A Formal Proof that if Evil Exists then the Theists' God Does Not

[Skwim]

Evil does not just occur, its cased by intentions of humans or requirements of nature, humans have free will,

Nah.

and sometime in nature what we observe to be evil is just natural occurrence

Yeah, people ain't always so smart.

but evil is not a thing, its a integral part of existence, it does not oppose GOD, evil is our creation not GODS.

Seems I remember something in the Bible where god says he created evil.

GOD has better things to do then to interfere in our personal problems, it

Yet millions of people pray that he does. Foolish souls, eh.

 

[Quagmire]

For us, they would be based on how they relate to us, our picture; for "god," they would be perceived and judged on how they relate to "the all inclusive picture." Is that somehow no longer subjective?

In order to assess events in accordance with how they relate to the all inclusive picture we'd have to isolate those events from the all inclusive picture. There's no need for God to do that. If He can see the whole thing at once then there's no need to compare anything with anything else, or determine how anything relates to anything else. It's all one thing.

In order for something to be assessed subjectively it has to be weighed on a scale consisting of other things and assessed in accordance with how it relates to those other things.

From an all seeing perspective, everything there, all at once, the totality of reality could be viewed objectively, ie., for what it is, and at the same time each and every component would stand on it's own (it's worth and purpose is already known) and His perspective of each one would also be objective.

He could see things as they are, independent of how they relate to anything else, and at the same time see the relationships it has with everything else, and view those relationships objectively too.

We generally do --we want to assign all of god's creation to him.

But it's impossible to do that if we attribute any one characteristic to God as being dominant, even for a moment, over any other characteristic.

If God is everything, all at once, including emotional, then he would have to be constantly experiencing (and being) every conceivable emotion all at the same time too.

In other words, no one element would have any more influence on His perception than any other.

If God created subjectivity and objectivity, why should he be exempted from one but not the other?

I'm not sure He did. I think those may have been our kids.

No, not in the human mind.

Where then?

 

[Koldo]

Evil is not an undisputed fact, it's a subjective designation.

If you were to defend that evil is a subjective designation, how would you also defend that God is objectively wholly good?

 

[Willamena]

In order to assess events in accordance with how they relate to the all inclusive picture we'd have to isolate those events from the all inclusive picture. There's no need for God to do that. If He can see the whole thing at once then there's no need to compare anything with anything else, or determine how anything relates to anything else. It's all one thing.

In order for something to be assessed subjectively it has to be weighed on a scale consisting of other things and assessed in accordance with how it relates to those other things.

From an all seeing perspective, everything there, all at once, the totality of reality could be viewed objectively, ie., for what it is, and at the same time each and every component would stand on it's own (it's worth and purpose is already known) and His perspective of each one would also be objective.

He could see things as they are, independent of how they relate to anything else, and at the same time see the relationships it has with everything else, and view those relationships objectively too.

I agree, it's necessary for relation to occur that something be isolated from the picture. At least one thing is isolated from the our pictures for us to be able to relate: "me." At least one thing must be isolated from the picture for God to relate to the overall picture: if God has a "me," then there is something that relates to everything; if God has no "me," then there is no relation of anything to anything in the all inclusive picture, which is to say that "god" is the complete picture.

But then there is no "god's perspective." As I understand it, that's not "the theist's god." The theist's god acts. In order to see the theist's god, we must put aside ideas of unity and recognize the duality inherent in a "god" that can have perspective, and for which "good" is contrasted with a moral imperative, and acts contrasted with being able to act differently.

But it's impossible to do that if we attribute any one characteristic to God as being dominant, even for a moment, over any other characteristic.

If God is everything, all at once, including emotional, then he would have to be constantly experiencing (and being) every conceivable emotion all at the same time too.

In other words, no one element would have any more influence on His perception than any other.

Then neither can we deny subjectivity for "god". We cannot deny for "god" anything that exists. I agree that unity is a good counter-argument against the theist's god, but it's not a counter-argument against subjectivity, or really against the OP. Unity doesn't deny duality --it doesn't deny anything --everything exists in balance with its counterpart(s). Subjectivity is influential, objectivity is influential, dependent on, and neither inhibiting nor cancelling, the other. And inhibiting exists... And cancelling exists... And dominence exists, and dominence of traits exists...

Where then?

I think we lost the thread of the conversation, here. I was saying that "evil" doesn't stand alone, not even "in the human mind." It stands with "good" and the whole of creation --everything with which it can be put into relation --there in the human mind.

Where then?

But to answer your question literally, "on a dark infested sea."

 

[idea]

yes, humans have free will... it's really not that hard of a concept to grasp...

 

[Gharib]

Came across this formal disproof of god's existence. What do you think of it?

(1) If God exists he is omniscient, omnipotent, and wholly good.
[Hypothesis that the theists' God exists]

(2) Evil occurs.
[Statement of the undisputed fact of evil]

(3) If someone did not prevent the occurrence of evil despite having full knowledge in advance that it would occur if he were not to prevent it and despite also having unlimited power to prevent it, then that person is morally culpable for its occurrence.
[Generalized principle of command responsibility]

(4) By virtue of his omniscience, God knew in advance that evil would occur unless he was to prevent it.
[From 1 by definition of omniscience]

(5) By virtue of his omnipotence, God had the ability to prevent the occurrence of evil.
[From 1 by definition of omnipotence in terms of absence of nonlogical limits to God's ability]

(6) God did not prevent the occurrence of evil.
[From 2 by double negation]

(7) God had the ability to prevent evil from occurring and knew it would occur if he did not prevent it.
[From 4 and 5 by conjunction]

(8) God is morally culpable for the occurrence of evil.
[From the conjunction of 3, 6, and 7 by modus ponens]

(9) God is not wholly good.
[From 8 by definition of "wholly good"]

(10) God does not exist.
[From 1 and 9 by modus tollens]
7.4 Conclusion

The theist's God was supposed to be morally perfect as well as omnipotent and omniscient. But from the undisputed fact that evil exists in the world whose existence he supposedly brought about, it follows--by the unassailable moral truth expressed in the Generalized Principle of Command Responsibility--that he can't have all three properties at once. Ipso facto, such a God does not now, and never did, exist. It is the logic of the new Down-Under Disproof, not of Plantinga's Free Will Defense, that triumphs.

source
​

what a weak argument. the writer has no sense of understanding of anything.

every parents lets their child fall over or what ever when they are kids in order to learn. does that mean the parents don't exist? according to that guy they don't but he is outright lacking understanding of basic things.

 

[9Westy9]

yes, humans have free will... it's really not that hard of a concept to grasp...

Please show how free will defeats the argument in the OP

 

[9Westy9]

what a weak argument. the writer has no sense of understanding of anything.

every parents lets their child fall over or what ever when they are kids in order to learn. does that mean the parents don't exist? according to that guy they don't but he is outright lacking understanding of basic things.

so God is just as unknowing, evil and powerless as a human parent?

 

[Gharib]

so God is just as unknowing, evil and powerless as a human parent?

please don't compare the abilities of God to that of a human.

and please read my post once again, it seems you didn't read it fully or just didn't understand it. i said 'every parent lets' - 'lets' is the keyword.

 

[9Westy9]

please don't compare the abilities of God to that of a human.

and please read my post once again, it seems you didn't read it fully or just didn't understand it. i said 'every parent lets' - 'lets' is the keyword.

You appear to be the one comparing God to a parent. God doesn't need to let his children fall over as he can create them with the knowledge already. He can also create a world where there is no need to fall over.

So if God 'lets' evil exist, despite the overwhelming ability to stop it, why does he let it exist?

 

[Koldo]

what a weak argument. the writer has no sense of understanding of anything.

every parents lets their child fall over or what ever when they are kids in order to learn. does that mean the parents don't exist? according to that guy they don't but he is outright lacking understanding of basic things.

And your argument is even weaker.

Since when parents are omnipotent, omniscient and wholly good?

 

[idea]

Please show how free will defeats the argument in the OP

evil exists because:

a) God does not take away our free will and we choose to kill one another etc.etc.

b) theory of relativity - opposites define one another - good cannot be appreciated without evil. Good and evil are relative terms, they each cease to exist without one another.

 

[9Westy9]

evil exists because:

a) God does not take away our free will and we choose to kill one another etc.etc.

b) theory of relativity - opposites define one another - good cannot be appreciated without evil.

a) God chose to create a world in which evil exists. There's also evil not caused directly by humans (Natural disasters for example) that God seems rather ignorant of.

b) why do we need to appreciate good?

 

[Koldo]

evil exists because:

a) God does not take away our free will and we choose to kill one another etc.etc.

Two important points to be made.

1- This argument will lead eventually to a debate over the existence of free will.
2- There is the natural evil too, which has already been pointed out by 9Westy9.

 

[idea]

a) God chose to create a world in which evil exists. There's also evil not caused directly by humans (Natural disasters for example) that God seems rather ignorant of.

Do you understand the theory of relativity? How some things do not exist except relative to one another?

take velocity - a single object, without anything to compare it to - for such an object velocity literally does not exist. - see link - read through the link if you are not familiar with the theory of relativity.

I could ask you - Is this rock good? - it is impossible to answer this question without putting it in context - without comparing it / relating it to something else - if you want a building material, then perhaps the rock is good - but if you want to garden, you don't want rocks, you want dirt - see, it's not until you compare it / relate it / put it in context that the rock becomes good or bad.

Is it good or evil? - that depends / it's relative to what you are comparing it to. Like velocity ceases to exist without a comparison, good ceases to exist without evil. Good/bad right/wrong - these are all relative terms, and cease to exist without one another.


(PS - God did not create everything out of nothing - the word "create" in the Bible is better translated as "transform" - God is cleaning up a mess He did not create... He transforms darkness into light - everything is eternal, there is no beginning to any of it, God is cleaning up / organizing / transforming a mess He did not create.)

b) why do we need to appreciate good?

take a glass of water - say you're sitting on the couch watching a movie, and someone hands you a glass of water. You think that's odd, would perhaps rather a pop or something, and just leave the water sitting there on the end table - you don't drink it / appreciate it... then take the same glass of water offered to you after running a marathon across some dessert - you are dieing of dehydration / in pain etc. etc. - same glass of water, only now you appreciate it.... there are a lot of things in life like that, you won't appreciate it, unless you've seen/experienced the other side...

why do we need to appreciate anything? .... the water would never taste as sweet... the pleasure would be sub-par... life would be bland without genuine appreciation...

 

[Gharib]

You appear to be the one comparing God to a parent. God doesn't need to let his children fall over as he can create them with the knowledge already. He can also create a world where there is no need to fall over.

So if God 'lets' evil exist, despite the overwhelming ability to stop it, why does he let it exist?

i wasn't comparing God to a parent in the sense of being limited, i wanted to show that parents sometimes allow things which to a child seems evil but instead is for their benefit. and it doesn't mean they don't exists for allowing that bad thing to happen to their child. just as it doesn't mean that God does not exists if we can't understand why evil/bad things happen.

God has created both good and evil. each has it's own purpose. our lack of understanding the wisdom behind them doesn't mean God doesn't exist. that is pure nonsense.

 

[9Westy9]

Do you understand the theory of relativity? How some things do not exist except relative to one another?

take velocity - a single object, without anything to compare it to - for such an object velocity literally does not exist. - see link - read through the link if you are not familiar with the theory of relativity.

I could ask you - Is this rock good? - it is impossible to answer this question without putting it in context - without comparing it / relating it to something else - if you want a building material, then perhaps the rock is good - but if you want to garden, you don't want rocks, you want dirt - see, it's not until you compare it / relate it / put it in context that the rock becomes good or bad.

Is it good or evil? - that depends / it's relative to what you are comparing it to. Like velocity ceases to exist without a comparison, good ceases to exist without evil. Good/bad right/wrong - these are all relative terms, and cease to exist without one another.

they're also very subjective terms :yes:

(PS - God did not create everything out of nothing - the word "create" in the Bible is better translated as "transform" - God is cleaning up a mess He did not create... He transforms darkness into light - everything is eternal, there is no beginning to any of it, God is cleaning up / organizing / transforming a mess He did not create.)

of course though, being omnipotent he could eliminate the bleimishes

take a glass of water - say you're sitting on the couch watching a movie, and someone hands you a glass of water. You think that's odd, would perhaps rather a pop or something, and just leave the water sitting there on the end table - you don't drink it / appreciate it... then take the same glass of water offered to you after running a marathon across some dessert - you are dieing of dehydration / in pain etc. etc. - same glass of water, only now you appreciate it.... there are a lot of things in life like that, you won't appreciate it, unless you've seen/experienced the other side...

why do we need to appreciate anything? .... the water would never taste as sweet... the pleasure would be sub-par... life would be bland without genuine appreciation...

Good response. Frubals heading your way.

My response is this. If God is omnipotent couldn't he create a world where appreciation just is. So you can appreciate something without a need to compare it to something 'worse'

 

[9Westy9]

i wasn't comparing God to a parent in the sense of being limited, i wanted to show that parents sometimes allow things which to a child seems evil but instead is for their benefit. and it doesn't mean they don't exists for allowing that bad thing to happen to their child. just as it doesn't mean that God does not exists if we can't understand why evil/bad things happen.

Because parents who are omnipotent, benevolent and omniscient don't exist. If they did then they wouldn't need to train a child using such means

God has created both good and evil. each has it's own purpose. our lack of understanding the wisdom behind them doesn't mean God doesn't exist. that is pure nonsense.

It does if you try to call God "good".

 

[Koldo]

i wasn't comparing God to a parent in the sense of being limited, i wanted to show that parents sometimes allow things which to a child seems evil but instead is for their benefit. and it doesn't mean they don't exists for allowing that bad thing to happen to their child. just as it doesn't mean that God does not exists if we can't understand why evil/bad things happen.

You are comparing parents to God.
As i said, parents are not omnipotent, omniscient, nor wholly good.
What apply to parents do not necessarily apply to God.

God has created both good and evil. each has it's own purpose. our lack of understanding the wisdom behind them doesn't mean God doesn't exist. that is pure nonsense.

Why would God create evil if he is wholly good?
This appears to be a contradiction.
A wholly good being would remain opposed to evil.
How do you justify this creation of evil?

 

[Skwim]

yes, humans have free will... it's really not that hard of a concept to grasp...

But if one reeeealy thinks about it, it 'tis.