Demolishing an aspect of the JW's explanation for evil

by logansrun 11 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  logansrun

  Part of the Watchtower's response to theodicy -- the problem of why an omniscient, all-loving God would allow evil -- is that Adam and Eve were given free will and chose to exercise their right to disobey God, hence bringing sin, evil and death into the world through their genes (of course the genome has been mapped and no evidence whatosever for that idea is established, but I digress).

  Let's look at this problem of evil a little more closely. A common objection to the JWs is "Why didn't God just create Adam and Eve so that they would not sin and, hence, there would be no evil?" A good question indeed! The Watchtower's response is that Adam and Eve had "free will" endowed by Jehovah and if God created them so that they were incapable of sinning they would not have had free will. Does this make sense?

  It does not. Think about it: according to the Watchtower (and many other conservative Christian groups) God has both free will and will not -- indeed, cannot -- do evil. Why couldn't God create a perfect creature "in his image" which has both qualities in the same way He does -- both free and be morally incapable of doing wrong?

  I say again:

  God -- is incapable of doing wrong but has free will.

  Man -- would not have free will if he was incapable of doing wrong.

  That logic just doesn't add up.

  Bradley
• 

  gypsywildone

  This was also explained the same way to me by another Christian, & it doesn't make sense to me either, along with a whole lot of other stuff about that religion. Perfect things don't malfunction.

  Suuposing one was able to believe the first part of that explaination. If it were all true, why wouldn't God just fix everything? If it were all true & their God was a loving God, why wouldn't he just put it all right?
• 

  logansrun

  gypsywildone,

  Saint Augustine provided the thought about Adam and Eve having "free will" for generations of Christians to come. Now, that thought doesn't really hold logical water based on the original post in this thread (the thought is not mine. I read it in a book by Martin Gardner.) Augustine does add a second element to the issue of theodicy which the JWs do not subscribe to, but does seem to clarify the point a little better from a Christian perspective.

  He went under the assumption that God is "outside of time" -- that God is absolutely omniscient about the whole of time. He experiences all of time as one present moment. Hence, God knew that Adam and Eve would sin, that we would have sufferring, etc. (The WT does not view God as being "outside of time" but as being "in time" and not having knowlegde of what Adam and Eve would choose.) God allowed this to happen (one could even say he planned it) so that the greater good of the salvific ministry and death of Jesus Christ could be accomplished. Evil is allowed for a greater good. That is the second aspect to the Augustinian answer to theodicy, although, as I noted, the JWs do not promote that view.

  (Note: I don't necessarily hold to this view either, although it does make more logical sense than the Witness view)

  Bradley
• 

  micheal

  Great point Bradley, I will use this one.

  That Genesis account has more holes in it than 7 year old underwear
• 

  logansrun

  Also:

  per Einstein's theory of relativity the notion of God being "outside of time" makes more scientific sense as well.

  B.
• 

  logansrun

  Michael,

  That Genesis account has more holes in it than 7 year old underwear

  Well, the Genesis account interpreted a certain way does at least.

  Bradley
• 

  micheal

  Well, the Genesis account interpreted a certain way does at least.

  I guess the only way I've been taught.
• 

  peacefulpete

  Just what greater good was accomplished thru killing Jesus? Perhaps I'm missing something. According to Orthodox Xtian theology, didn't he merely die to restore humans to a sinless state? Was the final state of saved humans greater than that of adam? If so then why not simply create them in this elevated state and avoid all the death? If not, then all the suffering has served no noble divine purpose. Further,if god 'knew' they would sin they he is party to the sin. as surely as I would be guilty if i knew my neighbor was going to kill his wife but made no effort to prevent it. Or better yet If i knew that my 2 year old loved cookies and would take one from the jar (but I knew they were poisoned)and left him alone to do it, then I would be responsible for the results.
  
  Not even Augustine had a way of reconciling the Genesis tale with justice and logic.
• 

  greven

  Your reasoning is sound. However, I am not aware that the WT teaches that "God has both free will and will not -- indeed, cannot -- do evil".

  I am aware they say he cannot lie, which demolishes any claims of an omnipotent being. Heck, even a child can do such a thing yet, an omnipotent creator of the universe cannot? LOL

  The problem of evil is a spearpoint in atacking any claim of a benevolent, loving God. I have lots of fun using it.

  Greven
• 

  Loris

  Genesis 2:17 "But as for the tree of the knowledge of good and bad you must not eat from it, for in the day you eat from it you will positively die"

  Genesis 3:22 "And Jehovah God went on to say: ' Here the man has become like us in knowing good and bad, and now in order that he may not put his hand out and actually take [fruit] also from the tree of life and eat and live to time indefinite, _' "

  This benevolent, loving God already knew evil existed before he planted Adam in the garden. So did the "us" whomever they or it is. The question of motive does come up. Why would he/they put evil in the picture to tempt Adam with in the first place?

  Loris