(April 12, 2012 at 1:27 pm)Perhaps Wrote: It appears that there is a direct argument related to God's ability to be omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent simultaneously. The argument against this possibility is accusing malevolence, non-omnipotence, or non-omniscience. This argument is built upon the existence of evil within the world, and compounded by the inhuman treatment of people all over the world. So naturally the question arises: where does this evil in the world come from if God is all powerful, all knowing, and all good?
The proponents of this argument are transposing human characteristics on an entity which is in no way bounded by our characteristics (I'm generalizing the argument to all possible Gods, not just the one of the Bible). A few questions I have for those who hold this argument: Is all death evil? Is evolution evil? Is natural selection evil? Is the fact that millions die daily, yet we as humans do nothing to stop it from occurring, evil? Are we evil?
If we are evil, then who are we to assert what benevolence looks like?
If we are not all powerful, then who are we to assert what omnipotence acts like?
If we are not all knowing, then who are we to assert how omniscience works?
We attribute our own meaning to these words, but beyond the words there is a deeper meaning which can't be thrown around like the semantics of the conversation can be.
Certain key factors that are overlooked in your argument.
1. We don't attribute our own meaning to the words - the words represent specific concepts. The meaning is as deep as the word assigned to it. The concept of evil is simple - it is something that is considered undesirable.
2. Passing judgment about an attribute does not require you to have that attribute yourself - it only requires knowledge of what it entails. If we know what evil is, we can say what benevolence looks like, irrespective of whether we we ourselves are evil or not. Even if we are not all-knowing and all-powerful, we can say how omnipotence and omniscience would work, because not knowing everything does not mean we don't know anything.
3. As to the naturalistic processes such as death, evolution and natural selection - they can neither be evil nor good. Being evil presupposes a conscious choice - something that is not present behind those forces.
4. The standard of evil that is the basis of this paradox has been clearly established. It is the conscious causation of unnecessary suffering. This basis is also considered to be accepted by any imagined god. And it is this simple standard that damn him as malevolent or impotent.
