tgamble

That's basically what I said. She responded with a demand for proof that not everyone on the plane was an atheist...

That website is a discussion board.

SRB

If the evil of the planes crashing on 9/11 was absolutely necessary for some greater good, then I guess that all things considered its a good job that the planes crashed. If you had been in a position to stop the hijackers, then on your theory the best thing to do would be to allow them to crash the planes, thereby bringing about this "greater good" you speak of. Isn't that so?

SRB

penumbra

Luluv wrote: “I also do not know of any segment of Christianity or any other world religion which has "the promotion of evil for the sake of good" as a policy.”

Hmmmm…..didn’t Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson both lobby for more weapons and military support for Israel in order to help bring about Armegeddon??? I think I might classify that as promoting evil for the sake of good (well, what Xians think of as good anyway), and those two, at least, seem to really be into the concept!!

luvluv

Nope.

All I said was that some forms of good are not possible without some forms of evil. Is that true or not?

I do not remember saying that out of EVERY evil act, good would necessarily come. I did not say that it was therefore good that every form of evil that occured actually occured, so that good may be brought out of it.

It also does not follow from anything I said that one should allow evil or promote it. I'm really drawing blanks over here as to how any of you actually came to that conclusion. Keith seemed to suggest that omnipotence could make every virtue available to us without the possibility of evil. I countered only to tell him that this was not true. This does not mean that I support or endorse any specific act of evil, only to say that some virtues are only POSSIBLE in a world where evil is also POSSIBLE.

It follows, from my comments about courage, that I would fight to prevent an act of evil from occuring. The good God might want to bring out in me would be the courage to fight to keep an evil act from happening. If God did not want us to fight to prevent evil, why would he make courage a virtue and cowardice a vice? It in no way POSSIBLY follows from any of my statements that I, as a Christian, have the authority or wisdom to decide which act to allow to happen and which act to stop. I have been explicity told by Christ to work for good: to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick and imprisoned.. to care for the "least of these". Inaction or indifference to the suffering of others is nowhere implied in Christian beliefs, nor does it follow from anything I've said here.