Total Posts:108|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The POE Does Not Refute God(s)

phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid. For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief. Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so. For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions. For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God? One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it. Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows? The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes. It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.

Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:39:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

That's the whole point. It only tries to refute an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent deity. All others are irrelevant to POE.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:49:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:39:52 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

That's the whole point. It only tries to refute an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent deity. All others are irrelevant to POE.

But many atheists seem to view it as an argument that gets rid of God altogether. Not any specifically defined God. The POE is not good grounds for being an atheist as it does not do much to disprove theism. It sometimes seems to me that certain individuals disgard arguments for the existence of God largely on account of the POE outweighing them. But yes, not all atheists view it as such. The purpose of this thread is only dircted at certain atheists.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:54:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:49:45 AM, phantom wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:39:52 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

That's the whole point. It only tries to refute an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent deity. All others are irrelevant to POE.

But many atheists seem to view it as an argument that gets rid of God altogether. Not any specifically defined God. The POE is not good grounds for being an atheist as it does not do much to disprove theism. It sometimes seems to me that certain individuals disgard arguments for the existence of God largely on account of the POE outweighing them. But yes, not all atheists view it as such. The purpose of this thread is only dircted at certain atheists.

Well then you know some pretty dumb atheists. The POE just attacks one commonly held attribute of God - once you extend outside of that the atheist needs to be honest about the limitations of the POE. I've unfortunately never had the experience of interacting with an atheist who believed that the POE disproved non-good Gods.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:56:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:49:45 AM, phantom wrote:
But many atheists seem to view it as an argument that gets rid of God altogether. Not any specifically defined God. The POE is not good grounds for being an atheist as it does not do much to disprove theism. It sometimes seems to me that certain individuals disgard arguments for the existence of God largely on account of the POE outweighing them. But yes, not all atheists view it as such. The purpose of this thread is only dircted at certain atheists.

You can't, of course, disprove deism. No matter how much we learn, we can always say "Maybe there's a deity controlling all of this stuff" or "Maybe there's a deity that started it all".

Atheists don't need a sound argument to justify atheism. We only need to recognize the unsoundness of theistic claims.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:57:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:54:44 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I've fortunately never had the experience of interacting with an atheist who believed that the POE disproved non-good Gods.

You want to meet dumb people or something? lol
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 2:42:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:57:45 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:54:44 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
I've fortunately never had the experience of interacting with an atheist who believed that the POE disproved non-good Gods.

You want to meet dumb people or something? lol

This world would be unbearable without dumb people. It's a thankless but necessary role.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 2:54:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 2:42:21 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
This world would be unbearable without dumb people. It's a thankless but necessary role.

I'd rather dumb people didn't exist, to be honest. Does that make me a bad person?
unitedandy
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 7:31:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Like Dakota said, the PoE is only used to refute an omniperfect God. Given that the philosophy of religion is almost always concerned with this type of God, if it were successful, it would pretty much wipe out almost completely those who profess to believe in God based on philosophical and other similar reasons.
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 9:31:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid. For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief. Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so. For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions. For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God? One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it. Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows? The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes. It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.



Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

PoE does not refute any view of God. PoE relies on poorly defined terms.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
unitedandy
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 11:39:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 9:31:25 AM, baggins wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid. For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief. Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so. For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions. For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God? One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it. Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows? The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes. It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.



Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

PoE does not refute any view of God. PoE relies on poorly defined terms.

Explain
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 12:46:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 11:39:53 AM, unitedandy wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:31:25 AM, baggins wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid. For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief. Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so. For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions. For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God? One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it. Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows? The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes. It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.



Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

PoE does not refute any view of God. PoE relies on poorly defined terms.

Explain

I second this request.
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:27:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 11:39:53 AM, unitedandy wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:31:25 AM, baggins wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid. For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief. Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so. For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions. For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God? One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it. Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows? The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes. It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.



Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

PoE does not refute any view of God. PoE relies on poorly defined terms.

Explain

There are several terms which are undefined or poorly defined.

Evil: In PoE, at least three different terms. If we consider any one of the definitions of evil, PoE can be refuted. However the answer for each is different. Often PoE relies on switching meaning between three.
1. Pain and Suffering due to natural calamities.
2. Death
3. Human Sins. They may lead to 1 also.

Omnipotence: It is defined as ability of God to do anything. There are many possible things God cannot do.
1. Anything which is logically inconsistent.
2. Anything which violates God's honor or God's traits.
The correct concept is that God has power over all things. Or God has complete control over all things.

Omnibenevolent: The correct concept is The Most Benevolent and The Most Merciful. Another of God's properties is The Most Just. Benevolence for criminals may violate justice in some cases.

Using correct concept of omnibenevolence and omnipotence and one meaning of evil at a time, PoE can be easily shown to be flawed.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:28:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 2:54:45 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
I'd rather dumb people didn't exist, to be honest. Does that make me a bad person?

No, just a dumb one.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:30:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:27:06 PM, baggins wrote:
At 4/12/2012 11:39:53 AM, unitedandy wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:31:25 AM, baggins wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid. For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief. Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so. For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions. For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God? One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it. Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows? The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes. It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.



Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

PoE does not refute any view of God. PoE relies on poorly defined terms.

Explain

There are several terms which are undefined or poorly defined.

Evil: In PoE, at least three different terms. If we consider any one of the definitions of evil, PoE can be refuted. However the answer for each is different. Often PoE relies on switching meaning between three.
1. Pain and Suffering due to natural calamities.
2. Death
3. Human Sins. They may lead to 1 also.

Omnipotence: It is defined as ability of God to do anything. There are many possible things God cannot do.
1. Anything which is logically inconsistent.
2. Anything which violates God's honor or God's traits.
The correct concept is that God has power over all things. Or God has complete control over all things.

Omnibenevolent: The correct concept is The Most Benevolent and The Most Merciful. Another of God's properties is The Most Just. Benevolence for criminals may violate justice in some cases.

Using correct concept of omnibenevolence and omnipotence and one meaning of evil at a time, PoE can be easily shown to be flawed.

Okay, so use the "Correct" concept of omnibenevolence and omnipotence and the meaning of evil in terms of pain and suffering from natural causes, and show how the PoE is flawed.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:34:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:28:13 PM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 4/12/2012 2:54:45 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
I'd rather dumb people didn't exist, to be honest. Does that make me a bad person?

No, just a dumb one.

Welcome back IT!
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 1:54:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid. For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief. Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so. For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions. For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God? One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it. Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows? The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes. It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.



Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

I never considered the POE to refute (or even address) any gods other than those outlined by its own premises.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 2:45:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:49:45 AM, phantom wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:39:52 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

That's the whole point. It only tries to refute an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent deity. All others are irrelevant to POE.

But many atheists seem to view it as an argument that gets rid of God altogether. Not any specifically defined God. The POE is not good grounds for being an atheist as it does not do much to disprove theism. It sometimes seems to me that certain individuals disgard arguments for the existence of God largely on account of the POE outweighing them. But yes, not all atheists view it as such. The purpose of this thread is only dircted at certain atheists.

It eliminates the belief of a deity for many of those that you are talking about in the philosophical community, but whether it eliminates a deity's existence is different.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
unitedandy
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 5:03:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:27:06 PM, baggins wrote:
At 4/12/2012 11:39:53 AM, unitedandy wrote:
At 4/12/2012 9:31:25 AM, baggins wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid. For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief. Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so. For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions. For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God? One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it. Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows? The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes. It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.



Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

PoE does not refute any view of God. PoE relies on poorly defined terms.

Explain

There are several terms which are undefined or poorly defined.

Evil: In PoE, at least three different terms. If we consider any one of the definitions of evil, PoE can be refuted. However the answer for each is different. Often PoE relies on switching meaning between three.
1. Pain and Suffering due to natural calamities.
2. Death
3. Human Sins. They may lead to 1 also.

Omnipotence: It is defined as ability of God to do anything. There are many possible things God cannot do.
1. Anything which is logically inconsistent.
2. Anything which violates God's honor or God's traits.
The correct concept is that God has power over all things. Or God has complete control over all things.

Omnibenevolent: The correct concept is The Most Benevolent and The Most Merciful. Another of God's properties is The Most Just. Benevolence for criminals may violate justice in some cases.

Using correct concept of omnibenevolence and omnipotence and one meaning of evil at a time, PoE can be easily shown to be flawed.

The problem here primarily, like tkubok said, is that none of this, even if true, would refute the PoE whatsoever. So, even from the outset, you've so far drastically failed, at least until you show how such definitions do aid your case.

Also, some of these definitions are just plain wrong. For example, evil can generally be defined as that which any rational person would avoid for themselves, all things being equal. So, things like suffering, disability, ignorance and loads of other things would all fall into this category because of the intrinsic nature of these things are such that, again, all things being equal, in and of themselves, they are purely destructive. So all of the things you mentioned would still be classed as evil.

As for omnibenevolence, God cannot merely be the most merciful, because such a being would still be capable of sin. He must be the very essence of the Good, which combined with omnipotence (the ability to do that which is logically possible) necessitates that there are no gratuitous evils.
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 10:04:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Many, or most, atheists seem to view the problem of evil as the utmost argument against the existence of God. They view it as un-impenetrable; rock-hard; solid.

No, not that many. But I'm certainly one of them.

For some, it even seems to be the grounding of their belief, or lack of belief.

Hmm.

Now I will willingly concede the fact that the problem of evil has certainly initiated many doubts in my mind, however when asking whether it really refutes God, it fails to do so.

No, it's bulletproof.

For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions.

But that's all it tries to do. And it does it irrefutably. So what's the problem?

For example who'se to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God?

Now you're changing the subject. If evil exists, then the PoE absolutely disproves the existence of gods who are omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. That's what it does, and that's all it tries to do.

There's no point in claiming that the possibility of lesser gods is somehow a refutation of the PoE. It is not.

One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it.

Sure it's possible. But that has nothing to do with the PoE.

Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows?

Right.

The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes.

No, it doesn't. The PoE is a response to people who claim that a tri-omni god coexists with evil. Can't happen. The PoE proves it can't happen.

It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.

Doesn't exclude them. It's talking about something else. It says that of all these different gods, here's one type that definitely does not exist.

Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

Right. And if you believe in a god, and that god is not omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, or if that god doesn't coexist with evil, then you should be endorsing the PoE as proof that your god is more plausible than the standard Christian god.
DakotaKrafick
Posts: 1,517
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 10:08:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:28:13 PM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 4/12/2012 2:54:45 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
I'd rather dumb people didn't exist, to be honest. Does that make me a bad person?

No, just a dumb one.

Ah, thanks for clearing that up.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 10:47:24 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 1:54:44 AM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:49:45 AM, phantom wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:39:52 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

That's the whole point. It only tries to refute an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent deity. All others are irrelevant to POE.

But many atheists seem to view it as an argument that gets rid of God altogether. Not any specifically defined God. The POE is not good grounds for being an atheist as it does not do much to disprove theism. It sometimes seems to me that certain individuals disgard arguments for the existence of God largely on account of the POE outweighing them. But yes, not all atheists view it as such. The purpose of this thread is only dircted at certain atheists.

Well then you know some pretty dumb atheists. The POE just attacks one commonly held attribute of God - once you extend outside of that the atheist needs to be honest about the limitations of the POE. I've unfortunately never had the experience of interacting with an atheist who believed that the POE disproved non-good Gods.

I wouldn't say that they would make the claim that the POE refutes non-good Gods, or deistic Gods, they just assume the general view of God is a tri-omni God. They tell themselves, God can't exist, for evil exists, and if God exists, God would prevent evil. It's just a mindset I sometimes come across. It is indeed close-minded.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 10:49:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 3:09:03 AM, DakotaKrafick wrote:
What kind of god do you believe in, phantom, if not an omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent one?

I never claimed that I believe in a tri-omni God. However I am undecided on the omni's of God, thus I can't give a yes/no answer to that question.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 11:14:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 10:04:58 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 4/12/2012 1:17:51 AM, phantom wrote:
For, it can only refute certain concepts of God, or rather, certain religions.

But that's all it tries to do. And it does it irrefutably. So what's the problem?

If it only refutes certain Gods that means it doesn't disprove other Gods which means it doesn't disprove theism.


For example who's to say the existence of God necessitates a personal God?

Now you're changing the subject.

Umm I created the topic, therefore I can make the subject whatever I want in the OP.

If evil exists, then the PoE absolutely disproves the existence of gods who are omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.

And if they're not omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent?

That's what it does, and that's all it tries to do.

That's all subjective to whose using the POE to disprove God, and how they define God.

There's no point in claiming that the possibility of lesser gods is somehow a refutation of the PoE. It is not.

What's "lesser Gods" supposed to mean? Anyways you clearly don't understand the purpose of this thread. I'm not trying to prove that the POE doesn't disprove a tri-omni God. I'm attacking a certain mind set that certain atheists have.


One who is directly involved in His creations? Is it not possible that He just created earth, for whatever reason(it's not necessary to know why), and then just left it.

Sure it's possible. But that has nothing to do with the PoE.

Only if the POE is defined as an argument that only defeats a tri-omni God. That's not necessarily a presupposition.

Perhaps at the beginning of creation the evil that goes on now did not exist. Or even that an immoral, or at least imperfect God exists. Who knows?

Right.


The POE commits the fallacy of assuming God's character and attributes.

No, it doesn't. The PoE is a response to people who claim that a tri-omni god coexists with evil. Can't happen. The PoE proves it can't happen.

To you it is....

It is based on the premise that if God existed He would not allow evil to exist, and that He could stop it from existing. However this excludes a whole variety of possible Gods.

Doesn't exclude them. It's talking about something else. It says that of all these different gods, here's one type that definitely does not exist.

Only if Gods attributes are presupposed. I never defined God, therefore none of his attributes were presupposed.

Therefore, in conclusion the problem of evil can only be found to be relevant to certain views of God, such as that He is a personal God. It does not refute Gods such as the deistic God.

Right. And if you believe in a god, and that god is not omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, or if that god doesn't coexist with evil, then you should be endorsing the PoE as proof that your god is more plausible than the standard Christian god.

Indeed I should use the POE, presupposing a perfect God, and perhaps would if I could just make up my mind on how God is defined.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
wiploc
Posts: 1,485
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 11:44:38 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 11:26:51 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The question remains is evil relative or absolute?

If there were a god, and if he were able to do anything, and if he were totally against evil, then evil would not exist. This is true regardless of how you define evil.
s-anthony
Posts: 2,582
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/12/2012 11:53:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 11:44:38 PM, wiploc wrote:
At 4/12/2012 11:26:51 PM, s-anthony wrote:
The question remains is evil relative or absolute?

If there were a god, and if he were able to do anything, and if he were totally against evil, then evil would not exist. This is true regardless of how you define evil.

So, which is correct, to say evil does not exist or God does not exist?
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2012 1:40:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
My apologies for the delay in responding. Writing it out actually took a little time. I am defining evil as both 'death' and 'pain and suffering'. It is a little long, so bear with me...

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Suppose someone gives me something. The understanding is that I am allowed to use it while I have, but eventually I have to return it when demanded.

Such is our life. Just a temperory gift from God. One day, Allah will take back our lives from us. This is God's promise. My death is as certain as everybody's death.

To question natural calamities is to question. why does death happen at all? And the answer to that is another question, why does life happen at all? Death is nothing but end of life. Those who question death have to first explain, what have we done to deserve this life? And if we have done nothing to deserve our life, then it is just a gift from God. If God takes it back, it does not mean God is cruel.

In any case, for the people who believe in God and in the accountability of our actions on the day of judgement and who lead a life of Good deeds - God will reward them with a better life in heaven, Insha Allah.

So while God is justified in taking our lives, there is another related question. Why do we see so much suffering in the world? This question does not seek to ask whether it is 'correct' for God to cause calamities. Rather it is a question about the rationale, wisdom or purpose behind it.

It is impossible for us to explain the reason behind a particular event. On other hand, we can attempt to discuss some general causes.

Part of a believer's duty is to stay true to God through good times as well as bad times. It is possible for some calamity to arrive as a test and trial for a community to see how they respond. It is also possible that the calamity will be preceeded or succeeded by good periods.

A calamity may also come as a punishment or warning due to misdeeds and sins of a comminity. People who suffer, may themselves be the criminals. It is also possible for the calamity to leave the biggest criminals unaffected. In such cases, it is a warning for them.

Just a note on the punishment as a cause for disasters. If a disaster strikes a community, it shall be completely wrong to say: 'That must have been because of sins'. That may not be true! Alternatively, we may have been committing the same sins and have been given some respite. On other hand, if a calamity strikes us, we should reflect if some of our deeds were possible cause. Even if they were not, eliminating our sins would be good.

In general, all deaths are a reminder to us about our own impending death. A reminder that this life is transient. If it were not for deaths, we may get too engrossed in this world - and never think about what will happen after the end of this life.

Some people give lots of importance to sufferings in this world. That is because they are unable to percieve that this world is just a transient abode for humanity. All the pain in this world is temperory. Ultimately it is not a very big deal in the next life. It is said, that human life on earth consists of just a part of a 'day' on the cosmic scale.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.
baggins
Posts: 855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/13/2012 1:49:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 4/12/2012 5:03:18 PM, unitedandy wrote:
The problem here primarily, like tkubok said, is that none of this, even if true, would refute the PoE whatsoever. So, even from the outset, you've so far drastically failed, at least until you show how such definitions do aid your case.

Also, some of these definitions are just plain wrong. For example, evil can generally be defined as that which any rational person would avoid for themselves, all things being equal. So, things like suffering, disability, ignorance and loads of other things would all fall into this category because of the intrinsic nature of these things are such that, again, all things being equal, in and of themselves, they are purely destructive. So all of the things you mentioned would still be classed as evil.

If you define evil as something that any person would not desire for themselves, answering PoE does become difficult. That is because there are two answers to it, each of which applies to a subset. Some evil is caused by freewill granted to human beings. Some calamities are sent to us by Allah. Classifying it helps us in clarifying it. You can't complain since the classification is comprehensive.

As for omnibenevolence, God cannot merely be the most merciful, because such a being would still be capable of sin. He must be the very essence of the Good, which combined with omnipotence (the ability to do that which is logically possible) necessitates that there are no gratuitous evils.

How do you relate omnibenevolence to sin?

I also explained that omnibenevolence will contradict justice. If there is no punishment for sinning, there will be no incentive to resist temptations of this world.
The Holy Quran 29:19-20

See they not how Allah originates creation, then repeats it: truly that is easy for Allah.

Say: "Travel through the earth and see how Allah did originate creation; so will Allah produce a later creation: for Allah has power over all things.