Asking
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The one question that Christians cannot answer. I dare any Christian to answer this question.

If God is perfect and has always been perfect. And if God is good and has always been perfectly good, then God has never had to choose to be good. And God has never had to make the choice between Good and Evil. So for God to give humans the choice between good and evil is a logical fallacy.

Why would God create humans having to choose between good and evil when he himself never had to choose between Good and Evil? Why wouldn't God make humans perfectly good like himself?

Furthermore if God is perfect and has always been perfect. And if God is good and has always been perfectly good then it is impossible for God to create evil. Because to create evil is to not be perfectly good.
Top | New | Old
ChatGPT:

1. The Original Post: The Logical Challenge

Your framing presents a classic problem of theodicy but sharpened into a paradox of consistency:

Premises you set out

God is perfect.

God is perfectly good.

Therefore, God never had to choose between good and evil (His perfection is non-contingent).

Humans, however, are commanded to choose between good and evil.

Thus, God imposes on humans a condition He Himself has never experienced.

And since God is perfectly good, He cannot create evil; if evil exists, either God is not perfectly good, or evil has some other ontological status.

Strengths of your argument

It echoes Augustine and Leibniz but radicalizes the dilemma: not just “why does evil exist?” but “why must humans choose at all if God never chose?”

You are pressing on the difference between necessary goodness (God) and contingent goodness (humans), and asking whether this asymmetry is coherent.

The conclusion you point toward is that the concept of “free will to choose good/evil” may be logically inconsistent with the premise of divine perfection.

Potential weaknesses

The argument assumes that for choice to be real, the chooser must have been in a position similar to those He creates. Some traditions reject that: God as Creator is not bound to undergo what His creatures do.

It equates “creating a world with evil” with “creating evil,” which theologians often resist by defining evil as privation, not substance (Augustine).

It doesn’t consider whether “freedom” itself (not perfection) is the higher good God wished to share with humans, even if that freedom entails the possibility of evil.

2. MarkPaul’s Response: Assessment

a. Rhetorical Style

Tone: defensive, dismissive, mildly scolding (“half-baked,” “childish game,” “sickening”).

Effect: this tone undermines the force of his response because it leans on condescension rather than argument. Instead of engaging your logical structure, he reframes the issue as an over-worn complaint.

b. Substantive Points

Redefinition of “perfect”: He challenges your definition, noting that in colloquial usage “perfect” can mean “flawless execution” rather than “moral purity.”

Weakness: The biblical/theological sense of “perfect” (teleios, tamim) typically does mean moral completeness or wholeness. His examples (bank robber, lion kill) sidestep the relevant theological definition. This is equivocation.

God choosing good vs evil: He asserts “you will find many examples of God deciding what is good and what is evil.”

Weakness: He provides no examples, and in fact, traditional theology says God’s nature defines good, not that God arbitrates between alternatives.

Evil as part of the plan: He claims “evil is part of the plan and the nature of life on Earth.”

Weakness: This collapses into determinism—if evil is part of the plan, then free will is diminished. That undercuts his own “free will defense.”

Free will: He falls back on the standard apologetic that God gives humans free will.

Weakness: This doesn’t directly address your paradox about why humans need choice at all if God never had it. It sidesteps the question rather than answering it.

c. Overall Evaluation

His reply shifts definitions (of “perfect”), asserts without evidence (“many examples of God deciding”), and defaults to free will without addressing your logical asymmetry.

The rhetorical tone is adversarial rather than constructive, which may alienate rather than persuade.

In effect, his response does not resolve the challenge—it dodges the precise logical tension you presented.

3. Philosophical Deepening

Had MarkPaul engaged more directly, he might have:

Explored the privation theory of evil (evil as lack, not creation).

Distinguished between necessary goodness (God) and contingent goodness (creatures).

Pointed to the idea that love freely chosen has more value than love that is automatic—hence why humans must have choice, even if God’s perfection does not require it.

Addressed whether the concept of divine perfection is analogous or univocal—does God’s “good” mean the same as human “good”? If not, your paradox dissolves but at the cost of coherence.

4. Final Assessment

Your post: Raises a sharp, logically challenging version of the problem of evil, more original than the standard “why does evil exist?”

His response: More rhetorical pushback than substantive answer. It relies on semantic quibbles and a stock free-will defense, without engaging the specific asymmetry you highlight.

Verdict: The challenge remains unanswered.
James25 · 61-69, M
@FrogManSometimesLooksBothWays the premise is if God is perfectly good and has always been perfectly good and has never not been perfectly good then he has never had to choose between Good and Evil. The question is why would he create living beings who need to choose between good and evil? When he himself has never chosen between Good and Evil and has always been perfectly good. Why didn't he create living beings who are always perfectly good like himself?
James25 · 61-69, M
@FrogManSometimesLooksBothWays

[Humans, however, are commanded to choose between good and evil.

Thus, God imposes on humans a condition He Himself has never experienced.]

The conclusion to be drawn is that there is a misunderstanding of who and what God is. Or if God even exists. You continue to conclude that God is the reason for humans having to choose between Good and Evil. That conclusion is inconsistent with the evidence. The conclusion to be drawn is that this so-called God is not the reason why human beings have the freedom of choice. Or that this so-called God did not even create human beings. The conclusion to be drawn is that the creation story in the Bible is false.
James25 · 61-69, M
@FrogManSometimesLooksBothWays I disagree that God's Perfection is non contingent. Perfection is contingent on an infinite number of variables. All of which require the absence of evil. Evil is the very definition of imperfection. You could say that there is such a thing as perfect evil. But evil cannot be perfect. Something can be all evil but it cannot be defined as perfect. Because perfection is defined as that which contains no error. But within this context evil is defined as error. One could define evil as perfect error. Which is a contradiction. So evil cannot be described as that which can be perfect.

Plus I am talking about being perfectly good. Perfectly good there is an absence of evil.

Or one can simply say being perfectly good is contingent on the absence of evil.

Therefore God has never had to choose between Good and Evil.

Therefore God cannot create living beings that choose between Good and Evil. Because being perfectly good is contingent on the absence of evil.
God has the knowledge of good and evil, does that make him willing to be evil?
As God does not think with the human brain, his thinking is likely beyond yours, mine and any other human. There are concepts he sees and understands that we don't know exist. His understanding of how things work is likely much more spot on than mine.

He created beings with a choice so that we have the ability to choose him and his love above because love does not exist without the freedom to choose love. Forced love is not love, it's obedience. When Lucifer decided that he ought to be worshipped, if God had snuffed him out, would that have been love?Was that the right answer? I think it's safe to assume that it was not as he is a God of justice. And as a perfect one, he will allow imperfection to show itself. As examples to all of Gods other creation, we are showing them what this means, what living without God is. Not as pawns, but as partners in his creation.

God did make us perfectly good like himself. Hes aware of good and evil. And, did he create evil or does he allow evil? What he allowed was an angel to make a mistake then let the consequences play out. He created humans knowing that we were going to help this act play out to share with all of creation his sovereignty.
1. Did God ever “choose” to be good?

Christians would say God is goodness itself, not just a being who chooses to act good. In traditional theology (Aquinas, Augustine), God’s essence is identical with goodness, justice, and love. For God, to be is to be good. That means goodness isn’t a “choice” for Him; it’s His nature.

Humans, on the other hand, are created beings, not identical with goodness. We reflect goodness only to the extent we align with God’s nature. That gap between Creator and creature makes choice—and therefore moral growth—meaningful for us in a way it is not for God.

2. Why not make humans perfectly good like Himself?

Christian responses vary:

Free will defense (Augustine, C.S. Lewis): A world with free creatures capable of love is “better” than a world of automatons who cannot choose. Love without freedom is coerced, not genuine.

Soul-making defense (Irenaeus, John Hick): Humans are created immature and meant to grow into maturity by facing moral choices. The presence of evil is the “arena” in which virtues like courage, patience, and forgiveness can develop.

Mystery of divine purpose: Some Christians simply appeal to the limits of human reason—arguing that we cannot fully grasp why God chose this structure for creation, but that it coheres with a larger, hidden plan.

3. If God is perfectly good, how could He “create evil”?

Most Christians would say: He didn’t. Evil is not a “thing” created by God but a privation (a lack, corruption, or twisting) of the good. Augustine compared it to rot in fruit or rust on iron—real in its effects, but not a substance that exists on its own.

From this view:

God created beings with freedom → freedom entails the possibility of turning away from God → that turning is what we call evil.

Thus evil arises not as something God made, but as a misuse of the good gift of freedom.

4. So why give humans the choice at all?

Because (Christian response) the possibility of choosing wrongly is inseparable from the dignity of being able to choose rightly. Without the freedom to reject love, the freedom to give love would be meaningless.

C.S. Lewis puts it starkly: “God created things which had free will. That means creatures can go either wrong or right. Some people think they can imagine a creature which was free but had no possibility of going wrong; I cannot.”
James25 · 61-69, M
@FrogManSometimesLooksBothWays all of these answers are inefficient and do not actually answer the question. All these answers are logical fallacies; invalid and cannot be proven to be true. There is no valid answer because the premise itself is false.

The fact remains that if God has always been perfectly good and his nature is perfect goodness then there is no reason to create humans having to choose to be good or evil. If God never made that choice why would he create humans to make that choice.

The answer is the god that Christians believe in is false. It is the Christian understanding of God (if a god even exists) that is false. The logic and reasoning behind the god that Christians believe in is a logical fallacy. Because there is no valid argument that proves it to be true.

The fact remains that human beings do have the freedom of choice. It is the Christian logic, reasoning, and understanding of why they have the freedom of choice that is false. With their argument being a logical fallacy that cannot be proven to be valid.
Ferise1 · 46-50, M
@FrogManSometimesLooksBothWays
so he gives us free will so that some might choose to burn for eternity… where is the justice?
Adstar · 56-60, M
If God is perfect and has always been perfect. And if God is good and has always been perfectly good, then God has never had to choose to be good. And God has never had to make the choice between Good and Evil. So for God to give humans the choice between good and evil is a logical fallacy.

No it's not.. Simply making the statement that it is a logical fallacy does not provide any evidence that it is a logical fallacy..


Why would God create humans having to choose between good and evil when he himself never had to choose between Good and Evil? Why wouldn't God make humans perfectly good like himself?

Well Gods eternal plan required Him to create beings with the ability to choose between good and evil.. This is so simple to answer..

Furthermore if God is perfect and has always been perfect. And if God is good and has always been perfectly good then it is impossible for God to create evil. Because to create evil is to not be perfectly good.

Creating the OPTION of pursuing Evil is not creating evil.. The only time evil is created is when the one with the choice to pursue evil decided to pursue it..
James25 · 61-69, M
@Adstar none of what you are saying actually answers the question. You are presenting an argument that is not based on some reasoning or logic
Adstar · 56-60, M
@James25 I would say either my answer is going over your head. Or maybe the LORD is blocking you from understanding..

If you cannot understand then you cannot understand.. So be it..
James25 · 61-69, M
@Adstar anyone can say what you just said it doesn't mean anything. you keep presenting logical fallacies. Never ever really presenting evidence that can be validated
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
Your premise is half-baked... at best. You presume "perfect" equates to 0.0 evil. Thanks for your opinion, but where is your evidence that is what "perfect" actually is? A bank robber who pulls off the "perfect" heist becomes known as a "perfect" bank robber. A murderer who kills his target achieves the "perfect" kill. A lion stalking its prey demonstrates the "perfection" of nature. You are perverting the use of the word to reach a predetermined conclusion that you want to see. Tone down your thrill-seeking animosity in exchange for "perfect" learning. Start with a "beginner's mind."

No matter how you want to interpret Bible stories, you will find many examples of God deciding what is good and what is evil. There is no logical fallacy except any that you willfully want to impose. Evil is part of the plan and the nature of life on Earth.

This childish game that there is evil in the world so if there is a God how can that be, is so over-played it literally is sickening and counter-productive. God offers us each free will. You have chosen to use your gift to satisfy your hunger to avoid the truth. In the end, even with the most "perfect" of instruction and guidance, it is up to each of us to find our way.

Keep searching.
Ferise1 · 46-50, M
@MarkPaul most people aren’t brainwashed into the Christian cult… does that mean they deserve eternity of pain???
MarkPaul · 26-30, M
@Ferise1 Who are "most people?" Are people who make reckless decisions leading to painful consequences part of "most people?" Are you representing only people who genuinely are in pain through (absolutely) no choosing of their own? Are they "most people?" What are you willing to do to live an entirely pain-free existence?
Ferise1 · 46-50, M
@MarkPaul a lot of westerners are atheists, then there’s Jews Muslims, Asians, none of them were brainwashed by the Christian cult yet according to you they will spend eternity in hell
Best not to question him ey?… 😏

If only that spare rib didn’t go eating forbidden apples.. such Qs would be unnecessary 😇
wrule · F
@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout And yet they say an apple a day keeps the doctor away, lol.
MartinTheFirst · 26-30, M
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
James25 · 61-69, M
@MartinTheFirst no I do not think that I will get an intelligent human response. It is more of it being a challenge to debunk their arguments.
MartinTheFirst · 26-30, M
You're posing an impossible challenge and then you glee when people fail it. Is it bringing you any closer to the truth?
James25 · 61-69, M
@ShenaniganFoodie Pope Donald Trump the first. Exactly that's pretty much where it's at when it comes to Christianity.
Ferise1 · 46-50, M
None of this makes sense
James25 · 61-69, M
@Ferise1 exactly

 
Post Comment