|  New Posts
 
 
 


Reply
 
Author Comment
 
gnosisandlight
Reply with quote  #1 

Hi all!

   I have a quick question regarding The Logical Problem of Evil. Most of the formulations of this argument that I am privy to require the definition of omnipotence to be defined as the ability to do anything at all, including things that are logically incomprehensible. I think that this very stringent rendering of the term is done so as to parry the inevitable theistic thrust of the freewill theodicy. The question I have is: 
  if the atheologian insists on defining the omnipotence of God as being without logical limitations, hasn't he also spoiled his own argument? Why would a logical contradiction be an issue at all regarding a being who can perform or accomplish logical impossibilities by definition? It seems to me that the issue persists, but it ceases to be a problem.
   I am not overly well versed on the subject but I haven't seen anyone else raise this objection before. On account of that I think that I must be missing something. Any elucidation would be appreciated. 
jmischley
Reply with quote  #2 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gnosisandlight

Hi all!

   I have a quick question regarding The Logical Problem of Evil. Most of the formulations of this argument that I am privy to require the definition of omnipotence to be defined as the ability to do anything at all, including things that are logically incomprehensible. I think that this very stringent rendering of the term is done so as to parry the inevitable theistic thrust of the freewill theodicy. The question I have is: 
  if the atheologian insists on defining the omnipotence of God as being without logical limitations, hasn't he also spoiled his own argument? Why would a logical contradiction be an issue at all regarding a being who can perform or accomplish logical impossibilities by definition? It seems to me that the issue persists, but it ceases to be a problem.
   I am not overly well versed on the subject but I haven't seen anyone else raise this objection before. On account of that I think that I must be missing something. Any elucidation would be appreciated. 


I've heard Dr. Craig give this objection before, I think in a podcast, but I don't remember which one.  Basically it goes that if the atheist rejects the free will theodicy by saying that God's omnipotence should be able to perform a logical contradiction such that he can control creatures with free will, then you can say that "well then there is no problem with an all-loving God co-existing with evil (or pain) because God's omnipotence would also allow him to perform this logical inconsistency".
_CTD_
Reply with quote  #3 
Nice point. It's amazing how many ways atheism defeats itself. No other religion can even compete in that contest.
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:



Important: The Reasonable Faith forums have moved to: www.reasonablefaith.org/forums/






Powered by Website Toolbox - Create a Website Forum Hosting, Guestbook Hosting, or Website Chat Room for your website.