However, in the case that he lacked omnibenevolence, evil would still cast a dark shadow in the world because perhaps God does not desire to relieve it. In actuality, God can be all three, and evil can and does exist. This is true because God is not responsible for the evil in the world. Evil blemishes the world wherever the world is lacking in goodness. If evil did not taint the world, the world would lack good and freewill, too.
Hume concluded that the three points are inconsistent. If God is omnipotent, He is aware of existing evil and suffering, and knows how to put a stop to it. If God is omnibenevolent He will want to put a stop to it. If God is both of these attributes, then evil cannot exist. Since we know evil and suffering is a necessary bi-product of human life, we must acknowledge that evil does exist.
He solved this problem by saying that god is responsible for the evil in the world by defining evil as “privation”. By this he means when we use worlds like “evil” and “bad” we are saying that something does not meet our expectations of what it should be like ( by nature). Augustine wrote that evil is not a substance but is in fact an absence of kind feelings. Augustine also said that god can’t be blamed for creating evil himself that occurs in the world. As he said that in fact evil comes from angels and human beings who chose deliberately to deny and disobey what God had taught them, by turning away from him and what he had wished for mankind.
Surely and all loving (omnibenevolent) God wouldn’t allow this. Human Evil is where people cause harm to others and create chaos. Why would God create a world that consists of evil and cruelty? therefore Mill questions the idea of an omnibenevolent God, however if it is disagreed that God isn’t all loving then it could suggest that God doesn’t know of our suffering and could mean that omniscience cannot possibly be an attribute of God. Mill would say that if God is omniscient then surely he is aware of our suffering and would therefore intervene in the evil as he loves us all.
Situation ethics works towards a successful end goal which in this case is love, this is pragmatism. The ethic is relativistic which means that there are no fixed rules when choosing what to do but whatever is done must stay relative to the Christian love of agape, making it simple and easy to make decisions accordingly. Positivism is where faith statements are made and people act in a way that is reasonable in the light of these statements. Reason isn’t the basis for faith, but it works within faith. Situation ethics depends on Christians freely choosing faith that god is love, so giving first place to Christian love.
Augustine's views seem to come from the concept of "the love of god." His theory starts by him trying to find a solution, the problem being evil. The problem at hand basically is that if god is so infinite in power then evil just can’t is here; but evil exists, therefore god couldn’t possibly. Augustine argues saying that all things start out as good, not perfect, and are like liable to becoming evil. Evil is simply the lack of good.
And for morality to require God in such a way, there must be a direct link between the two. I believe that morality is defined by God, therefore immoral actions are wrong solely because God forbids them. Similarly, the “rightness” of moral actions is only because God has commanded them. In today's world things are defined as “right” or “wrong” or “moral” and “immoral.” This is because God, is the one that has allowed us to even understand what morality is. I believe that God is the creator and sustainer of all things, and that we would not even be self aware, let alone aware of right and wrong, if God had not created within us his image, and therefore the ability to make moral distinctions.
Though Romans says that human nature is that we are sinners. Human beings are slaves to sin and seem to be powerless against it. We understand that we are not righteous at all, and that we need a relationship with God, so that we can be empowered by His righteous. His righteous comes through our faith in Jesus Christ. Only he can redeem, justify, and sanctify us, and we need all three for our salvation.
The issues with this option mainly deal with the definition of a theistic God. If morality is independent of God and God’s commands only exist because the moralities of actions are predetermined, then God is no longer sovereign. If morals are independent of God’s commands then God is not sovereign over morality. This goes against the definition of a theistic God which defines God as the creator and ruler over everything. It also puts limits on God’s power.
“Misbeliefs are the direct cause of emotional turmoil, maladaptive behavior and most so-called ‘mental illness.’ Misbeliefs are the cause of the destructive behavior people persist in engaging in even when they are fully aware that it is harmful to them” (p. 17). This takes me to the lie I once told myself that I am not worthy. I had to replace that lie or “misbelief” with truth. Jesus said, “"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one can come to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).