NonContradiction

I don't think that this is the issue. Obviously, if God is omnipotent, then, by definition, He is capable of preventing all suffering.

You are setting up a false dichotomy here. Logically speaking, there are more than just the two choices you are presenting here. Have you ever not done something that you wanted to do, for your own reasons, yet you were capable of doing so? The same logic that applies to us, also applies to God. Again, you are presenting a false dichotomy here.

Hawkingfan

It is not a false dichotomy. If god is omnibenevolent and omnipotent, then he would have *no choice* but to wipe out suffering.

Philosoft

It's not false in the context of wiploc's argument. Wiploc's premise 3 specifies this: 3. If that god more than anything else really wanted to prevent our suffering, then He would prevent our suffering. [combined premise 3 & 4 for clarity]

To refute premise 3, you must go this route: God wants something else more than he wants to eliminate all suffering, and that something else cannot obtain unless there exists some suffering.

It's a consequence of a being that creates by force of will that whatever said being wants also obtains. If there are multiple mutually exclusive things said being wants, then the one that obtains must have been the thing he wanted most.

NonContradiction

Hi Philosoft:

I hope that you had a good weekend. I see what you are saying, and I also see what Wiploc is saying.

Now, let's say that God wants us to learn to have patience. Without the existence of some pain and suffering, we obviously would never obtain patience, since it's meaningless to talk about having patience in the good times. We must experience some bad times in life in order to learn how to have patience. From this patience, according to my experience, a greater good usually evolves.

Philosoft

Or God, being God, could create us with patience included. It seems like a trivial thing for an omnipotent God to create an inherently patient being.

Just_An_Atheist

Patience seems to be a virtue that only matters if one is exorcising it. For instance, it doesn't seem to be very good that I'm thinking about patience right now, or if one always thinks about it. If one never experiences any pain whatsoever, it would seem that possessing patience would be superflous. To create something for no reason would be a sign of irrationality.

NonContradiction

For God to create us, with patience included, would have been meaningless without creating some pain and suffering, also. To obtain one, we must logically have the other.

pa·tience n.
1) The capacity, quality, or fact of being patient.
2) Chiefly British. The game solitaire.

Synonyms: patience, long-suffering, resignation, forbearance
These nouns denote the capacity to endure hardship, difficulty, or inconvenience without complaint.

If God wants X, and X can only be obtained, logically speaking, by God creating Y, then God must create Y. Since an omnipotent God is still bound by the laws of logic, even though He is omnipotent, He had to create Y.

rainbow walking

I will let this be a response to wiploc, philosoft and hawkingfan's objections. In a sense noncontradiction is right that there is a false dichotomy afoot. But the solution lies elsewhere...

Both wiploc, philosoft and hawkingfan's objections focus on omnipotence and omnibenevolence and totally ignore omniscience.

In relation to the argument of PoE:

It's not that he can't or is un-able/omnipotence.

It's not that he doesn't want to or isn't willing/omni-benevolence

It's simply that he knows better and thus won't allow himself to.

His intellect/omniscience takes the lead over his heart/omnibenvolence and restrains his omnipotence.

Much the same way our passions struggle with our reasoning to dictate our course of action.

I hope this clarifies my position somewhat.

Hawkingfan

Now who is spewing a false dichotomy?

We can only learn patience through pain and sufferring. We cannot learn patience without pain and suffering.

NonContradiction

I don't know. Who is? So far, all you have done is assert that I am commitng the fallacy, but you haven't demonstrated how I am doing so.

You can roll your eyes all you want, but you are not demonstrating how I am wrong. Look at the definition of the word patience. By definition, some pain and suffering MUST be endured in order to obtain patience. Therefore, it becomes logically necessary, by definition of the word "patience,' to create some pain and suffering if God wants us to obtain the virtue of patience.

If you want to demonstrate for me how I am wrong, then proceed. If you just want to assert that I am wrong, without demonstrating how I am wrong, then you are merely making assertions without supporting them.