Indeed, All Their Tables Are Covered with Vomit; There Is No Place Without a Stench

megaphone-2

Advisory: The editorial board of HNewsWire adopted the official policy to bypass many social media platforms. Some of these include: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Parler, and YouTube. We believe these companies are responsible for many of the spiritual ills our world faces today. In some cases, however, we have allowed our guest contributors to include content from their YouTube channel while we search for alternatives.

Featured Story

HNewsWire Logo Bottom Menu

A FLOOD OF MORAL FILTH…

We may not like the idea that God allows certain kinds of evil. And, logically, there is nothing invalid about a person choosing to say, “I reject obedience to God because I don’t agree with His morality.” But theodicy is not a question of making God agree with our whims. What we cannot say, logically, is that, if God does not act according to our moral preferences, then He cannot exist in moral perfection. This makes the critic the ultimate standard of morality!

To put that another way, claiming God cannot exist or cannot be perfectly moral unless He agrees with my moral preferences is to say this: “I am morally perfect, so if God and I differ on some moral issue, the only possible reason is that God is flawed, and I am not.” Once again, a person is not logically prevented from taking this approach. But just because it’s a possible viewpoint does not make it a reasonable one.

“Good! I hope the Jews did kill Christ, I’d do it again. 
I’d F*cking do it again in a second!” 
comedian, Sarah Silverman, Jesus is Magic; 72-minute movie ….

Infamous comedian Sarah Silverman is a very beautiful woman outwardly, but inwardly she is filled with dead man’s bones and rotting maggots. Matthew 23:27, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness.” As with many elite Jews today, Silverman hates Jesus Christ and often blasphemes Him in her works of darkness. She portrays herself in bed as having sex with Jesus. Sarah Silverman is a sick woman. One of her 2 biological sisters is a feminist rabbi, the other an actor.

America can’t seem to get enough of immoral celebrities like Sarah Silverman. Everything is so evil these days. Nothing is sacred anymore. Look what they just erected in Chicago in July of 2011. How much more of America’s sinful pride and stubborn arrogance will God tolerate?…

Just as the Jews crucified their Messiah 2,000 years ago, their descendants today harbor the same intense hatred for Jesus Christ. Matthew 27:24-25, “When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.” And so it was and is today upon the Jews (Luke 21:24). Hollywood is saturated with hatred toward Jesus Christ. In every movie, every major production, they curse in God’s name, blaspheming the holy name of Jesus, and desecrating everything which God has made sacred and holy.

God does not have to create evil in order for there to be evil. Logic says that God does not have to conform to our moral preferences in order to be perfectly good. So, then, how can a person rationalize the existence of evil in a way that’s relevant to our own experience?

The first point that must be realized is that God is consistent in His “allowance” of our free will and the natural function of His creation. As it turns out, it’s the fact that God is consistent in His moral behaviors that greatly aggravates the skeptic. This is because God’s consistency runs counter to our human preferences: we’d rather God bend or break the rules to suit our own selfish preferences.

HNewsWire Logo Bottom Menu

For example, God is consistent in allowing human beings a broad use of free will. This includes allowing people the freedom to reject His will and spurn His commands. This can result in consequences for those who choose to disobey. At the same time, much of the suffering of man on earth is due to the decisions of other people. There, again, God is being consistent in allowing humanity the freedom to act.

This is really nothing more than a rephrasing of the earlier argument about allowing the potential for evil, because, without it, there is no potential for good. The same natural laws that allow us to build skyscrapers and develop medicines can be abused to make bombs and illicit drugs. They are the same laws that produce earthquakes and hurricanes. Too often, we make choices knowing the risks involved or with deliberate intent to misuse creation and then blame God when those potential problems materialize.

The second point to make is that God is not motionless, silent, and inactive in the face of evil. Here, again, is a point where the critic becomes inconsistent. The same voices who attempt to say, “God is not doing enough to stop the evil” are almost always the same ones who object when God does anything to stop evil. The incidents most often pointed to by critics of the Bible as evidence of God’s supposed immorality (such as the destruction of Sodom) were times when God explicitly stated that His actions were a response to malevolence. They were His means of stopping and preventing more evil.

The same critic who cries, “God does nothing about evil,” is all too often the same person calling God immoral for His actions in the flood. Or against the Amalekites. Or at Jericho. God has already taken steps to neutralize and counter evil. Saying He does “nothing” is simply untrue. Complaining that He does “too much” to stop evil is all well and good, but that makes theodicy irrelevant and the problem of evil moot.

The third point is that we have a limited perspective. This is not a very persuasive argument, especially for someone hostile to the idea of God. But, logically, it has to be said that God under examination is posited to be omniscient, omnipotent, eternal, and omnipresent. We, of course, are not. We often hear employers, military personnel, parents, doctors, and others reminding us that there are things happening “behind the scenes” that we simply cannot understand. Our inability to understand certain decisions is not hard evidence that those decisions are wrong. It means nothing more than that we have an incomplete understanding.

Finally, one has to take all criticisms of evil in the entire context of Christian teaching. If this life were all there is, then the problem of evil would be a much bigger problem. However, according to the Bible, this is not the only life we are going to live. A person can reject that belief, but he cannot criticize the God of the Bible and His morality as if the afterlife were not an intrinsic part of Christian moral understanding. Christians believe that all wrongs—every single one—will be reckoned with, someday. They believe that God is acting to restrain evil now, just as He has in the past. The Bible makes it clear that the struggles we experience now are not the purpose for which we exist, nor do they define our value. Instead, there is a point to the suffering and a plan that involves making all wrongs right.

Looking at these ideas, then, we can see that Epicurus’ version of the problem of evil suffers from a fatal flaw. This can be summed up in one simple statement: the “God” Epicurus criticizes is not the God of the Bible. In other words, Epicurus’ criticism only works against the deities of Greek polytheism and in the context of a polytheistic view of reality.

HNewsWire Logo Bottom Menu

The Christian can respond to Epicurus as follows:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but unable to? Then he is not omnipotent. God is willing to limit evil and has acted to do just that. So, He is still omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. God is able, but not willing, to abolish our free will. So, He is still omnibenevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? God has acted to defeat evil. Evil comes simply when we fall short of His will.
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? God is not willing to prevent our free will. Your disapproval does not make Him any less God.

And, to the more pop-culture-friendly Lex Luthor, Christianity can respond as follows:

“If God is all-powerful, he cannot be all good. And if he’s all good, then he cannot be all-powerful.” God can be all-powerful and choose not to act according to your preferences. When you say “all good,” what you really mean is “doing things my way”; and when you say, “all-powerful,” what you really mean is “capable of making us simultaneously free and robotic,” which is gibberish. An all-powerful, all-good God can allow evil in order to obtain the greater, eternal good.

Human beings will always struggle with the problem of evil. Theodicy is not an attempt to make God appear as palatable as possible. In fact, the opposite is true. A truly rational theodicy has to begin with the admission that our dislike of something does not make it false. The question is not whether God is compatible with our personal preferences. The problem of evil is simply the debate over whether or not God is logically possible. Theodicy, taking all logic and evidence together, clearly says He is—whether we like Him or not.

Our politicians are corrupt, and each year their self-centered behavior only leads to us despising them even more. Then we’re left with our current state of decaying culture, and many believe America has fallen down a cliff of a complete reprobate, one that is so immoral that a return to decency may NOT impossible. The irony is, of course, we continue to ask our politicians to rectify this issue, the same iniquitous politicians who cannot be trusted with a free cheeseburger, or the same politicians that vote for themselves a raise in the dark of night, in the halls of Congress.

We ask our government to improve and fix our economy, the same government that steals from us daily. We implore our government to hold our interest at heart, the same government that daily regulates us into ruins. We ask our government to morally police us, to clean up the culture and to lead by example – the same government that cannot maintain the placement of its own genitals in its pants and doesn’t possess an ethical bone in its body. Our government like Rome is the decaying, from the inside out, there’s one exception so far, Pres. Trump….

For well over 125 years, the American people took care of one another. This isn’t to say there weren’t poor individuals, of course, there were, utopia only exists in heaven. But the American people took care of their own; they did so through church, community, and charity. There was no need for a monstrous welfare state. If your values and principles take issue with the current welfare state we live under, what are you going to do about it? You have two choices, let the government handle it as they do now and continue to be taxed for it, or you take care of it yourself. Churches must start acting like churches in their communities. People who hold to the values they state must act like people of these values. Do this, and the problem goes away.

God is consistent in His “allowance” of our free will and the natural function of His creation. As it turns out, it’s the fact that God is consistent in His moral behaviors that greatly aggravates the skeptic. This is because God’s consistency runs counter to our human preferences: we’d rather God bend or break the rules to suit our own selfish preferences.

For example, God is consistent in allowing human beings a broad use of free will. This includes allowing people the freedom to reject His will and spurn His commands. This can result in consequences for those who choose to disobey. At the same time, much of the suffering of man on earth is due to the decisions of other people. There, again, God is being consistent in allowing humanity the freedom to act.

This is really nothing more than a rephrasing of the earlier argument about allowing the potential for evil, because, without it, there is no potential for good. The same natural laws that allow us to build skyscrapers and develop medicines can be abused to make bombs and illicit drugs. They are the same laws that produce earthquakes and hurricanes. Too often, we make choices knowing the risks involved or with deliberate intent to misuse creation and then blame God when those potential problems materialize.

The second point to make is that God is not motionless, silent, and inactive in the face of evil. Here, again, is a point where the critic becomes inconsistent. The same voices who attempt to say, “God is not doing enough to stop the evil” are almost always the same ones who object when God does anything to stop evil. The incidents most often pointed to by critics of the Bible as evidence of God’s supposed immorality (such as the destruction of Sodom) were times when God explicitly stated that His actions were a response to malevolence. They were His means of stopping and preventing more evil.

The same critic who cries, “God does nothing about evil,” is all too often the same person calling God immoral for His actions in the flood. Or against the Amalekites. Or at Jericho. God has already taken steps to neutralize and counter evil. Saying He does “nothing” is simply untrue. Complaining that He does “too much” to stop evil is all well and good, but that makes theodicy irrelevant and the problem of evil moot.

The third point is that we have a limited perspective. This is not a very persuasive argument, especially for someone hostile to the idea of God. But, logically, it has to be said that God under examination is posited to be omniscient, omnipotent, eternal, and omnipresent. We, of course, are not. We often hear employers, military personnel, parents, doctors, and others reminding us that there are things happening “behind the scenes” that we simply cannot understand. Our inability to understand certain decisions is not hard evidence that those decisions are wrong. It means nothing more than that we have an incomplete understanding.

Finally, one has to take all criticisms of evil in the entire context of Christian teaching. If this life were all there is, then the problem of evil would be a much bigger problem. However, according to the Bible, this is not the only life we are going to live. A person can reject that belief, but he cannot criticize the God of the Bible and His morality as if the afterlife were not an intrinsic part of Christian moral understanding. Christians believe that all wrongs—every single one—will be reckoned with, someday. They believe that God is acting to restrain evil now, just as He has in the past. The Bible makes it clear that the struggles we experience now are not the purpose for which we exist, nor do they define our value. Instead, there is a point to the suffering and a plan that involves making all wrongs right.

Back to the beginning

Looking at these ideas, then, we can see that Epicurus’ version of the problem of evil suffers from a fatal flaw. This can be summed up in one simple statement: the “God” Epicurus criticizes is not the God of the Bible. In other words, Epicurus’ criticism only works against the deities of Greek polytheism and in the context of a polytheistic view of reality.

The Christian can respond to Epicurus as follows:

Is God willing to prevent evil, but unable to? Then he is not omnipotent. God is willing to limit evil and has acted to do just that. So, He is still omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. God is able, but not willing, to abolish our free will. So, He is still omnibenevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? God has acted to defeat evil. Evil comes simply when we fall short of His will.
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? God is not willing to prevent our free will. Your disapproval does not make Him any less God.

And, to the more pop-culture-friendly Lex Luthor, Christianity can respond as follows:

“If God is all-powerful, he cannot be all good. And if he’s all good, then he cannot be all-powerful.” God can be all-powerful and choose not to act according to your preferences. When you say “all good,” what you really mean is “doing things my way”; and when you say, “all-powerful,” what you really mean is “capable of making us simultaneously free and robotic,” which is gibberish. An all-powerful, all-good God can allow evil in order to obtain the greater, eternal good.

Human beings will always struggle with the problem of evil. Theodicy is not an attempt to make God appear as palatable as possible. In fact, the opposite is true. A truly rational theodicy has to begin with the admission that our dislike of something does not make it false. The question is not whether God is compatible with our personal preferences. The problem of evil is simply the debate over whether or not God is logically possible. Theodicy, taking all logic and evidence together, clearly says He is—whether we like Him or not.

Contributors

StevieRay Hansen
Editor, HNewsWire.com

MY MISSION IS NOT TO CONVINCE YOU, ONLY TO INFORM…

Jesus come quick, there is nothing left in society that’s sacred….

“Have I therefore become your enemy by telling you the truth?”

#enemies #christ #War #christhaters #theend

#chilssextrade #pedophiles #lawlessness #mexican #children #molested #kill #badbusiness

HNewsWire Logo Bottom Menu


127-Faith-Foundation-Logo-7

The 127 Faith Foundation: We do not solicit donations from “those on disability, on a fixed income, or those who cannot afford to give.” Please Pray!

Amazon “Wish List” for The 127 Faith Foundation

Or, make checks payable to:

The 127 Faith Foundation
PO Box 127
Pontotoc, TX 76869

watchman-on-wall

Tagged In

Support

The number of Orphans aging out of Child Protective Custody has grown at an alarming rate. The 127 Faith Foundation receives many requests each week to house them at our ranch. Our prayer is that the good people of our country will step up to the challenge and offer financial support for "the least among us." We need your help! StevieRay Hansen, Founder, The 127 Faith Foundation

Newsletter

Must Read

Long-Journey-Home-1
One-Thing
Mark-Cahill-Ministries-1
One-Blinding-Vision

Other Sources

USSANews

Delicous

Web-Ad-1

Latest News

Media Bias, Censorship, and Political Correctness Run Amuck,Twitter, Facebook a.k.a.(Fake book) YouTube, MSLSD, CNN, and the list is long!

By StevieRay Hansen | February 3, 2017

![aefder](https://hnewswire.com/content/images/2017/02/aefder.jpg?resize=720%2C376&ssl=1) January 26, 2017 Article category: Highlights. Tags: [media](http://www.cairco.org/tags/media) [media bias](http://www.cairco.org/tags/media-bias) [national security](http://www.cairco.org/tags/national-security) [political correctness](http://www.cairco.org/tags/political-correctness) In the aftermath of the horrific Islamic terrorist attacks, the…

Read More

(no title)

By StevieRay Hansen | February 2, 2017

Verse Of The Day… for Thursday, February 2, 2017: Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. — 1 John 4:8…

Read More

Matthew 5:13-15 (NIV) 13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good”

By StevieRay Hansen | February 2, 2017

Matthew 5:13-15 (NIV) 13“You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It…

Read More

Linda Harvey on Oregon’s ‘Gender-Obliterating Nonsense’ – The Worst State to Raise Children

By StevieRay Hansen | January 31, 2017

Linda Harvey on Oregon’s ‘Gender-Obliterating Nonsense’ – The Worst State to Raise Children LGBTQ Liberalism Is Destroying Young Women’s Bodies: Alex Matheny, 20, shows off…

Read More

The Agenda: GLBTQ & Activist Groups

By StevieRay Hansen | January 31, 2017

Well, we called it on Shep, but so did just about every other conservative who is in the know about Fox News: the network’s afternoon…

Read More
Focused-Protection-1
Place Your Ad Here

We make every effort to acknowledge sources used in our news articles. In a few cases, the sources were lost due to a technological glitch. If you believe we have not given sufficient credit for your source material, please contact us, and we will be more than happy to link to your article.

StevieRay Hansen

In his riveting memoir, "A Long Journey Home", StevieRay Hansen will lead you through his incredible journey from homeless kid to multimillionaire oilman willing to give a helping hand to other throwaway kids. Available on Amazon.

1 Comment

  1. WildB on February 13, 2021 at 7:30 pm

    Rep. Adam Schiff acknowledged that he LIED and made up parts of the Ukraine phone call transcript when he delivered his opening statement at a much-watched TV hearing with the U.S. top intelligence officer. I also know that this lie got out 1st and the rebuttal didn’t. THESE PEOPLE are the ones tampering with the election with these continued lies that are aired to taint the voter pool..! When does this voter pool tampering end?

    Why can this man continue to lie, even now under oath and not be taken to task? NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW? Really? Seams these people are.

    https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/sep/26/adam-schiff-called-out-fabricating-ukraine-call-tr/

    Adam Shift is in violation of 50 U.S. Code § 3033. Inspector General of the Intelligence Community (k) Reports (G) In this paragraph, the term “urgent concern” means any of the following: (ii) A false statement to Congress, or a willful withholding from Congress, on an issue of material fact relating to the funding, administration, or operation of an intelligence activity.

    In that Adam Shift did make a wilful and false statement about material facts with his opening comments in regards to Ukrainian “urgent case” investigation.

    He is guilty of the very definitions of “urgent case” violations and needs to be put to task himself.

    Not only did he violate his oath of office, his misconduct was air by many colluding major networks to the determent and continued contamination of the voting public.

    This is the worst kind of election manipulation to date as he has been guilty of others since the election of Mr Trump.

    This man needs to be removed from all future areas of Intel responsibilities and he and his cooperatives need to brought to bear the full weight of the Law. .

    Most Respectfully,
    WK Gainer USNR BT2

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/3033

    MORE! Sam Stein: Adam Schiff “Expressed Regret” For Lying About Having No Prior Contact With Whistleblower https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2019/10/04/sam_stein_adam_schiff_expressed_regret_for_lying_about_having_no_prior_contact_with_whistleblower.html

    ——————–
    That is all…..

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.