Thomas the Llamas:

If God desires evil for the sake of evil then that makes him evil. If he desires evil because a good is accomplished then that seem to undercut the evil and make it in some sense good. Right? No? Yes?

Jimmy Stephens:

There’s absolutely no compelling reason for thinking God’s good reason to elect evil x makes x good.

In fact, it’s just a confusion of:
– God’s predestination of x, which is good
&
– x, which is evil

That x is predestined is an example of God’s activity, goodness.

That x is predestined is not itself x.

x itself is an example of some sin or natural evil.

Same mistake in principle as confusing God’s predestination/decree with God’s commands.

TheSire:

Take for example the case of rape. Given Thomas’ view, rape itself isn’t any moral grievance, because God allows or causes it to occur. Let’s say the result is that of a child. Does the fact that the child is a good byproduct of rape entail that the rape is good? I would say that that is not something that obviously follows. God creates different facts for different purposes. God created facts about the future and he creates facts about how people ought to act in those times, but there is no reason to collapse the latter into the former category.