I mean that flow chart fails to disprove god through the circular discussion on free-will. If you want to argue logic in the discussion about if God cannot create a world with free-will but also without evil then he is not all powerful. But those ideas are opposed to each other. No matter the amount of power, making evil non-existent takes away a component of free-will. Could a creation god create a world that does not have a god? The question is paradoxical.
Not a defense of faith but a disapproval of this particular argument against it.
Isn’t that an argument against an all powerful God though? That if God were all powerful, that they can do literally anything, that they could create a world such that there was free will and no evil.
If God cannot create such a world then God cannot be all powerful. Just because we cannot imagine what that world would look like wouldn’t limit an all powerful God from creating it.
Then they can go the “god is not literally all powerful as he can’t do logical conflicting things together”, when then asked why, either because he is “only” maximally powerful and to obey logic. Or because he would have to destroy logic for that and it would break any concept like good or evil and his creation would lose all good as well and free will becomes absurd too because there is literally no logic, so how would a person use their will?
I mean that’s just as bad faith of an argument as a Christian saying “it’s God’s will.” You can’t argue against nonsense and illogical concepts because they will hit you with more nonsense. But if an argument can be made logically, that’s when it is time to meet it with more logic. If evil exists, and is also not a creation, but a facet of life, then to remove all opportunity to choose evil, destroys the idea of free will. Turn the argument on its head. “If God were all powerful, he could create a world with free will and also no good.” That doesn’t even make sense. If there is no good there is no evil. There is no longer a choice in the matter.
At that point you have to think about things like free will and good and evil as what they are, human inventions of the mind. I know people of faith who understand the difference between inventions of man and what they believe are creations of God. It’s silly to say God invented the car I drive. It’s also silly to say God invented math or philosophy or science. Only the real fanatical types will argue that way. Instead most people, when they boil it down, will come to understand good and evil are human ideas. For the faithful, I think the smart ones will be able to determine that if we invented those ideas, they don’t exist because God made them exist, but because humans chose to invent them with their free will.
I think I’m going to stop defending the Christians now lol. They are capable of their own arguments. As bad as they usually are…
This comment assumes that someone other than God has the moral authority to define evil. If God doesn’t define evil, then who does? If I say what God does is wrong and therefore evil, what am I really saying? Aren’t I judging God? I dont even have the authority to judge other men, let alone God. If I had the authority to judge God, then between the two of us, which one of us is really God?
According to scholar Nathan French, the term likely means “the knowledge for administering reward and punishment,” suggesting that the knowledge forbidden by Yahweh and yet acquired by the humans in Genesis 2–3 is the wisdom for wielding ultimate power.
I know there’s a fancy name for these arguments but I dont recall them.
I mean that flow chart fails to disprove god through the circular discussion on free-will. If you want to argue logic in the discussion about if God cannot create a world with free-will but also without evil then he is not all powerful. But those ideas are opposed to each other. No matter the amount of power, making evil non-existent takes away a component of free-will. Could a creation god create a world that does not have a god? The question is paradoxical.
Not a defense of faith but a disapproval of this particular argument against it.
Isn’t that an argument against an all powerful God though? That if God were all powerful, that they can do literally anything, that they could create a world such that there was free will and no evil.
If God cannot create such a world then God cannot be all powerful. Just because we cannot imagine what that world would look like wouldn’t limit an all powerful God from creating it.
Then they can go the “god is not literally all powerful as he can’t do logical conflicting things together”, when then asked why, either because he is “only” maximally powerful and to obey logic. Or because he would have to destroy logic for that and it would break any concept like good or evil and his creation would lose all good as well and free will becomes absurd too because there is literally no logic, so how would a person use their will?
I mean that’s just as bad faith of an argument as a Christian saying “it’s God’s will.” You can’t argue against nonsense and illogical concepts because they will hit you with more nonsense. But if an argument can be made logically, that’s when it is time to meet it with more logic. If evil exists, and is also not a creation, but a facet of life, then to remove all opportunity to choose evil, destroys the idea of free will. Turn the argument on its head. “If God were all powerful, he could create a world with free will and also no good.” That doesn’t even make sense. If there is no good there is no evil. There is no longer a choice in the matter.
At that point you have to think about things like free will and good and evil as what they are, human inventions of the mind. I know people of faith who understand the difference between inventions of man and what they believe are creations of God. It’s silly to say God invented the car I drive. It’s also silly to say God invented math or philosophy or science. Only the real fanatical types will argue that way. Instead most people, when they boil it down, will come to understand good and evil are human ideas. For the faithful, I think the smart ones will be able to determine that if we invented those ideas, they don’t exist because God made them exist, but because humans chose to invent them with their free will.
I think I’m going to stop defending the Christians now lol. They are capable of their own arguments. As bad as they usually are…
This flow chart assumes god isn’t evil.
Logical explanation:
“Don’t you know there ain’t no devil, it’s just god when he’s drunk.” - Tom Waits
Love Tom Waits.
That might be a branch off the “why didn’t he?” box.
This comment assumes that someone other than God has the moral authority to define evil. If God doesn’t define evil, then who does? If I say what God does is wrong and therefore evil, what am I really saying? Aren’t I judging God? I dont even have the authority to judge other men, let alone God. If I had the authority to judge God, then between the two of us, which one of us is really God?
God knew men would eat of the Tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Thus, giving man the ability to judge good and evil.