The Problem of Evil (XXVII)

[wiploc]

 

Evil is what an omnibenevolent god forsakes, not "other good attributes."  

That is the question isn't it?

I don't understand.

 

The only thing logically incompatible with comfort is discomfort.  The only thing logically incompatible with happiness is unhappiness.  If we call comfort and happiness good, and discomfort and unhappiness evil, then--except for evil--an omnipotent god can have anything it wants in addition to comfort and happiness.  

If what it wants is discomfort and unhappiness, then it is not omnibenevolent.  
If it wants something else and can't have both that and the absence of evil, then it is not omnipotent.  

This is simple, but it's not naive or false: An omnipotent god can have anything it wants that isn't logically incompatible with other things it wants.  An omnibenevolent god doesn't want evil.  Therefore, an omnipotent and omnibenevolent god can have anything it wants.  

I don't believe that comfort and happiness equate with good (at least not on a logical or definitional level).   This it is more of an emotional problem, than logical.

Then pick something else to define as good.  The PoE is bulletproof regardless of what you choose.  

But I'll suggest that you may come back to that after choosing other things.  That is, once god gets some mysterious X-factor that he prefers--once he has accomplished his other and greater goals--won't he still want people to be happy?  And, if not, will you still call him benevolent?  


[/quote]

[SteveII]

[LadyForCamus]

[wiploc]

I'm likely to fall off the radar for awhile. Entering Canada tomorrow, and don't have any idea whether I'll have internet there.

I'm on my way to Alaska.

[SteveII]

I'm likely to fall off the radar for awhile.  Entering Canada tomorrow, and don't have any idea whether I'll have internet there.  

I'm on my way to Alaska.

Must be a beautiful trip. Enjoy.

[wiploc]

[wiploc]

[Neo-Scholastic]

What is wrong with the idea of a Multiverse in which all possible worlds are exhasted and we just got a crumby one?

[robvalue]

I'd like to make this general observation:

Is it reasonable that God needs so much explaining and justifying?

[Pat Mustard]

It is foundational?  What's that even mean?  That it cannot be mistaken?  Like I said, it sounds like it's just made up.

That's why I don't care about whether God could do logically impossible things. Theists made him up, they can make his superpowers be whatever they want.

Yhwh is the reverse Superman. The longer his myth is being retold the fewer his powers become in number.