How do you define 'evil'? Is it a cause of negativity at every causal link, from every frame of reference? Such Divine Evil and Divine Good is not perceived on this plane - even wiping our all of life on Earth will get a cheer from a few strange humans - 'evil' that depends on a frame of reference.

The problem of evil is that it assumes that the word and concept of 'evil' offers an accurate and valid interpretation of aspects of the equation when harm is evident, as well the assumption that it offers an effective deliniation for moral action.

a) Killing = 100% Evil. b) no killing > less killing > more killing.

'Kill 1 person or 100 will be killed' - choosing which rule are you guaranteed the prefered outcome of less killing, as a) infers and b) states outright?

The problem of evil is that the term, once defined and overlayed over a reality that depends on conditions and frames of reference, actually offers an inferior definition of 'wrong action'..

How do you define 'evil'? Is it a cause of negativity at every causal link, from every frame of reference? Such Divine Evil and Divine Good is not perceived on this plane - even wiping our all of life on Earth will get a cheer from a few strange humans - 'evil' that depends on a frame of reference.

The problem of evil is that it assumes that the word and concept of 'evil' offers an accurate and valid interpretation of aspects of the equation when harm is evident, as well the assumption that it offers an effective deliniation for moral action.

a) Killing = 100% Evil.

b) no killing > less killing > more killing.

'Kill 1 person or 100 will be killed' - choosing which rule are you guaranteed the prefered outcome of less killing, as a) infers and b) states outright?

The problem of evil is that the term, once defined and overlayed over a reality that depends on conditions and frames of reference, actually offers an inferior definition of 'wrong action'..