Do we prevent somebody being hurt by superstition or faith by rejecting and challenging those things? 

Is it mistaken to support organised religion in membership or donations?

If people do good because they are human, not because God prompts them then is it right to risk giving God any credit when they alone own their good?

Patrick H


In religion God is the pure good and the source of all good.

Evil is seen as a good that is faulty and thus it is not a thing that is created. 

Religion says that atheists if they say there is no God cannot account for good or what good means.  They end up with a problem of good.  So evil is evidence or proof for God. 

So the problem of evil and the problem of good are two sides of the same coin.  To say like atheists do that there cannot be a God when there is such great suffering and evil is held to make no sense. 

The problem of good claims that an atheist cannot account for why he calls say happiness good and suffering bad.


There is big picture to worry about all the time.

It is evil just to look at what somebody has done.  An action entails many direct actions and indirect ones.

Wanting to see evil is a sign you are evil so this says to avoid seeing evil or judging anybody as evil unless you cannot avoid doing so for the evidence is so clear.


Evil is hostile to good and what is real. To say evil is the negation of good is to call it in some way hostile and intrinsically malevolent.

Saying evil is maladapted good is to say that it can make you love it and you can make yourself love it. Both things must happen before evil can be done.

The problem is that you are not really loving evil but what you wrongly think good is!

The accusation of loving evil proves that religious people and moralists slander you in the name of good.


Notion that evil is an uncreated power means it is permanent and you can be permanently evil and it will never be overcome. Tehre are amny eils which there is no point in battling.

The notion that evil is a power and the fact that evil does burn out implies that you should do evil just to use up the power so that it will be gone for good. Then those affected can move on. This inspires people to use the evil against their enemies or the worst people in society so that it is directed at them instead of being allowed to strike innocent people and maybe children.


People rightly or wrongly do see evil as just that a power.

Those who see some evil they encounter or find in themselves as permanent will believe the power is there so there is no option but to go along with it.

People probably are lying when they say they think good masters evil every time


God using evil to do good does nothing to justify the evil even a little. It emphasies the condemnation. It is still totally inexcusbable. So if evil is bad anyway it is worse in how it has to be fougth with good.

Imagien evil is a poers as much as godo is. That does not mean tht it cannot prtend to be good and be a parasite. You can present that temmptimg glass of water as water when it is positon. Real evil will have to target real good by trying to pollute it. So wther real or unreal, evil is parastic on good.

If evil is not real but is parstic on good then in a sense it is wors than real evil. Good being orrupeted is worse than good being good and evil being evil and separate. So the only respons to the evil erson wil be hate. If the hate will not work then that is a pity. So you hav eto love

Evil is corrupted good and uses good to cloak itself. So yoy may say that God tllerates a baby suffering terribly for he has found a way to inject good into it. But that is the point. Evil always uses the good purpose to promote itself.


God has no freedom to sin and yet he is perfect so how can he have the right to make us as free agents who can sin? If he can do without the ability to sin why can't we?

The notion that God gives us free will is about trying to say that God loves us so much that he respects our free choice. But to respect our free choice is not the same as respecting us. You are not respecting a person if you freely let them freely do something very dangerous and bad.


Believers insult good by describing it as a problem if there is no God. They don't know what good is when they can say that. They don't know that good will be whether there is a God or not, whether there is anything or not. The evil person has a warped sense of good that blinds him or her to what good is. That is what makes her or him bad. The God belief is making believers evil.

The argument that design and goodness in the universe and in people shows there must be a God to make the good is to be rejected for it insults good in the way we have shown. Christians sometimes say that God made all things and designed all things without intending it to be an argument for God. But argument or not, they are saying wicked things. If he did not intend the marks he left to be evidence they are still marks of goodness and show something of him.

An atheist might see evil as good in the wrong place just like a believer in God does. But at least the atheist is not at risk of seeing it as more good than the believer is. The believer sees God in it.

The notion that evil is not real but is merely good that is not good enough leads to some interesting things. What if a person is a cynical malicious gossip? His friends may say, "You tell it as you see it!" That is saying, "You are to be praised for being a gossip." It does not make their condemnations of cynicism and gossip sincere. If you love the person you will be forced to praise what good they do even if it is the good of evil. That you condemn proves that you do not. To view a person as dangerous and harmful makes you hate and that is what hate is all about.

The person who forgives will reason, "That person hurts me for he sees me as a danger. He hates his perception of me and not me and so I forgive. I understand and understanding is necessary for forgiving."

In fact a person who has warped perception is worse than the person who sees you as you are and hates you for it. That person is more dangerous. It is more rational to forgive the person who hates you because he knows you. Whether it is the perception of you that is hated or you you will still bleed from the knife in your back. It follows then that Christian goodness is not as good as it pretends to be. So why put much value on the problem of good?