The Problem of Evil (XXVII)

[wiploc]

The skeptical objection still contains a positive claim that cannot be proven. That claim is this: there is a possible world without evil.

It is obviously possible.  It is easily proven.  It's patently true.  

A possible world is any world without logical contradiction.  That's all there is to it.  

Worlds with square circles and married bachelors are impossible.  Worlds without such contradictions are possible.  
Lack of evil is not a contradiction.  Therefore, an infinite number of worlds without evil are possible.  The ones without evil but with square circles are impossible, and the ones that are simultaneously without evil and with evil are impossible, but the ones without evil and also without logical contradictions are all possible.  All infinity of them.  Obviously, by definition, possible.  

Secondly, there is no doctrine to salvage. Skeptics' definitions of "tri-omni" are not part of Christian doctrine. Skeptics strain the definition of omnipotent well beyond any reasonable bounds by saying that an all-powerful god could do the impossible. In so doing they are objecting to a god not associated with Christianity.

I think you overstate your case.  My mom believed in a truly omnipotent god (could do anything including square circles).  My sister in law believes god created himself.  Their Christianity may differ from yours, but these are Christian beliefs.  

We atheists are not out of line to argue against the Christian beliefs that we encounter.  When we see a stupid one, we get to point out the stupidity.  (Here I want to quote somebody probably on this website, who says something like, "I'm not anti-Christian; I'm anti-stupid.")  

I don't strain credulity by arguing that a god can violate logic.  I am absolutely on your side of that issue.  If gods can violate logic, then logic is unreliable, and then it is pointless to try to have a logical discussion about gods.  

So, in order to have logical discussion, let's assume that god cannot violate logic.  This is where logical discussion must begin.  

But many Christians disagree.  They're being stupid, but they still disagree.  

Those of us who point out that those Christians are being stupid, we're on your side (of this particular issue).