FenrirIIIThe answer is D
GaMEChldGrowing up as an agnostic atheist, I loved the Epicurean argument. Now as an adult, I feel compelled to ask the definitions of the words Good, Evil, and God before talking about things.
I think most of the arguments surrounding these topics involves complex use of metaphors and abstract concepts that people can spend lifetimes defining, but are happy to argue about in a short form without a mutually agreed definition.
ZloubidaYeah, it’s that. I’m a Christian, but I have atheist close friends, and I love our debates, but it’s because we respect each others enough to accept and recognise that we use the words differently. It’s generally not the case on the net.
The Epicurian argument is strong only if you have a very broad definition of all-powerfulness. A definition that classical Christian theology doesn’t have, as it recognizes a lot of logical limitations. All-powerfulness is the capacity to do everything possible. So yes, the Christian God is limited.
One of these logical limitations is: God can’t create anything free without allowing their creation to do thing that they disapprove, thus God being good, they can’t create freedom without accepting the existence of evil, which is not a thing per se, but the absence of good. God chose freedom over perfection, and it’s not a human.thing, but a cosmological one.
So yeah, this is a strong argument only of you are already convinced, but it’s generally the case on religious matters. I tend to tink that the only purely rational position is true agnosticism, but sometimes for important things you have to make choices without being sure. That’s why I’m an agnostic theist.
One of these logical limitations is: God can’t create anything free without allowing their creation to do thing that they disapprove, thus God being good, they can’t create freedom without accepting the existence of evil, which is not a thing per se, but the absence of good. God chose freedom over perfection, and it’s not a human.thing, but a cosmological one.
What I don’t get is - didn’t God create the necessity of evil for freedom to exist, just like he created everything else? He could have chosen to create the concept of freedom such that it still doesn’t allow for evil, but for some reason didn’t choose to do so, right?
Or is God bound by rules from an even higher power?
They’re bound by logic. They can make anything possible, but 2+2 will never be 5, and even God can’t change that. Something can’t be and not be. Something thus can’t be free without having any choice, or it’s not freedom.
But didn’t they create this logic, just like everything else? So either they’ve deliberately bound themselves, or some even higher being created that logic by which they are bound.
Something thus can’t be free without having any choice, or it’s not freedom.
Why is the freedom to do evil things necessary for freedom per se? You can have plenty of choice without the ability to do evil.
Logic is not created, it just is.
You can have plenty of choice without the ability to do evil.
It’s not a question of choice, nature for example doesn’t has any choice, and there are illnesses and natural catastrophes. It’s a question of being. God being the Good, he can’t create something purely good that is not him, or bound by him, thus or not different, or not free. But he didn’t created evil, evil doesn’t exist, evil is just something not good, thus not God. And it’s a spectrum, from almost good to almost not good.
Logic is not created, it just is.
Logic is a result of the rules of our universe, no? A universe could be created where 2 + 2 = 4. But sounds like you’re saying God is bound by rules from an even higher being - after all, isn’t the idea that everything has to have an origin, except God?
It’s not a question of choice, nature for example doesn’t have any choice, and there are illnesses and natural catastrophes.
Well yes, illnesses and natural catastrophes exist because God created them, right? They could have created a universe that can’t have viruses existing, or where earth quakes are impossible.
But they didn’t created evil, evil doesn’t exist, evil is just something not good, thus not God. And it’s a spectrum, from almost good to almost not good.
But didn’t God create the very distinction of things being good or not good? Why couldn’t an all-powerful being have chosen to create the universe such that everything is good?
everything has to have an origin, except God?
The actual argument is everything has to have an origin inside the universe, thus our universe to exist must have a cause exterior to it. We call this cause God. It’s not a question of higher being, just that a universe where the effect predates the cause can’t hold. God is not less omnipotent because they can’t make a round square.
Why couldn’t an all-powerful being have chosen to create the universe such that everything is good?
I thought I answered this question twice, I’m sorry if I’m not clear, English is hard for me. So I’ll try again: because it’s logically impossible to have a universe which is not a part of God, thus independant and free, that is also perfectly good, as God is perfectly good. Put as a formula, the formulas
universe = good and universe ≠ God are not possible at the same time if God = good
It’s not a question of higher being, just that a universe where the effect predates the cause can’t hold. God is not less omnipotent because they can’t make a round square.
So this would mean that logic exists outside our universe, and since God can’t change logic, it’s an even higher power than they are - right? But why isn’t God bound by logic regarding e.g. creating matter/energy?
It seems it all comes down to God having to follow rules beyond their own design and power, which flies in the face of them being all-powerful and all-knowing. After all, even if evil must be an option, they could have created the universe such that no being would ever choose to do evil - they already knew the choices everyone would make when they created the universe!