The answer (logically possible, though slightly frustrating) is that:
God must have a sufficient reason/s for waiting to end all evil/ suffering that is hidden at this time. Evil and suffering doesn't question the existence of God, it just questions his operation. Why doesn’t he end it NOW!?!?!?!? We don't know. We have to say 'God has hidden and sufficient reasons that will one day be revealed and understood'
God being omnipotent, he could have created a reality which would have the same results as this one, but where this "reason" would not have existed. You are trying to skirt around the issue. That is, he could have created a reality where we would not have needed to wonder at these "hidden and sufficient" reasons, and these reasons themselves would not have existed.
2. God HAS done something about evil and suffering.
The bible says that suffering has resulted from humans rebelling against God (sin - Gen3). God made a promise to bless this cursed creation through Christ, and reverse the effects of sin (Gen12.1-3).
Again, the idea that God is omnipotent (and omnipotence implies omniscience) implies that he could have created initial conditions under which man, even if given free will, would never have rebelled at all! The fact that man rebelled means either that God is bound by time (and is thus neither omnipotent nor omniscient), or that he is either non-omnipotent, or he is neither omnipotent nor omniscient.
Jesus took our guilt and punishment for that guilt when he died on the cross. He dealt with sin, the cause of suffering, and in his resurrection we see an example of complete restoration from death and decay that God will apply to the whole world and everyone who turns to him in trust....
This is really not pertinent to the argument, nor is it falsifiable, so I won't comment on it.
3. God IS doing something about evil and suffering.
If you take a minute to think about it, he is doing many things to help us and sustain us through this dark world. He is transforming people by his spirit to be more like Christ - and who in turn alleviate the suffering of others through loving acts.
A few questions:
a) Why is this world dark? It was the Father who created it, after all, according to your own theology.
b) If Christ is equivalent to his father, why did not his removal of all sin automatically remove the taint on mankind, and return us to an Eden-like state of primal purity?
c) If he can transform people by his spirit, why does he not simply transform us all and end this world of suffering we find ourselves in?
d) How does he choose his "Agents"? What is it that qualifies you to be an "agent" of change in God's plan?
In fact, this whole part is so rife with contradictions that I could go on like this for hours.
He is still sustaining the earth, and we see his goodness in providing sun, food, shelter etc.
How precisely does he "sustain the Earth"?
And what of those who are denied food and shelter in this world? If he is responsible for the provision of food and shelter, he is equally responsible for its absence.
He often answers prayers for healing and restoration (but sometimes allows the suffering to continue)
He uses suffering to produce godly character, perseverance, patience and hope in the future resurrection. Character is built in the furnace of difficulty.
Again, the old question arises - why create a reality in which all these virtues are the products of the furnace of difficulty? Why not create one where they are inherent to man? Why create a reality where suffering is a necessity? Either he is not able, in which case he is not omnipotent, or he is not willing, in which case he is not God by any reasonable Christian standard.
He is patiently waiting to bring an end to all evil - so that in the mean time more people can heed his call to 'repent' - stop ignoring Christ and submit to his Lordship so that they can escape his judgment. He uses suffering situations to warn people to repent before its too late (Lk13)
Again, the same old question. Why can he not simply create a different method of letting people know his wish? And why not create man so that man is inherently inclined to his wish? Or create starting circumstances so that even when man has free will, he never strays? And why is he judgmental? It is like me creating a computer program, then "judging" it when it does precisely and exactly what I programmed it to do, and condemning it to deletion (or whatever the analog of hell is) based on that judgment. Only with your God, it's much worse, because he is condemning conscious entities.
4. God WILL do something
God has never failed to keep any of his promises, and on that basis (his faithfulness), we can be absolutely confident that he will destroy the old evil-infected creation, and remake and perfect a beautiful new home of righteousness - where all his people will dwell with him and each other for eternity (without any evil/suffering). This is our 'resurrection hope'. We will rise with new physical incorruptible bodies (like Jesus) and inherit a perfect new creation.
Then why the hell didn't he do it right the first time? Either he couldn't, or he didn't want to, both of which disqualifies him as a God.
The bible doesn't define 'Omnipresent' as neatly as we would like. In fact that is just a word that theologians have applied to a bunch of data (examples) depicting God as 'apparently all present'. Eg. Psalm139.
Why doesn't the Bible define it properly? After all, it IS supposed to be a guide to humans for living on Earth, isn't it?
God is spirit and so can’t be thought of as 'present' in the same way that you and me think of it (we who are space/temporally bound). We tend to think of presence as 'physical presence' which ISNT the sort of presence referred to. Omnipresent does not necessarily mean corporeally bound. This would actually limit him. God existed before physical created matter. Once he created it, he did not dwell in it, although he is around it and knows about it. God did become a human in Christ - but that is a different matter (excuse pun).
GOTCHA!
I would like to present the old refutation of dualist systems - if matter and spirit share no attributes, how do they interact? And if they share an attribute, then spirit is also bound, or matter is unbound. As matter is apparently bound, spirit must also be bound, which would make it no different, in principle, from matter. And how can a bound spirit be God? Also, how could spirit create matter if it was completely different from it? Can the unbound produce the bound?
Theologians like to distinguish between Gods 'immanence' and 'transcendence' - that is, he is 'immanent' (close to us and creation), and yet is apart from it and above it, not identical with it, or a part of it (transcendent).
The concept of distance is meaningless to a transcendental being.
As I have previously suggested, trying to fit Gods infinite order of being into our puny finite mental categories produces gaps of understanding that we just won’t be able to fill until the new creation, when we shall know as he knows. But just because we can’t know the big metaphysical questions about God with completeness doesn't mean we can’t know him adequately. We can know as much about him as will fit in our puny brains (which is enough for a healthy and good relationship with Him), and the rest will be revealed later when we get our new creation brain upgrades!!!
This is a total cop-out! You are saying that the truth as relating to God is unknowable. However, if man is created in God's image, and that includes man's consciousness, and their fundamental attributes are the same, then God is very definitely not unknowable. Because if he were unknowable to us, then he would be unknowable to himself, too.
Finally my brother, may I suggest to you that God is some one we should trust in and have Faith in.
All that is required to refute this argument is one simple interrogative:
Why?
It is only in the person of Jesus Christ that God has revealed Himself to be the most trust worthy and the Faithful.
As I said, if "spirit" is completely different from matter, then ideas and concepts from our reality have no meaning when concerning God. He cannot "be" anything we can describe meaningfully, simply because he is not of our reality.
This brings up another contradiction - if God is knowable, then he must essentially have a way to interact with matter, which means that he must have some attributes common to matter, which means that he is bound. If, on the other hand, he is pure spirit, and unknowable, then he has no way of interacting with matter at all. Your points consecutively contradict themselves.
I know I am deviating a bit from your questions, but am compelled to urge you to consider Christ in detail. Faith is not wishful thinking. It is when we put our faith in Him; He reveals Himself to us in His fullness and leads us into all truth. It is only then that our inner eyes (manonethra) will be opened to understand the mysteries therein. I too had doubts. It is He who answered me in due course of time. Yet, at every moment He has proved Himself faithful to me. May I beg you not to get into a willful rebellion against Him who is the creator, sustainer and savior of all, but consider Him diligently? It is my prayer that God Himself Who is the ANSWER will reveal to you the truths of Him and unfold the mysteries of His work of salvation for the mankind.
I appreciate your passion for religion, but I urge you consider the truth.
Again, this has no bearing on the debate.
