spamandham

I think you're being overly literalistic. When I say "written by god" in reference to Christian perspectives on the Bible, I do not mean that Christians think a god sat down and wrote a book.

When I say such a thing, I mean "Biblical inerrantists believe god ensured his message was accurately and completely penned by human beings, by miraculously intervening and inspiring those writers to do his will".

Is that not what you mean by it as well?

HelpingHand

That's an excuse I've heard lots of times by (Christian) theists, but it does not work.
Let me use my 'hole-in-the-brick-wall analogy here.
If I build a brick wall and cut a hole in it, am I or am I not the creator of the hole?
If I build a wall and leave out some bricks so that the result is a hole, am I or am I not responsible for that hole?
If I create everything and it appears there is a privation, am I or am I not responsible for the privation? If there is a privation, God created things so that there is a privation, it's as simple as that.

And if we keep in mind that God is a timeless and omniscient being and for God time has no meaning at all, we can see how this is still a HUGE CONTRADICTION. So p and not p are in fact true at the same time in the eyes of God.

Walter

juergen

I don't particularly like getting into philosophical discussions that more than often are over my head, but I'll risk it: couldn't it be said that if evil is just lack of good, good is also just lack of evil?

If evil doesn't exist, unless in the absence of good, good wouldn't exist either, unless in the absence of evil.

Am I making any kind of sense? (i can't tell from here).

connick

Good and evil are not things in a physical sense, they are both concepts. You are simply defining evil in such a way that it can't be introduced into the PoE argument, which is, of course, absurd. Regardless, anything that exists or does not exist is due to God according to the Bible.

This is an interesting argument. It has not been shown that God holds anyone accountable for anything, so that premise is just words in the air at this point. Assuming that God does in fact hold sinners accountable does not lead necessarily to the conclusion that free-will exists. It is equally likely that such a god is sadistic or insane.

Evil or potential to do evil can, for the purpose of this argument, be equated. Why would God impart the potential for evil into his creation if he hates evil? Why should mankind be to blame for being created with an innate potential to commit evil? It is interesting to note, however, that your use of "do evil" seems to be at odds with your assertion that "creation of evil" doesn't make sense.

The context in both instances is that the world is a creation of a perfect, all-powerful and evil-hating god. If the world was good at one point and evil at another that does nothing to quiet the fact that it is the same creation from the same creator who posesses supposedly immutable attributes. That the world was "good" in one chapter and "evil" in a subsequent one only implies a flawed creation. Unless of course it's part of his "working in mysterious ways" which seems to me to be an ad hoc excuse.

bacht

Yup. They always have an escape clause: if logic fails they can hang it on the supernatural, the mystical, the unknowable mind of God etc

evangelical

This is a common misunderstanding. I suppose that there are pairs of things where the presence of one is the absence of another. But good and evil is not such a pair. Good is not the absence of evil but evil is the absence of good. It is like in science where we speak of heat, positively, but cold is, negatively, an absence of heat. Heat is not the absence of cold, technically speaking.

evangelical

Strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a hole in a wall. The wall is lacking something. The hole is a privation, not a positive subdivision, in the wall. If you built the wall with the privation then the privation is your responsibility. Nevertheless, a privation in a creation is not necessarily the responsibility of the creator. For example, suppose you built a complete wall, one with no hole in it, and then 100 years after you die, a wrecking ball hits the wall, knocking out the center. The new privation in this case is with respect to your creation but it is not a privation of your creation qua being created by you. In other words, while you are responsible for the creation, you are not responsible for the privation of the creation, in this case. It is analogous with the evil in the universe.





If time has no meaning for God then it is false to say: "So p and not p are in fact true at the same time in the eyes of God." One can not first say time doesn't apply to God and then apply it to Him. But time is most certainly meaningful to God. He created it so He must know something about it. Plus He is omniscient so He does know everything about it. He does not experience it, but He does know about it.

HelpingHand

OK

OK


OK


Not OK. If I am the creator of everything (God is supposed to be, isn't He?) then I am not only the creator of the wall but also the creator of the wrecking ball.
So, the hole is still my responsibility.





OK, so we just say,"P and not p are both true in the eyes of God". Still a contradiction, my friend.


That's the whole point, evangelical, He is omniscient.
Now let's go back to my wall. I have just built a wall and I shout,"This is a very good wall", and a second later it collapses.
Is my staement, "This is a very good wall", true or false? You could say 'true' because when I said it, the wall looked fine. But suppose I was omniscient, would the phrase ,"This is a very good wall", still be true? No it wouldn't, because being omniscient I would know that the wall would collapse.
And that is why the statement,"It is good", is a contradiction. Since God knew it would get bad, His statement,"It is good" is either a mistake or a lie.




Walter

temporalillusion

Running the risk of breaking an analogy (), if the builder of the wall is also responsible for the "reality" around the wall, the capability for the wall to have a hole knocked in it is still the responsibility of the creator. If the creator is capable of anything, then it's capable of creating a reality where a hole in a the wall isn't possible.

evangelical

I suppose I agree that good and evil are concepts instead of physical entities. It is not my definition but the traditional definition of what 'evil' has always meant. And one still can use this 'evil' in the atheistic argument from evil. As an aside, if you want to use PoE, depending on how you formulate it, then you admit there is such as thing as right and wrong, and, if you admit there is such a thing as right and wrong, then that entails the existence of God). And the Bible does not say that God is responsible for everything that doesn't exist (in the sense, I take you to mean, of a part of something that does exist to be missing). "Let no man when he is tempted say he is tempted of God, for God does not tempt any man." So God is not responsible for sin, according to the Bible. "It is impossible for God to lie [lie=privation of truth]." Those are two examples to establish my point.



"...and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works." This is from Revelation 20 while the people are standing before God to be judged. The Bible teaches that God is neither sadistic nor insane. Even if He were, though, if He truly holds men accountable, then men are truly accountable. But men can only be truly accountable (for the choices they make) if they were free to do otherwise. Just a reminder, what we are talking about here is what the Bible says, not its truthfulness or lack thereof.



How else could God create free creatures unless they had the potential to do evil. God cannot do the logically contradictory and if a creature is truly free-and we humans like to be free-then a creature can do that which God hates (i.e. sin). But mankind is not blamed "for being created with an innate potential to do evil." Mankind is held responsible for the sins of mankind not, and I hate to put it this way, with the potentials God creates them with. Finally, by "do evil" what I really meant was "not do as much good as one is supposed to". For example, if one were to murder another, that would be an indication of missing love. I was being imprecise by saying "do evil".