The problem of evil (Dr. Michael Heiser) 

This is what we call the matrix

Same holds true for the nuremburg trials

I agree with you. Who needs or wants evil AT ALL? Who WANTS to be able to sin? It is soooo horrible. God help us. Jesus save us. Holy Spirit, comfort us. We are wretches!

I disagree. Every human being was created with an inborn sense of right and wrong, with discernment of what is fair and unfair. We cannot violate this God-given morality without justification. We see this all the time because even unbelievers can recognize fairness versus unfairness, right from wrong, and justice versus injustice. That is why some people accuse God of being cruel or nonexistent because they correctly recognize unjust, unfair, and bad things happening, and God seems to do nothing about them. God will not tamper with our freedom of choice in this life or the next for two extremely important reasons. First, if there were no free will we would be robots and, therefore, not responsible for our actions. That is because robots are not responsible for their actions-the one who programmed them is responsible. In other words, if there is no freedom of choice, then you cannot hold a person responsible for their actions. It would not be right for God to judge the world if humans did not have free will. If there was no free will in humans, then God would be responsible for the evil in the world. This is why we don’t see God intervening every time man does a horrible act because that would be manipulating free will. Now the world does not like that. They want immediate justice from God against evil. But if God rendered immediate justice for every evil act, then all of humanity would be dead and on their way to hell. Not only that, but God gave man dominion over the earth. And since our progenitor Adam sinned, all humanity is suffering because we are all separated from God from birth. Second, and more importantly, if we did not have free will, we could not genuinely love anyone. This is because love is a choice and choices can only be made by beings of free will. Yes, you can make a robot and program it to love, but the love of a robot is forced and not voluntary. Would you really want to be loved by a robot who was made to love you without a choice for eternity? Neither does God. If He wanted beings without free will, then why would He make us with free will go through the pain and suffering of this life only to take it away in the next life? Truly genuine and satisfying love is given to another as a voluntary gift from the heart between beings of free will. It is putting another’s interests above one’s self. To trick, manipulate, scare, or force someone into love is a selfish act that ends up destroying the love that is being sought. God wants people to love Him because they want to, not because they have to. Isn’t that what we want too? When both parties want to love each other, the relationship will last. However, when one party is forced to love by fear or manipulation, there may be outward actions of love, but their inward heart is not in the relationship and will eventually want to rebel and leave. So, free will is required to have the capacity to love (which is unselfishness), but with it comes the capacity to choose selfishness. And once it is chosen, selfishness grows irreversibly, relentlessly, progressively to higher and higher levels. Then, the being justifies their selfish behavior with self-justifying reasons that allow them to override the God-given morality system that is trying to tell them they are doing wrong. As the progression of sin goes to higher levels of selfishness, the being becomes so fixated on pursuing what they want and what they THINK is right that they can no longer see the damage they are doing to themselves, the ones they love, and others. And that is where moral evil comes from.

@@roberthill4581 You too show a disregard for the biblical teaching concerning specifically what man's ability is concerning his turning back to God after the fall. "You MUST be born again" or IMHO, a better translation, "be born from above." Just has we have no capacity to produce our physical birth, even so our spiritual rebirth. That is why Paul's conclusion is "It's all from Him, through Him and to Him."

@@leefury7 Jesus said twice that no one can come to me except the Father draws Him. Humans are helpless to save themselves apart from God. It is by the grace of God that our hearts are touched to enable us to see the truth and accept Christ. But humans do know right from wrong. They may not recognize it as sin, but they know right from wrong. Even in our unsaved state, we instinctively know right from wrong. People are doing what is “right” by this moral law when they are unselfishly doing unto others as they would have others do to them. People are doing “wrong” by this moral law when they do what is selfish and consciously or unconsciously do things that benefit “me, myself, and mine,” without realizing or caring about the negative effects on others. God wants humanity to learn by experience that despite man recognizing the truth about sin and his self-determination to be good, sin inside of man inhibits the ability to be good. Paul recognized this and explained that the seed of sin lives in our flesh, preventing us from doing good. Romans 7:14-25. I was disagreeing with your statement "regeneration must occur prior to the recognition of sin." Sorry, I should have stated more clearly what I was disagreeing about.

So you can't sin now then either, right? You are dead to sin according to Paul. Dead is different in this verse? You Calvinists only want to believe you are elect....

@@tinfoilghost Position vs practice. Standing vs state. You need to study Romans more ardently.

It seems pretty interesting to say that God does not have free will. What verses are you thinking of to defend your position?

@@mjtonn God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good? - Numbers 23:19 For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. - Malachi 3:6 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; - Titus 1:2 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. - James 1:17 Imo, God is the best that can be and so are His plans that He must see through. He is changeless and good. We are as yet changeable and tainted by evil.

@@mjtonn: I don't know about Bible verses, but the idea of Yahweh being omnibenevolent is a common one, and it seems obviously in conflict of the idea of him having libertarian free will to me.

@@jamesc3505 I'm not sure what you mean exactly by "libertarian" free will, versus regular free will. I refer to free will just in the sense of being able to make choices, or having the freedom or liberty to make a choice. The question comes to mind that if we are made in the image of God, and we have free will, doesn't have mean that YHWH also has free will? He cannot give us something that He doesn't possess Himself (similar to how we can love because He first loved us). Plus, if God does not have free will, then He would be locked into some fatalistic system as well, and actually be controlled by something else. Thinking on that, this image came to mind. (It's a just a way to look at the issue). Imagine a room. Inside that room is being within God's law. Outside that room is sin (because sin is defined as lawlessness). Can God walk out of that room? [This also begs the related question - is God's law literal a part of who He is (which some argue as part of His righteousness) or is it outside of who He is (thus, lex rex)? ] If God does not have free will, He cannot leave that room - that is, He cannot sin. But if God cannot sin, then Jesus really wasn't tempted. There was no possibility of Him ever falling into temptation. This cannot be true. He was tempted just like we are, but He overcame sin. He had the ability, the freedom to sin, but He never sin. God has free will to leave the room and sin, but He never has and never will sin. But there is the potential for Him to do so. That's why it is that much more amazing - that God could be tempted with sin, but never will.

​@@davidmukarovsky2044 I wrote some on this in my response to the other person on this thread. But as to those verses you cited, they don't speak about whether God has the ability or potential to sin. Sin is lawlessness - anything that contrary to the law of God. Thus God will not break His own law. But is that because He will not or because He can not? If He can not, does that mean God's law is in some sense "higher" than Him? Or is His law somehow a part of Him? And I absolutely agree with all those verses you cited. God cannot lie, He does not change His nature or character (He never stops being God or changes into anything else, but Jesus is both God and man).

Wow. Wasted my 15 seconds.

That is the most absurd and asinine "thinking" I've seen yet. Zero logic.

With all the frauds and lies of evolution in the last century I'd say science is continually trying to prove the lie is true. In physics, scientists continually try to prove God doesn't exist. All of science in evolutionary biolobgy and physics is dedicated to that premise. As a Christian, If I was continually trying to prove I'm wrong in my faith, I'd be a fool. Jesus rose from the dead. Many saw Him cruicifed and later risen. I can't try to prove what I know is true is a lie. I'd be very confused to do so. I don't know about other religions which are of the devil, but Christianity will defend itself against sceptics. And this defense is to glorify God and allow Him to work through us to the saving of people from Hell.

Hold up. Science assumes it is right all the time.

​@truthbebold4009 Wrong again...I repeat...science continually tries to prove itself wrong whereas religion continually tries to prove itself right. And, I may add, fails miserably.

They are actually very similar. Those who follow Christ know he’s the truth and their lives are the constant disproving of what they think bc God is tried and true every time. Every thing always works out/goes the way He said it will, no matter what we think or do

​@huntercostello9036 Again, this only proves the arrogance of religion. The interesting thing about yours and others statement of "knowing", is that, it is never followed up with evidence.

Calvinists and Atheists both say that we are basically... well... robots.

@@J42337 I've never heard a Calvinist say such. I suppose you are trying to equate hard determinism atheism with Calvin's teaching. What I suspect you are missing is the mystery. God is Sovereign, (how can any Christian deny this?) and yet man is responsible. Read the first 2 chapters of Acts. Pretty clear. In the Westminster Confession it deals with it pretty clearly, God is sovereign yet not to be blamed for evil. Man is responsible. God ordains the atonement through Jesus, man is responsible for killing the God/Man. If you have ever heard a Calvinist claim we are robots, I'd love to hear you quote the person who said that. I suppose it's possible but then again it's possible for some "Christian" to say God isn't sovereign. Or any number of wrong things.

@@dannewcomb7631 With all due respect, if atheistic determinism makes people into robots so does Christian determinism. Just because the cause is different doesn’t make the effect different. If you appeal to mystery what you are saying is there is a contradiction in your system you don’t know how to solve, that is the mystery. Calvinism is a minority view of Christians historically and present day. The Orthodox Church made it a full on heresy hundreds of years ago. The Catholic Church, who adore Augustine, also deny this deterministic view. Augustine got his determinism from Manichaean ism which he used to be a part of. It is no where found in any church fathers before him and still rarely after him. Calvinism makes God the author of evil because He is the author of everything. You can say the evil is done by beings who do what they desire but God determined what they desired. The programmer is responsible for what the non free robot does because the robot has no ability to act freely. They fulfill a program and then they end. Calvinism makes God the programmer of the evil in men’s hearts and then blames the men for having evil hearts. If God wrote the code of evil that would make him the author of that evil. Thank the Lord that this is not true. It truly is as close as you can get to a salvation risking heresy without denying the core doctrines of Christianity. To attack the character of God in such a way under the veil of trying to raise Him up higher is so misguided and gross. God doesn’t do what you say and doesn’t want you putting Him in that place. God created free creatures that were to reflect His character to the world and we as believers are to deny temptation and freely choose to walk as He walked, to restore the Edenic ideal. Free people choosing to obey the commands of God above their own. Calvinism destroys that core story of reality and makes a mockery of it by giving nonsensical reasons for a God to want to reflect His image in people who aren’t in any way separate from His decision making faculties. Reject Calvinism, join traditional Christianity, feel the love and mercy of God full blast and deny yourself and pick up the cross.

God is sovereign. Too what degree does he exercise His sovereignty over man. Did He in His sovereign power decree that Adam and Eve were to eat of the tree. Does his sovereignty only allow some the gift to understand their sinful need of a savior. Is our God inconsistent in whether He gives men choices?

@@dannewcomb7631 starting your argument by "i have never heard a Calvinist say such" is erecting a strawman of your own, and a disingenuous one at that. Of course, no Calvinist will explicitly say that, and they don't have to. Their claims/beliefs/assumptions about "predestination" and such inevitably lead to an inference that can be summarized as "humans are essentially robots = not having free will" using modern terms.

My major problems with the free will defense are: 1. It's (free will) just never given as an explanation for evil, or anything else for that matter. It's an understandable intuitive leap. But there are explanations given for evil in the Bible, and it should be telling that free will is never one of them. 2. It doesn't explain anything. Our raw capacity to make sin and non-faith decisions (or those decisions being available to us) doesn't explain why we do, either now or in the case of Adam and Eve. 3. This is almost always framed with "we are not robots" language, which pretty much everyone agrees with. It still has to be recognized as an intuitive leap to say from that God can't make non-robots without them doing evil.

@@brianwagner781 I think the intent of the Free Will defense is to assign moral culpability to one and only one agent, namely man, and absolve God from moral culpability. That's intuitive, and for man-to-man relationships, it is definitely correct. There are many instances in the Bible where we see that culpability follows intent and knowledge: for example, if a farmer knows that his Ox has a habit of goring people, then he is morally culpable for not properly protecting his Ox from getting out and goring people. But I'm not convinced that moral culpability works that way when it comes to a Being who is omnipotent and omniscient. There are a number of examples in the Bible where God ordains for a person to do evil. And in those cases, it is always that person, not God, who is held morally culpable for that behavior.

@@timffoster yeah, that and justifying God's decision to make a world where so much evil will happen. Free will and evil is greater than no free will and no evil. That sort of thing. I think your argument illustrates why we shouldn't put so much faith in an explanation that isn't provided in the Bible. It's just an understandable intuition.

Yall are trippin'! I'm not going to pretend for a second that I'm qualified to argue about this. But What Heiser says makes perfect sense to me.

@@robertpillowjr.1672 I think I get why it does. But can you point to a place in the Bible where free will is ever given as the reason for moral evil? "Makes sense" isn't really the best basis for forming beliefs about God. Especially when he's actually revealed knowledge to us in the Bible.