IF THERE IS A GOOD GOD , WHY IS THERE SO MUCH EVIL IN THE WORLD..? ATHEIST ARGUMENT.

IF THERE IS A RIGHTEOUS GOD WHO IS GOOD WHY IS THERE SO MUCH EVIL IN THE WORLD. ?Atheist Arguments. This is the bane behind the atheistic disposition by many philosophers who can't understand the modus operandi of divinity in the light of the multifarious societal ills. It is the against this backdrop that I hereby bring to fore these issues which have hitherto been classified as no- go areas by many a religious body in our quest for a more civil society founded on well grounded theological knowledge .It is my hope that most theist would avail themselves of this information in our quest to bring the gospel to the academic community . Analysis on the aforementioned question , would be based on the following models .First , the Free Will Model: God wanted us to freely love him, which meant allowing for the possibility that we might choose against him. And we have--all of us since Adam and Eve. Free will provides a great good—self-determination--and carries with  it significant responsibility, which is also a great good. This is especially true of relationships involving love: such must be entered into freely. Evil is an unfortunate result of human free will. If God were to intervene at every point of our wrongdoing, our free will would be compromised. So evil in the world is not entirely God's fault; however, this position does not claim that God is not responsible in any way for evil. If you have the power to intervene and do not, that implies choices. Among theists there are a number of positions on the nature of God and free will. The two most important for our purposes are the libertarian and compatibilist positions. The compatibilist believes that human free will and God’s determination of all things are compatible, while the libertarian holds that God has restricted his power in order to make human free will possible  and whatever position you may hold would not rule out the place of God’s sovereignty in our lives. Secondly considering The Soul Making Model: We are functionally incomplete [potentially complete]  souls in need of improvement and growth. If we are to assume a free-will [consequent free will and or antecedent condition free will  ). Evil is a necessary condition for a world in which we overcome obstacles and struggles in order to develop. In fact, many higher-order goods (e.g. self-sacrifice, endurance, courage, compassion on the poor, etc.) are not possible unless we have to overcome evil. This model points out that God often allows the condition of suffering to improve us. We become purified through life's trials.     The Possible Worlds design Argument: This suggests that God designed the world in such a way that it included the possibility of evil, but that if rightly perceived, we would understand that all of it works together for a greater good Ro 8:28 “That's why we can be so sure that every detail in our lives of love for God is worked into something good”‘. This is a subset of the first two because both models assume a world in which moral action/ growth is both possible and meaningful. Namely, a world with free will and the possibility of soul making is a better world than one with only automatons. According to design it is safe  to stress the  position of a  world that has regularity in it. consequently there must be a cause and effect for our actions. Thus, evil can have both actual and possible justifications. Actual evil has its purpose in being necessary for some greater moral purpose, while possible evil warns us against the consequences of our actions (e.g. gazing directly in to the sun at noon could result in blindness) This raises a number of issues, including: Couldn’t God have created a world in which we are free and/or our souls improve and yet we always choose the good? Why can’t God intervene when evil is committed yet still maintain our freedom or soul improvement? Is  human freedom really justified? Are we free enough for our moral choices to be meaningful? If we must exercise our free-will position then  it is impossible to actually imagine such a world, that free will makes no sense in a context where God is always intervening, and that significant freedom must have real consequences.  There is therefore an Eschatological Hope: 1 Co 15:24” After that the end will come, when he will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having destroyed every ruler and authority and power”.  Granting all the above, God has also promised that such evil and suffering is only for a finite time in human history. God will bring an end to it all, and evil will be rightly answered by its destruction. Furthermore, the future hope that God offers will judge, compensate and/or at least put into perspective this present world’s evil. Of course, this model raises the question as to whether good can be said to actually "balance off" evil and suffering. This is alternately understood as either the afterlife and/or the final state of all things. An extension of this is that the Church should be a community that looks to that future justice by modeling it now: believers are to avoid fatalism and work toward God's promised  peace and justice. that begins in God’s work on the cross. Resistance to evil and suffering can be a form of obedience to God. On the  question of who goes to hell from a biblical point of view anyone who believes in Jesus Christ as their lord and savior automatically has a place in heaven, and I must state it has nothing to do with your character but rather on the price paid on the cross for our sins :{ present, past, and future sins inclusive} Tit 3:5“ he saved us, not because of the righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He washed away our sins, giving us a new birth and new life through the Holy Spirit. “Ro 8:1 THEREFORE, [there is] now no condemnation (no adjudging guilty of wrong) for those who are in Christ Jesus, who live [and] walk not after the dictates of the flesh, but after the dictates of the Spirit.  AMP  IF THERE IS A RIGHTEOUS GOD WHO IS GOOD WHY IS THERE SO MUCH EVIL IN THE WORLD. Atheist Arguments. This is the bane behind the atheistic disposition by many philosophers who can't understand the modus operandi of divinity in the light of the multifarious societal ills. It is the against this backdrop that I hereby bring to fore these issues which have hitherto been classified as no- go areas by many a religious body in our quest for a more civil society founded on well grounded theological knowledge .It is my hope that most theist would avail themselves of this information in our quest to bring the gospel to the academic community . Analysis on the aforementioned question , would be based on the following models .First , the Free Will Model: God wanted us to freely love him, which meant allowing for the possibility that we might choose against him. And we have--all of us since Adam and Eve. Free will provides a great good—self-determination--and carries with  it significant responsibility, which is also a great good. This is especially true of relationships involving love: such must be entered into freely. Evil is an unfortunate result of human free will. If God were to intervene at every point of our wrongdoing, our free will would be compromised. So evil in the world is not entirely God's fault; however, this position does not claim that God is not responsible in any way for evil. If you have the power to intervene and do not, that implies choices. Among theists there are a number of positions on the nature of God and free will. The two most important for our purposes are the libertarian and compatibilist positions. The compatibilist believes that human free will and God’s determination of all things are compatible, while the libertarian holds that God has restricted his power in order to make human free will possible  and whatever position you may hold would not rule out the place of God’s sovereignty in our lives. Secondly considering The Soul Making Model: We are functionally incomplete [potentially complete]  souls in need of improvement and growth. If we are to assume a free-will [consequent free will and or antecedent condition free will  ). Evil is a necessary condition for a world in which we overcome obstacles and struggles in order to develop. In fact, many higher-order goods (e.g. self-sacrifice, endurance, courage, compassion on the poor, etc.) are not possible unless we have to overcome evil. This model points out that God often allows the condition of suffering to improve us. We become purified through life's trials.     The Possible Worlds design Argument: This suggests that God designed the world in such a way that it included the possibility of evil, but that if rightly perceived, we would understand that all of it works together for a greater good Ro 8:28 “That's why we can be so sure that every detail in our lives of love for God is worked into something good”‘. This is a subset of the first two because both models assume a world in which moral action/ growth is both possible and meaningful. Namely, a world with free will and the possibility of soul making is a better world than one with only automatons. According to design it is safe  to stress the  position of a  world that has regularity in it. consequently there must be a cause and effect for our actions. Thus, evil can have both actual and possible justifications. Actual evil has its purpose in being necessary for some greater moral purpose, while possible evil warns us against the consequences of our actions (e.g. gazing directly in to the sun at noon could result in blindness) This raises a number of issues, including: Couldn’t God have created a world in which we are free and/or our souls improve and yet we always choose the good? Why can’t God intervene when evil is committed yet still maintain our freedom or soul improvement? Is  human freedom really justified? Are we free enough for our moral choices to be meaningful? If we must exercise our free-will position then  it is impossible to actually imagine such a world, that free will makes no sense in a context where God is always intervening, and that significant freedom must have real consequences.  There is therefore an Eschatological Hope: 1 Co 15:24” After that the end will come, when he will turn the Kingdom over to God the Father, having destroyed every ruler and authority and power”.  Granting all the above, God has also promised that such evil and suffering is only for a finite time in human history. God will bring an end to it all, and evil will be rightly answered by its destruction. Furthermore, the future hope that God offers will judge, compensate and/or at least put into perspective this present world’s evil. Of course, this model raises the question as to whether good can be said to actually "balance off" evil and suffering. This is alternately understood as either the afterlife and/or the final state of all things. An extension of this is that the Church should be a community that looks to that future justice by modeling it now: believers are to avoid fatalism and work toward God's promised  peace and justice. that begins in God’s work on the cross. Resistance to evil and suffering can be a form of obedience to God. On the  question of who goes to hell from a biblical point of view anyone who believes in Jesus Christ as their lord and savior automatically has a place in heaven, and I must state it has nothing to do with your character but rather on the price paid on the cross for our sins :{ present, past, and future sins inclusive} Tit 3:5“ he saved us, not because of the righteous things we had done, but because of his mercy. He washed away our sins, giving us a new birth and new life through the Holy Spirit. “Ro 8:1 THEREFORE, [there is] now no condemnation (no adjudging guilty of wrong) for those who are in Christ Jesus, who live [and] walk not after the dictates of the flesh, but after the dictates of the Spirit.  AMP