van Inwagen has, in his book on the POE, a brilliant section on evil and vagueness, where he argues that God has to allow some evil and that there are now sharp cutoffs towards how much evil has to allow. to achieve what he wants. So there has to be some arbitrary line and there would be some evil that God could prevent without losing a greater good, therefore God has no choice but allowing some gratuitous evil.
Ok. I problably wasn't looking properly, still getting used to the internet...
I would be inclined to agree with you on your last point. I think that one of the flaws with the contradictory arguement is that it it uses doublethink to define good. That god is good and must therefore be 'nice'. But Athiests define Truth as good. However Truth is not 'nice' or 'nasty' it merely is. I would still agree that truth is in fact good. As I would that god is also.
Grrrrr. when's the fifth one coming out? Also as a side point does good = nice? Are we, with our limited perspective in a position to judge what is good let alone that which is evil? Plenty of horrifying things happen in nature. Does that make the design of the world evil? Or is it somehow necsisary?
Fifth one is out, and should be attached to this video. I don't think I'd define good as 'nice'. Rather, I would think off the top of my head that good is what ought to be.
@telemantros The knowledge of evil God created in His tree.He called it good..Knowledge is an attribute not a virtue of who God is.God is not giving a moral law in the knowledge of good and evil. It was not even His objective.Morality in law does not explain evil.Evil is the powerless knowledge man holds in trying to do good.Man has derived laws of morality to substitute or control the inclination of evil always in His heart.But God is above morality He is not moral! But Virtue in Jesus Christ
Finally, I actually respect your attempt to approach the Problem of Evil with a level head. I watched all of these videos and was pleased to see one of a handful of calm and cool theists I have ever found.
3) You have misconstrued (although I suspect not with any ill intent) aspects of the argument. The argument, for example is not "If God exists, evil cannot exist" it is, "if a BENEVOLENT God exists, evil would not exist"
The interesting part of the Problem of Evil is that it is not actually binary. It allows for the elbow room of God being all-powerful, but not all-good or all-knowng, or all-knowing, all-good, but not all-powerful, etc...
(Actually, it is "If a benevolent God exists that has the power to prevent evil and the foresight to know that it will be created with his actions, evil cannot exist unless its root is God and therefore a God of this sort cannot have created the universe.")
I'll leave your first and third contention unanswered for now, and focus on the second. This is a very good point to consider, however due to both time constraints and a personal feeling that this deals with the coherence of God himself, I opted not to talk about 2.
However, I do feel that omniscience and free will can mesh quite well. While I'm not a Calvinist, the combatabalist view 'seems' to work, although I would be more of a Monolist.
...then he has no excuse for the existence of evil. He created a universe without any appearance of Free Will inside it. So it stands to reason he could have created one sans all corrupting/evil processes.
2) At any point in your arguments, you choose to negate aspects of the argument. For example, when considering Free Will, you have negated to recall that if God can see all things in the future, and also created the universe, this nullifies Free Will.
Unfortunately for this series of videos, dismantling the Problem of Evil is not so easy. You have attempted to do so with a few faulty premises:
1) The assumption that Free Will exists. Free Will as a concept muddies the waters of the conversation. As far as we can see, Free Will does not exist; which is to say, humans are not in full control of every decision they make. With this in mind, everything falls apart in your string of reasoning. If God is not attempting to save free will...
let me get this right.....you believe there's a reason for the suffering of poor african children dying from starvation? or iraqi/afghani kids who die b/c of collateral damage?
van Inwagen has, in his book on the POE, a brilliant section on evil and vagueness, where he argues that God has to allow some evil and that there are now sharp cutoffs towards how much evil has to allow. to achieve what he wants. So there has to be some arbitrary line and there would be some evil that God could prevent without losing a greater good, therefore God has no choice but allowing some gratuitous evil.
Pumbaelo 2 years ago
Ok. I problably wasn't looking properly, still getting used to the internet...
I would be inclined to agree with you on your last point. I think that one of the flaws with the contradictory arguement is that it it uses doublethink to define good. That god is good and must therefore be 'nice'. But Athiests define Truth as good. However Truth is not 'nice' or 'nasty' it merely is. I would still agree that truth is in fact good. As I would that god is also.
ultharcody 2 years ago
Grrrrr. when's the fifth one coming out? Also as a side point does good = nice? Are we, with our limited perspective in a position to judge what is good let alone that which is evil? Plenty of horrifying things happen in nature. Does that make the design of the world evil? Or is it somehow necsisary?
ultharcody 2 years ago
Fifth one is out, and should be attached to this video. I don't think I'd define good as 'nice'. Rather, I would think off the top of my head that good is what ought to be.
telemantros 2 years ago
@telemantros The knowledge of evil God created in His tree.He called it good..Knowledge is an attribute not a virtue of who God is.God is not giving a moral law in the knowledge of good and evil. It was not even His objective.Morality in law does not explain evil.Evil is the powerless knowledge man holds in trying to do good.Man has derived laws of morality to substitute or control the inclination of evil always in His heart.But God is above morality He is not moral! But Virtue in Jesus Christ
polopowers1 2 years ago
Finally, I actually respect your attempt to approach the Problem of Evil with a level head. I watched all of these videos and was pleased to see one of a handful of calm and cool theists I have ever found.
Solthiel 2 years ago
Thanks : )
telemantros 2 years ago
3) You have misconstrued (although I suspect not with any ill intent) aspects of the argument. The argument, for example is not "If God exists, evil cannot exist" it is, "if a BENEVOLENT God exists, evil would not exist"
The interesting part of the Problem of Evil is that it is not actually binary. It allows for the elbow room of God being all-powerful, but not all-good or all-knowng, or all-knowing, all-good, but not all-powerful, etc...
Solthiel 2 years ago
(Actually, it is "If a benevolent God exists that has the power to prevent evil and the foresight to know that it will be created with his actions, evil cannot exist unless its root is God and therefore a God of this sort cannot have created the universe.")
Solthiel 2 years ago
I'll leave your first and third contention unanswered for now, and focus on the second. This is a very good point to consider, however due to both time constraints and a personal feeling that this deals with the coherence of God himself, I opted not to talk about 2.
However, I do feel that omniscience and free will can mesh quite well. While I'm not a Calvinist, the combatabalist view 'seems' to work, although I would be more of a Monolist.
telemantros 2 years ago
...then he has no excuse for the existence of evil. He created a universe without any appearance of Free Will inside it. So it stands to reason he could have created one sans all corrupting/evil processes.
2) At any point in your arguments, you choose to negate aspects of the argument. For example, when considering Free Will, you have negated to recall that if God can see all things in the future, and also created the universe, this nullifies Free Will.
Solthiel 2 years ago
Unfortunately for this series of videos, dismantling the Problem of Evil is not so easy. You have attempted to do so with a few faulty premises:
1) The assumption that Free Will exists. Free Will as a concept muddies the waters of the conversation. As far as we can see, Free Will does not exist; which is to say, humans are not in full control of every decision they make. With this in mind, everything falls apart in your string of reasoning. If God is not attempting to save free will...
Solthiel 2 years ago
If the Democratic Party exists
God does not exist
The Democratic Party does exist
therefore God does not exists.
The argument you gave to disprove God is hardly persuasive or convincing. God bless. Keep up the good work!
Blogrich55 2 years ago
you think too much.
be.
Heraclitean 2 years ago
i think it's from Slumdog Millionaire but i'm not 100%
epaminodas 2 years ago
It is from Slumdog Millionaire, called "Mausam & Escape"
telemantros 2 years ago
correct - but just b/c something is plausible doesn't mean there is sufficient justification for it
PS - no prob about Dover bro :)
epaminodas 2 years ago
automatons , machanical man , Yeah , lets all become robots, Not . I like having free will. Thank God we do. 5*****
hellavadeal 2 years ago
Too bad your god values the free will of murderers more than the free will of their victims. Thank Vishnu he's a figment of your imagination.
Perrine234 2 years ago
let me get this right.....you believe there's a reason for the suffering of poor african children dying from starvation? or iraqi/afghani kids who die b/c of collateral damage?
epaminodas 2 years ago
Yes. I dealt with this objection in the second video if you are interested in further explanation.
telemantros 2 years ago