Quick thought on God and Evil

"Some things are necessarily true"

In reading God, Freedom and Evil by Alvin Plantinga I came across an explanation that opened my eyes to logic and necessity a little further.

Atheist or Atheologians as Plantinga puts it are essentially saying of God that:

(1)  God is omnipotent

(2)  God is wholly good

and

(3)  Evil exists

Their claim is of course that this is logically inconsistent with a God existing. But in terms of inconsistencies, where this argument currently stands, there is no inconsistency with this set of propositions.

The atheologian must adopt certain additional premises which John Mackie lays out:

(4)  A good thing always eliminates things as far as it can

and

(5)  There are no limits to what an omnipotent being can do

If in fact these premises are true then in it would follow that

            (6) Therefore, God does not exist

I think when you properly examine these additional premises; you discover they are false in their assumptions. On (5) for example, is it possible for this all-powerful being to create, say a round-triangle? How about a married-bachelor? Can God bring it about that He both exists and does not exist? I think we can see from these quick examples that even a being that is all-powerful cannot create/do things in logical contradiction to themselves. Neither is this evidence against God nor is it evidence against God being less than omnipotent. If we eliminate the validity of these hidden premises the argument that God does not exist as a result of evil is defeated. I think we can show that (5) is false which would result in the conclusion (6) being false:

Is God All Knowing - Dr. William Lane Craig

How Is God The Creator? Dr. William Lane Craig (1 of 2)

Starting Out in Apologetics?

Great introductory advice here from Dr. Craig. The most important point when starting out in apologetics is to be honest when confronted with a tough question you are not yet equipped to answer: Simply admit you are not prepared to answer the question at the moment but if they wouldn't mind you take some time to formulate a response and get back with them.

If you try to sound intelligent about the topic and dance around an answer you may risk harming the dialogue.

Be genuine and honest and then do the work to find the answer!

Debate: William Lane Craig vs. Alex Rosenberg - Is Faith in God Reasonable?

This is the full video of last nights debate... give it a view and let me know who you think won.

(Spolier alert: All three judging bodies (the internet, 6 on site judges and the audience) overwhelmingly feel Craig won this debate)

Does It Matter If Premise One of the Moral Argument Is A Counterfactual?

Cartoon: Out of Nothing Comes Nothing?

Craig on Dawkins' Ontological Argument

A Response to McCloskey

              Is the existence of God tenable? Do the so-called arguments for the existence of God have any truth-value? Can an atheist live a more fulfilled and ultimately more comfortable life? H.J. McCloskey attempts to answer these questions and more in his treatise On Being an Atheist. McCloskey claims that atheism, not theism is a better explanation for the world we observe. In this paper I shall tackle some objections McCloskey makes about the “proofs” of God, namely the Cosmological and Teleological Arguments. I will then focus on answering his objections to a morally perfect God who would allow evil to exist in a world he created. Lastly I will look at McCloskey’s claim that life, as an atheist, is more comfortable than a life based on the belief in a supreme being.

            Within the first few paragraphs of his paper McCloskey consistently refers to the arguments for God’s existence as proofs. What does he mean by proofs? Is he placing an all to heavy burden on these arguments, burdens that need not be applied? McCloskey goes too far in suggesting that we need to prove the existence of God conclusively. What things are known with absolute certainty outside of particular branches of mathematics like geometry? What should be said rather is that upon examining and evaluating the arguments for God one could draw the conclusion from the premises in these arguments that they represent the most probable answer to the questions raised about design in the universe, the cause of the universe and the existence of moral values and duties. As theists, we are not trying to present any one argument as the sole case for God, rather we are attempting to build a coat of chain mail in which each link adds to the overall strength of the armor, or in this case sum total for the validity of belief in God. This is a cumulative approach to reasoning the existence of a necessary, all-powerful, immutable, immaterial, incorporeal being, and we call this being God. We need not prove God exists we merely need to give evidence that he is the best explanation for the universe and life we observe.

J.P. Moreland - Has Science Made Belief in God Unreasonable?

Sit back with some popcorn or a cup of tea and allow Philosopher J.P. Moreland to pique your interest in the question of Science and Belief in God, is it obsolete? 

Decide for yourself!

A New Challenge began with 9-11

                              

As we recall the tragic events of September 11, 2001 today I am also reminded of the wave of frustrations and subsequent publications that arose from the events of 9-11 in reference to the question of evil.

From this event, the so-called "New Atheist" got there start in raising the question of evil to a new/renewed level on the world scene. No longer would this atheist be refined to the halls of academia, no they would take aim at the everyday Christian whom they deem as ignorant, fear-mongering bigots.

This new war on Terror that started on 9-11 started a war on Christianity that day as well, one I am happy to say we are winning much like our brave men and women are winning day in and day out. Though the attacks have been many from the likes of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Dan Dennet and even Stephen Hawking, the brave men and women who have come to the intellectual defense of the Christian faith are many and they are growing in power each day. Hats off to the apologist and philosophers such as William Lane Craig, Greg Koukl, Dinesh D'Souza and others, whose countless efforts give Christians like me material and research to study and utilize as parts of my own defense of the faith.

Though the loss of life was heavy this September day 10 years ago, because of the attacks on the faith of Christianity, many lives who would have otherwise not been effected by spiritual things have had the opportunity to hear the gospel and receive it freely. This has resulted in the eternal security of many souls and for that reason today I rejoice!

So cry and mourn the loss of the men and women and families effected by the events of 10 years ago and also rejoice for the lives won to the Lord as a result. God can use any evil for good and this is another proof of his ultimate divine desire to see all come to repentance.

God Bless you all and may God continue to Bless America!