Re: Why does God allow evil...Can such a God be trusted?

Fordtunate Son

Top TigerNet [32444]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 9840

Joined: 2010

Oct 17, 2025, 3:19 PM

He has an interesting perspective and I don’t disagree with much of what he says, but he seems to ride both sides of the fence, dismissing some views, then later adopting them as the correct views.

For instance, he rags on agnostics a bit at the beginning, and then by the end of the lecture is taking a pretty agnostic stance…that one cannot know anything about God for certain, even quoting Job in doing so.

0:45 “There are some agnostics who are agnostics simply because they don’ t care to know…and then there are some who take you through a rational system of arguments on why they don’t believe…”

Later he says,

1:01:00 “This shows the folly of asking stupid questions and wondering why God has to explain himself to you.”
[As Job said in] Job 42:3 “Surely you [God] spoke of things that I did not understand.”

Isn’t that Job taking a rather agnostic position? “I do not understand?”

Or this:

40:30 “[Some believe in] Ying and yang and all that stuff…There are people who have this metaphysical concept that there is a necessity of evil by virtue of the fact that there has to be something opposite good.”

Followed by:

46:10 “Therefore, the existence of evil is for, in the end, to the praise of his glory.”
50:36 “God puts his righteousness on display by the way he deals with sin.”
52:40 “We’d never see the majesty if there were no cross. We’d never see the cross if there were no sin. For the sake of demonstrating his righteousness he allows sin.”
54:50 “We wouldn’t know what wrath was and we wouldn’t know what mercy was is there were no sin.

Aren’t those basically the same concept? That X must exist in order to illustrate Y? There must be sin, and evil, to illustrate mercy? Ying, and Yang?

On a lesser note, I disagree with some of his other conclusions not directly related to his topic. For instance, he says:

49:15 Paul: [The Jews] think that the righteousness of God is attainable by them.
49:30 They think the righteousness of God is attainable to them…They think they can meet his standard.

But Abraham did. He was declared righteous by God. So why wouldn’t other Jews think they had/have the same chance, being the Chosen People? Elijah was taken into Heaven as well, so, the odds may have been slim, but they had examples where Jews DID meet God’s standards, despite what he says.

And his closer was not exactly airtight either…

1:03:30 “If we thought for a moment that you [God] were not in control of evil, we would have no guarantee that it wouldn’t appear in Heaven. And Heaven wouldn’t be the Heaven of scripture, where there is no sin.”

The Heaven of scripture includes a rebellion of angels, and War in Heaven. So where is he getting an image of Heaven from with no disobedience, or sin? Plus, there will be no one in Heaven in the End, once God descends to earth, also per scripture.

From the very same Revelation he quoted earlier:

Rev 21:2
“I saw the Holy City, the new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride beautifully dressed for her husband. And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, “Look! God’s dwelling place is now among the people, and he will dwell with them.”

Dwell with the people, on earth, not in Heaven.

Still, it was a good video and I enjoyed hearing his perspective. I do wish he would have focused a bit more on what exactly ‘evil’ is, which I find to be the more interesting topic. His basic position seems to be a bit Muslim…that is, “God controls everything, pray he’s in a good mood and beg for mercy.” The Biblical version of that being:

Isaiah 45:7
“I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.”

In fairness though, he did frame his position and by saying ‘evil is this, and that’, though I wish he would have added…or, Evil could also be ‘this, or this’.

Good Post.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

So God told Adam, not Eve, about the trees:

Gen 2:15-17 Then the LORD God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it. And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.

After this, God made Eve to give Adam companionship. Adam told Eve about the tree they were not to eat from. The Serpent attacked Eve, not Adam. Eve surrendered to the temptation to eat the forbidden fruit. She then offered to Adam the fruit. Sin came into creation because Adam chose to eat the fruit.

Isn't it an interesting thing that Adam could have refused the fruit and left Eve to suffer her own consequences from eating the forbidden fruit. He chose not to abandon Eve; she was his companion in life. One that kept him from being alone. Certainly, he remembered what it was like to be alone for the length of time God took before providing Adam his life/help mate. How long was that? We don't know... but it could have been many many years. Certainly, Adam and Eve could have walked the Garden together for many many years before the temptation overcame Eve. This thought embodies why I do not discuss the "age" of the earth. How long did it take Adam to name all the creatures God created? more than a day, for sure.

Anyway, Adam did not abandon Eve and, I wonder, can a man be "better" than God? No! And God did not abandon man in the rebellion. But, life circumstances did change. And God prepared man for those changes. More than that, something did die because of man's rebellion - it was a lamb. A lamb that God used to clothe Adam and Eve. Already God is teaching mankind something innocent can pay the price for our sin.

But, enough... have a good weekend.

Why does God allow evil...Can such a God be trusted?