This is as terse as he's gotten so far:
To which I said:
(September 1, 2017 at 4:30 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:(September 1, 2017 at 4:26 pm)Hammy Wrote: What exactly do you think you said in the OP that is remotely argument to successfully addressing the argument from evil?Quote:The name of God is obviously connected to God, so it makes no sense to say "the name of God" points to this concept, that the name of God somehow exists, and properly manifests what an ultimate being would be to a degree, that we have a reference to what an ultimate being would be, but that no such being exists.
It is insane to think we would know what ultimate greatness would be and how it would act, while there is no connection to it.
The argument of evil falls flat in that regard and becomes paradoxical. It has no argument.
That's it. That is the relevant part.
To which I said:
(September 1, 2017 at 4:32 pm)Hammy Wrote: And how is that relevant? The name/concept of God is not the same thing as God. But yes, God shall be defined. And if he is defined to be all powerful, all good and all knowing.... well, the argument from evil addresses those things and you haven't.
Fair enough if you don't think your God is all good, all powerful and all knowing. But in that case... why are you even bothering to attempt to argue against the argument from evil when it's not relevant to the God you believe in?
