> > I don't know that I'd go so far as to say that "joy is the absence of evil," because I don't actually believe that it is. We simply wouldn't know what joy was if evil did not exist.
>
> Of course, by this definition, there could have been no "good" or "joy" in the Garden of Eden. "Good" has to be more than the mere absence of "evil". Giving money to someone who needs it is "good"; not stealing what little they already have (while not "evil") isn't.

This seems to be a point at which God has to be quantified more than the one in Stephen's simulation, and admittedly westernized.

Can good exist without evil? If so, then it is greater than evil. If not, they are equal, so some other titles (without the inherent stigma that good is better or greater and evil is worse or less) must be assigned.

Can evil exist without good? If so, then it must be re-assigned, since the name "evil" carries a stigma which implies it is not as great as good.

If good can exist without evil, and evil cannot exist without good, then evil is at its base only a corruption, a bent form, of good. A world can be had in which the chief of devils, the pinnacle of evil, Satan himself, could have begun as a holy agent of God. His present work of evil can then only work out for good.

I'm not a mathematical wiz, so i do not claim to work perfect theorems or syllogisms. Please help me with my logic.