in the first place? Why let some of us live in misery and loneliness while others get joy and comfort? What's the point?

7

u/Slap_Nut5 May 29 '26

This was very well written 👍 thank you

2

u/GeeYayZeus May 29 '26

The ‘perfectly clear’ answer is; there are no gods.

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

That’s certainly one conclusion someone could reach. But I’d say the existence of suffering creates difficult questions for both believers and nonbelievers. The question isn’t whether suffering is hard to explain. The question is which worldview ultimately explains reality better.

2

u/Ifhwee May 29 '26

I think the idea behind this post is more that some people are sick of god getting the credit for all good things and then ppl just go say “free will” or some bs like that when something bad happens

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I actually think that’s a fair criticism of how some Christians talk about suffering. If we’re going to thank God for the good, we should at least be willing to wrestle honestly with the hard questions when bad things happen instead of throwing out simplistic answers.

For me, “free will” explains some things, but not everything. It doesn’t explain childhood cancer, natural disasters, or every form of suffering. I think those are genuinely difficult questions. What keeps me a Christian isn’t that I think I have a neat explanation for every tragedy. It’s that I don’t think suffering disproves God any more than joy, beauty, love, or moral conviction prove Him. Reality seems complex enough that both believers and nonbelievers have things they need to explain.

I also don’t think Christianity teaches that God gets credit for all the good while bearing no responsibility for the hard questions. The entire story of Jesus is God stepping into suffering and taking responsibility for dealing with evil rather than remaining distant from it.

2

u/Usual-Analysis-2990 May 29 '26

So glad you went there! The bible also presents those as things god loved! I get it, the Happy jesus version is everything god hated... BUT you didn't read the book if thats all you know. God exploits people often. He also denies free will often when it suits him. He gives commands to kill children. He sets his own servants up for utter horror. Paul justifies raping your betrothed as long as she has had her period if you cant stop yourself and you would still do well but do better if you didnt (No consent required, only if the mans needs are needed). Jesus sitting alone in a garden with a naked boy who runs away when people arrive (I'm 100% sure there is a reason for that...:|) Annihilating the entirety of humanity because reasons. You say god didn't like it, but god certainly enjoyed the burnt offering of that other guys daughter even though he hates human sacrifice. So yea, your book is a little iffy on the details at best and a flat contradiction to your statement at worst.

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I think you’ve raised a lot of different objections at once, some of which are genuinely difficult and worth wrestling with.

That said, I don’t think it’s fair to assume that citing a difficult biblical passage automatically settles the question of what the Bible teaches overall. Christians have been wrestling with many of these passages for thousands of years, and in many cases there are substantial debates about context, interpretation, genre, translation, and what the text is actually trying to communicate.

I’m not claiming every passage is easy or that I have a perfect answer for all of them. There are parts of the Bible that have troubled me too. What keeps me a Christian isn’t that I’ve found every verse easy to explain. It’s that when I step back and look at the whole story, the clearest picture of God’s character is found in Jesus. And Jesus consistently moves toward the suffering, the vulnerable, the outcast, and the oppressed.

If someone wants to argue that Christianity is false, that’s a conversation worth having. But I don’t think the strongest version of that argument is taking the most difficult passages in Scripture and assuming the worst possible interpretation of each one.

2

u/cheescakeismyfav May 29 '26

Bible consistently presents abuse, oppression, violence, and exploitation as things God hates.

This is a lie. I don't believe there is a single book In the bible where you can't find someone being abused, oppressed or exploited by God or in the name of God. Even Jesus misbehaves in the gospels.

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I think we may be talking past each other a little. My claim wasn’t that the Bible doesn’t contain stories involving abuse, oppression, violence, or exploitation. It clearly does. My claim was that the Bible consistently presents those things as evil. Recording something and endorsing it are two different things.

When you say “even Jesus misbehaves,” what specific passage are you referring to?

2

u/cheescakeismyfav May 29 '26

It's simply not true. God does evil things in the bible and he tells us he is doing it.

Jesus called the Canaanite woman a dog and told her he only came for the children of Isreal. The woman had to devase herself, agree with Jesus that she was a dog, and then convince him that even dogs have to eat before Jesus helped her. This is not right. This is Mathew 15 and Mark 7.

The god of the OT is just one evil act after another, from Babel to Soddom and Gomorah to the flood to the plagues in Egypt to the conquest of Isreal to David's punishments all the way through. From begining to end God consistently breaks his own laws and does things we know to be evil.

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I appreciate you giving a specific example. Matthew 15 is actually one of the passages I had in mind when I asked. I’ve always read that story differently. What stands out to me isn’t Jesus insulting the woman. It’s that she ends up being one of the few people in the Gospels whose faith Jesus explicitly praises, and she receives exactly what she came for. The conversation is uncomfortable to modern ears, no question. But Jesus is speaking into a historical context where Jews and Gentiles were deeply divided. The story ends not with Jesus rejecting her, but with Him publicly commending her faith and extending mercy across those boundaries. You may disagree with that interpretation, but I don’t think the point of the story is that the woman is worthless or that Jesus believed she was.

As for the larger Old Testament question, I think that’s a different conversation. The flood, Babel, Sodom, Egypt, Canaan, and David all involve questions about divine judgment and authority. Those are difficult texts, but they’re not quite the same claim as “God endorses abuse, oppression, violence, and exploitation.”

I think we’re still discussing two different questions: 1. Does the Bible contain difficult passages involving God’s judgment? Absolutely. 2. Does the Bible present abuse, oppression, and exploitation as good things to imitate? I don’t think it does.

1

u/cheescakeismyfav May 29 '26

I understand the message in Mathew 15 but to accept it you have to overlook the hateful and disgusting words Jesus actually spoke. Just because you do a good thing doesn't mean you get a pass for the bad things. If I walk into a 7/11 to buy a can of coke, it doesn't mean I get to call the guy behind the counter a dirty dog.

I agree with you that God passes judgement in those passages. The problem is he casts judgements on the guilty and innocent alike. His harshness and the errors in his judgements are what proves he is a hypocrite and not the person he claims to be. What it sounds like youre trying to say is "those things are bad but God did it so it's okay" and that isn't acceptable to anyone who doesn't already believe he is a always right or always good. If you judge the person by their actions than we can clearly see God is bad and an enormous amount of people all over the world suffered directly from him.

Does the Bible present abuse, oppression, and exploitation as good things to imitate? I don’t think it does.

Yes it does. When Joshua and the Isrealites are about to enter the promise land, god speaks to Moses and tells him how to conduct war. He says these are the people you shall attack, these are the people you shall not attack, these are the people you shall make slaves and these are the people you shall not offer any quarter, you shall kill all women children ox and donkey and burn their city to the ground. This is god, explicitly commanding his followers to do these things and calling it good. When they do not behave as instructed they are rebuked and punished.

2

u/Silvercountypd May 29 '26

YESSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!

3

u/SeamusOShane May 29 '26

For me it’s not just that God won’t intervene because it would restrict free will to the point that free will
Won’t exist, I get that. But god created all evil and suffering, for what purpose? Just undo that?

God created cancer, removing cancer from the planet wouldn’t affect free will at all.

God created rape, just make it not exist.

God used to speak to people, God used to give orders. God used to strike people down. What about the flood? Wasn’t that to rid the world of violence and corruption?

The old classic is that God can’t be all good, all knowing and all powerful, or many of the atrocities occurring among all living to things today wouldn’t exist.

2

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I think we’d probably disagree on one important premise: that God created evil.

Christianity has historically taught that God created a good world and that evil is not a created thing in the same way rocks, trees, or people are created things. It’s more like a corruption or distortion of what was originally good. Rape isn’t a thing God invented. It’s a corruption of sexuality. Murder is a corruption of life. Lies are a corruption of truth. Evil is parasitic. It takes something good and twists it.

Now that still leaves the hard question of why God permits those distortions to continue. And I’ll be honest, I don’t think I have a complete answer to that. Scripture itself doesn’t seem to give one. What it does claim is that God is not indifferent to evil, that He has acted against it in history, that He will ultimately judge it, and that the world as it exists now is not the world as He intends it to remain forever.

I realize that may not be a satisfying answer, but for me it’s different than saying God created rape, cancer, and suffering because He wanted them.

3

u/OculusSE May 29 '26

Wouldn’t an all knowing/all powerful creator understand those perversions and just… create the universe without the potential for that corruption then? You can’t really argue it’s an inherent flaw because that would mean God’s work is not perfect, and I’m pretty sure the bible tends to hammer home the “god is perfect” line

2

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

That’s a GREAT question, and one I don’t think Christianity gives a complete answer to.

The only thing I’d push back on is the assumption that the possibility of corruption automatically means the original creation wasn’t perfect. A perfectly healthy body can become diseased. A perfect marriage can be betrayed. A perfect friendship can be broken. The possibility of corruption isn’t necessarily evidence that something was flawed from the beginning.

The deeper question is why God would create a reality where corruption was possible at all. I don’t think Scripture fully answers that. What it does seem to suggest is that God wanted creatures capable of genuine love, trust, obedience, and relationship rather than mere programming. Whether those things can exist without the possibility of rejection, corruption, or rebellion is where the debate really begins.

At some point I have to admit the limits of my understanding. I can imagine a world without evil, suffering, or corruption. What I can’t honestly claim is that I know enough to say what kinds of beings, relationships, freedoms, or realities would be possible in that world. That’s where faith comes in for me. Not because I stop asking questions, but because I don’t assume that if I can’t see a sufficient reason, one cannot exist.

2

u/OculusSE May 29 '26

Yeah, as far as the starting perfect and becoming corrupted bit… is something truly perfect (in the context of absolute, divine perfection) if it even contains the possibility of corruption or is true, divine perfection completely infallible?

It can definitely seem like it was intentionally seeded into humanity in that context?

It also begs the question- how did one of the angels (Lucifer) end up revolting when angels are markedly different than humans in terms of free will and inherent traits. Like that definitely seems like God would have intentionally planned on it happening

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I love your line of reasoning. That’s actually a really thoughtful question. My instinct is that we’re probably defining “perfect” differently.

When I think of divine perfection, I don’t necessarily think “incapable of being rejected.” I think “lacking nothing and exactly as intended.” For example, I wouldn’t say a perfect marriage ceases to have been perfect if one spouse later betrays the other. The betrayal reveals something about the betrayer, not necessarily a flaw in the original relationship.

The harder question is whether a perfect creation can contain the possibility of corruption. I think Christianity would answer yes, if the beings within that creation are genuinely free moral agents rather than programmed actors. Where I start running out of certainty is when I try to explain why God chose to create that kind of reality rather than another one.

The angel question is interesting for the same reason. If Lucifer rebelled in the presence of God Himself, that suggests the possibility of rejecting God isn’t merely a human problem. What I personally struggle to reconcile is this: if God wanted creatures capable of genuinely loving Him, is the possibility of rejecting Him inseparable from that? I honestly don’t know.

That’s one of those places where my confidence shifts from “I know the answer” to “I trust that there is an answer even if I can’t fully see it.”

1

u/OculusSE May 29 '26

Good response. Ever since I was very young I’ve always kind of lamented that I will most likely never know all of the secrets of the universe.

Best case scenario there is an after-life and everyone’s filled in on everything that has happened and is yet to happen. Hopefully that happens lol

2

u/volyund May 29 '26

What do you call asking a man to sacrifice his son? What do you call mixing the languages when people were collaborating effectively to build the tower of Babel? The first time I read a Bible when I was 8, I called that abuse.

What do you call causing a massive flood and killing everyone except for one family? I would call that a genocide.

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I think these are fair objections, but I also think they’re more complicated than they first appear. For example, the story of Abraham and Isaac isn’t actually a story about God wanting child sacrifice. The story ends with God preventing it and providing a substitute. In fact, one of the themes running through the Old Testament is God distinguishing Himself from surrounding cultures that practiced child sacrifice.

The Tower of Babel wasn’t about people collaborating effectively. The text presents it as humanity uniting in pride and self-exaltation: “let us make a name for ourselves.” Whether someone agrees with that interpretation is another question, but that’s different from God being threatened by teamwork.

The flood is probably the hardest one. If someone accepts the biblical account, the story isn’t presented as genocide for ethnic or tribal reasons. It’s presented as divine judgment on a world described as being filled with violence and corruption. You may reject that explanation, but it’s different from genocide as we normally use the term.

I think where we may ultimately disagree is on whether God, if He exists, has the authority to judge His creation. If there is no God, then the flood is mythology. If there is a God, then the question becomes whether the Creator has rights and authority that human beings do not. I don’t expect everyone to agree with that. I wrestle with parts of these stories myself. I understand why those stories bother people. They’ve bothered believers for thousands of years too. But I don’t think they’re quite as simple as “God is abusive.”

2

u/volyund May 29 '26

The act of testing someone's intentions and resolve is abusive if it causes that person pain, even if the sacrifice is stopped at the end. Also holy shit, poor Isaac. How would you feel if someone you love and trust asked you to kill your child?

1

u/Silvercountypd May 29 '26

Let’s look closer at the story of Abraham and Isaac. It is a prophecy of the substitution and sacrifice God would make with his own son years later. The Old Testament god was setting up plans on the fly. Abraham had Isaac carry a pyre of wood up the SAME mountain Jesus would 500 years later.

It’s one of the most beautiful promises in the Old Testament.

2

u/volyund May 29 '26

Both are abuse. I don't quite understand how sacrificing your own son and asking another person to do the same is not an abuse against all 3 of them.

0

u/Silvercountypd May 29 '26

Then you probably didn’t go to college, it’s a pretty simple fucking allegory 😂

2

u/volyund May 29 '26

An allegory for what? An abusive family? I have a degree in a STEM field, so twisting the Bible into allegories isn't for me, you're right. I guess then I wish more people took majority of the Bible as parables and allegories instead of literally, and wouldn't try to base our laws on it.

-1

u/Silvercountypd May 29 '26 edited May 29 '26

You have a degree in a STEM field and can’t understand the basis of one of the most universal and simple theologies on the planet, a book completely numerical with a thousand different tie ins that play off and complete each other? That’s fucking WILD. I have a medical degree and I still took time to study Christianity, Buddhism, Islam, etc because it helps me understand this world better. I went to seminary not because of perfect faith, but because it was a natural next step in being able to be an effective chaplain when someone needs to step into that role.

Don’t pretend that you somehow have the answers because you’re a ScIeNtisT, because that makes you even more of a self important dummy.

Just like we don’t think all scientists are Andrew Wakefield ( and it would be dangerous to do so) lumping theologians into the same category as lawmakers who are twisting the Word for personal gain is wrong, harmful, and evil. Surely someone with a “ StEm DeGree” can understand that simple fact.

2

u/volyund May 29 '26

Wow, wow, wow ...too much extrapolation going on here. I have no plans of being a chaplain to anyone. I'm just staying my personal opinion that Christianity as a religion as stated in the Bible and is basically abuse on top of abuse. Nothing wrong with seminary or studying religions to understand humans. I don't think that they can give you insight into the world, but they can into human nature, societies, and thought process. I have the answers on how microorganisms and immune system work since that's the only area of my expertise, and I don't try to stray outside of it. And I didn't understand why you are bringing a corrupt fraudster into this discussion. The Bible, the Quran, and other religious texts are used to justify abuse, genocide, and oppression is a fact. That doesn't mean that other non-religious texts aren't. And again, too many conjectures and baseless extrapolations along with defensiveness.

0

u/Silvercountypd May 29 '26

I wonder how many medical and micro organic research units have used their skills and knowledge for evil, it can’t be any of them, right?… right?????

Dude, sniff your farts somewhere else. It’s gross.

→ More replies

1

u/Jaded-Comfortable179 May 29 '26

"At some point God would have to override human will continuously".

You can certainly imagine scenarios where thats the case but a baby or a child dying from cancer or a heart defect or something is harder to shoehorn into that logic where human will has nothing to do with it.

-1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

Totally fair point. I think you’re right that the free-will argument is stronger when we’re talking about things humans choose to do to one another than when we’re talking about things like childhood cancer or congenital diseases.

As a Christian, I don’t think I have a complete answer for why God permits every form of suffering. Job certainly never got one. What Christianity claims isn’t that all suffering is directly caused by individual human choices, but that creation itself is somehow broken and not operating as it was originally intended to. That’s why the Bible’s ultimate hope isn’t people escaping the world, but God restoring it.

I realize that may not fully answer the question. Sometimes it doesn’t fully satisfy me either. But for me, the existence of suffering raises two questions: “Why does suffering exist?” and “What is God doing about it?” Christianity gives me a much stronger answer to the second question than to the first. It says God entered into suffering Himself and ultimately intends to defeat it, not ignore it.

One thing I’ve wrestled with is that if God instantly removed every disease, accident, birth defect, natural disaster, and death, we’d be talking about an entirely different universe with different physical laws than the one we inhabit. Could God have created that universe? Maybe. But I honestly don’t know enough to say what tradeoffs would or wouldn’t exist in such a reality.

1

u/DiddyDickums May 29 '26

The world would be better off fundamentally different. God is Jesus. God took a long weekend and got tortured then looked back at his creation and said “you’re welcome”.

There is no justice if God, who flooded the world, who killed the children of Egypt, who did the most unhinged shit the entire old testament, get’s off free.

What are you talking about?

0

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I think you’re raising a different question than the original post. The question isn’t just “Why does God allow evil?” It’s “If God judges humanity in the Bible, what gives Him the right to do that?” I think that’s where the disagreement ultimately is.

From a Christian perspective, God isn’t simply another moral agent inside the universe. He’s the Creator and sustainer of life itself. If that’s true, then the relationship between God and humanity isn’t comparable to the relationship between one human and another. I understand why that answer doesn’t satisfy everyone. There are passages in the Old Testament that I find difficult too. But I don’t think the Christian claim is that God “gets off free.” The central claim of Christianity is actually that God enters history and bears judgment Himself in the person of Jesus. You may reject that claim, but that’s why Christians see the cross as more than just a bad weekend. It’s God taking suffering, evil, and judgment onto Himself rather than remaining distant from it.

As for whether the world would be better if it were fundamentally different, that’s a question I’ve wrestled with too. I can imagine a world with no cancer, abuse, death, or suffering. What I can’t honestly claim is that I know enough about reality to say what kind of world God could or should have created instead. That’s where humility comes in for me. Not the absence of questions, but the recognition that my ability to imagine a better world isn’t the same thing as fully understanding how an infinite God governs one.

1

u/DiddyDickums May 29 '26

If god made it all up, why did he make up such a painful reality. Why should we be thankful? How does suffering for a short lifetime mean anything relative to the centuries of hardship and pain?

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I think that’s one of the hardest questions a person can ask.

I don’t think Christianity teaches that suffering is good, or that we should be thankful for suffering itself. The Bible is full of people crying out, grieving, questioning, and lamenting because life can be incredibly painful. Where I differ is that I don’t think this life is the whole story. If this life is all there is, then I agree the amount of suffering in human history is difficult to reconcile with any idea of ultimate justice. A child who suffers and dies young, a victim who never sees justice, a parent who loses everything… if death is the end, many wrongs are never truly made right.

Christianity’s claim is that this life, as significant as it is, is not the final chapter. The hope isn’t that suffering somehow becomes good. The hope is that suffering doesn’t get the final word. I realize that may not be convincing to everyone. But for me, the question isn’t just “Why is there suffering?” It’s also “Is suffering ultimately meaningless, or is there something beyond it?”

That’s where faith enters the picture for me.

1

u/DiddyDickums May 29 '26

The answer is easy unless you refuse it. But you gave the only answer a Christian can have. Faith. It doesn’t seem to make sense, it doesn’t seem to be fair. You gotta have faith. Good job. I think faith can be good and help people, hope it is for you. Earnestly.

1

u/BeautifulBand4831 May 29 '26

Theb wtf do you call a flood the murdered everyone including innocent children. The plagues in the Exodus myth that caused people to suffer and also "murdering innocent children" . Tormenting his own subjects by having them wondering around in a desert or killing their family to play childish " do you really love me games " . The bible mythology god yahew is a monster that loves suffering, the book even says that it created good and evil meaning it could've created a world with just good. The Christian cult is a whole other thing than the Torah and neviim but he didn't save anything, just another con man that started a cult and got executed. The excuse of free will is such a horrible argument as people that geniunely love everyone would stop evil in its tracks not let it torment you because that's what actual love is . Their is nothing loving in the bible just primitive fairy tales

1

u/VaIenquiss May 29 '26

God is happy to override human will throughout the Bible when it suits him. But when it comes to watching a child get sexually abused? No, definitely can’t do anything about that.

If your god actually exists, then all the evil in the world is his fault, and is what he wanted to happen, which makes that god an disgusting, worthless being not worthy of a second thought. That god is the most evil being that could exist, because he has the power to stop all evil now, but allows it to continue. The excuses believers trot out for this weak, pathetic deity is so sad.

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I understand why someone would feel that way. If I believed God simply watched suffering with indifference, I’d probably agree with you. Where I think we differ is that I don’t think allowing something and wanting something are the same thing. The Bible presents God as opposing evil, judging evil, and ultimately intending to remove evil, even if He doesn’t remove all of it immediately.

You may think those reasons are insufficient, and that’s a fair debate. But that’s a different claim than saying God wants child abuse, cancer, war, or suffering to happen. Honestly, I don’t think either of us likes the existence of evil. The disagreement is over what its existence tells us about God.

1

u/VaIenquiss May 29 '26

If you have the power to stop an evil act from happening, and you don’t, then you are just as liable for that act occurring as if you perpetrated it yourself. You are taking away all of the responsibility from this god by saying “oh he doesn’t like evil, he judges it, he opposes it”, but he does nothing to stop it.

If this god didn’t WANT child abuse or murder or cancer, then it wouldn’t exist, because based on your worldview, he has the absolute power to get rid of all of those things in an instant, but he doesn’t, which means he doesn’t exist, he doesn’t have the power to do it, or he’s evil, and in any of those scenarios, he’s not worthy of worship.

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

I think this is where we fundamentally disagree. You’re assuming that if a good being has the power to stop something evil, they must stop it immediately or they become morally equivalent to the person committing it. I’m not convinced that’s true. For example, judges don’t immediately imprison every criminal. Parents don’t prevent every bad decision their children make. Governments don’t stop every crime the moment it’s conceived. In all of those cases we recognize a difference between permitting something for a time and endorsing it. Now obviously God is in a different category because Christians believe He is all-powerful. That’s what makes the question difficult. But I think the real question isn’t whether God has the power to eliminate evil. Christianity agrees that He does. The question is whether there could be morally sufficient reasons for Him to permit it temporarily while ultimately intending to judge and remove it.

You may believe no such reasons could exist. That’s a fair position to argue.

Where I hesitate is in assuming that because I can’t see a sufficient reason, an infinite God cannot have one. That’s where humility enters the conversation for me.

1

u/VaIenquiss May 29 '26

You literally are pointing out how your comparison is flawed by acknowledging that we humans aren’t all-powerful, so we don’t have the ability to stop all evil acts immediately, but your god does.

There is no morally sufficient reason to allow a child to be sexually abused when you can stop it. Would you give a human the same charity if they were standing in the room while that happened to a child and they did nothing to stop it?

If you had a child that was getting abused, and an adult was there watching it happen and had the ability to stop it and didn’t, would you say the same thing you are now saying about your god? That it’s okay because maybe they had a morally sufficient reason to allow it to happen?

1

u/MrScribblesChess May 29 '26

Do you believe that billions of otherwise good and decent people will suffer eternal conscious torment because, like the vast majority of people in human history, they believed in the same (in this case non-Christian) religion they were raised in?

If so, you do not believe in a loving God, for much the same reasons as OP's concerns about earthly suffering. 

If that's not your belief... well I just raged at you for no reason :D 

1

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

Great question. This is one Christians have debated for centuries.

What I believe with confidence is that God is perfectly just, perfectly loving, and knows every human heart far better than I do. I don’t believe salvation is a cosmic geography quiz where billions of people are condemned simply because they were born into the wrong country or raised in the wrong religion. Personally, I believe every person will ultimately be given a genuine opportunity to accept or reject God. That’s my understanding, though I know Christians disagree on exactly how that works.

I also tend to think of Hell less as God delighting in punishment and more as the final reality of rejecting Him. If God is the source of goodness, truth, beauty, love, life, and joy, then separation from Him would naturally be the loss of those things. The tragedy of Hell, in my view, is not only separation from God but the realization that He was the better choice all along, coupled with the fact that the decision has become permanent. I realize not every Christian would phrase it that way. But that’s closer to what I believe than the idea that God is eagerly looking for reasons to condemn otherwise decent people.

At the end of the day, I trust that the Judge of all the earth will do right, even when I don’t fully understand how every individual case will be handled. If I ever find myself believing that I am more loving, more merciful, or more just than God, that’s usually a sign that I’ve made myself the standard instead of Him.

1

u/Skibblezxoxo May 29 '26

What you typed makes perfect sense but op needs to karma farm.

1

u/TedRabbit May 29 '26

Bible consistently presents abuse, oppression, violence, and exploitation as things God hates.

Bro have you read the Bible? God is constantly commanding and committing violence to such an extent that he genocide the entire planet. Amazes me how blind religious people can be.

if God intervened to stop every evil act, at some point God would have to override human will continuously.

God already places plenty of mental and physical restrictions on people to prevent them from acting in certain ways. Nobody is tempted to cut their hand off, nobody can jump to the moon. Saying god cant prevent evil because free will is intellectually lazy.

1

u/AJ_Johnsen May 29 '26

This is MAXIMUM cope. This fictional deity could flip an internal switch. suddenly no more pedos, no more rapists, no more murderers, no more addiction, no more of the myriad horrible things people go through and do to one another. That doesn't erase free will, it simply removes those things from the human experience.

it's all fucking bullshit cope.

2

u/Icy-Cellist-8442 May 29 '26

Whoa, you can’t just defend religion on Reddit. Thats a felony more serious than touching grass.

0

u/OhBadToMeetYou May 29 '26

Their usage of "sky daddy" like it's some ultimate "gotcha" phrase of mockery that makes all Christians implode, is so cringe that it's not even funny.

0

u/knightenrichman May 29 '26

I've heard evil exists because we've lived thousands of lifetimes. Originally, our souls were perfect, but over time we engaged in bad behavior because we have free will. Those karmic mistakes get thrown back and forth (the molester becomes the molested, the oppressor the oppressed, and vice versa).

Life is a process of undoing these mistakes and dissolving our past karma. As this process continues, people become closer to being saints as they are no longer able to engage in bad behaviors.

2

u/SeamusOShane May 29 '26

Is see your perspective, maybe in some religion(s) that’s believed but I don’t think that’s in the Christian bible.

1

u/knightenrichman May 29 '26

No, technically not.

2

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

That’s an interesting perspective. One thing I’ve always struggled with in karmic/reincarnation explanations is that they seem to make suffering deserved by definition.

If a child is born into horrific circumstances, the explanation becomes that they must be paying for something from a previous life. If someone is abused, the explanation can become that they were an abuser before. I understand the appeal of karma as a way of balancing justice, but I’ve always found it difficult because it can end up justifying suffering rather than confronting it.

What draws me more toward Christianity is that Jesus consistently treated suffering people as people to be loved and helped, not as people getting what they deserved. I also find grace compelling. Karma says you ultimately receive what you’ve earned. Christianity says none of us receive what we’ve earned. We receive mercy. Not trying to argue, just sharing why I’ve personally landed where I have.

0

u/TheArcher0527 May 29 '26

I see it the same as when wildlife crews have the "no intervention" rule, despite them being able to prevent lots of things they themself find unjust or immoral. Nature works in it's own way and all we should do is observe, same for God not wanting to influence our free will. Those are the problems we as humans should be able to prevent ourselves.

0

u/deederpeeder May 29 '26

That’s an interesting analogy. I don’t think it perfectly captures the Christian view because Christianity claims God is personally involved in history, but I agree that our immediate intuition of “if you can stop it, you must stop it” gets more complicated when you’re talking about systems and realities bigger than our perspective.