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

[Koldo]

according to islamic belief, God created all humans long before they came to life in this world, a verse in the Qur'an mentions this case and speaks about humans making a covenant with Allah that we would worship him in this life and agree to go through this test.

What is there to be gained from this convenant that couldn't be gained out of it? Why is there a need for a covenant?

heaven was/is perfect however the nature in which man was created allowed for disobedience to occur. God tested Adam and Eve in paradise and since they failed and listened to Iblis (satan) to disobey God, he took them out of paradise and sent them to live an appointed amount of time on earth in order for them to live a life of the nature of which they were created. if he had not tested them in paradise and called us sinners and disobedient at times when we choose then for lack of a better word one could say that God was unjust towards us. because one could argue that paradise is a place of peace and there is no evil, however, evil did not have to exist, which it didn't, only the ability to obey and disobey was sufficient.

once we go to Heaven after this life, there will not exist the possibility to sin or to wrong others or be disobedient to God.

What is it that changed from Eden to Heavens?
What is it that makes Heavens a place where sin is impossible?

 

[LaaIlahaIllAllah]

What is there to be gained from this convenant that couldn't be gained out of it? Why is there a need for a covenant?

Hi, I think the brother was referring to the verse that says everyone made a covenant with God that we would worship Him alone.

As the verse(s) further elaborate we see that this covenant is so that they cannot make up excuses on the Day of Resurrection.

What is it that changed from Eden to Heavens?
What is it that makes Heavens a place where sin is impossible?

In Christianity i'm pretty sure the "Garden" where Adam and Eve were is on earth but in Islam it was in heaven

And before i guess there could be 'sin' or ability to disobey God as we can see from the Adam and Eve and Iblees example.
But after Judgement on Day of Resurrection, in heaven there will be no bad speech, unpleasantness, and things of that nature since the 'test' is over and those who enter will abide there for eternity.

And Allah (Subhana Wa Ta'ala) knows best.

 

[TalonXXX]

In my opinion Good and Evil are subjective. and that seems to undermine your entire proof. If we allow for a god who is omnipotent and omniscient then we also allow for the fact that the deity's point of view is different from ours. And it is even more different from ours if we assign god to being 3 or 4 dimensional. For the sake of this argument as well as simplicity in keeping us away from the dark realm of theoretical Physics, I will use the example I have heard used that it is possible for a deity to create time and the subsequently enter it following a 3 dimensional time line rather then existing in the same unchanging state at all points through-out time as a 4 dimensional entity (which makes the idea of free will go out the window). Because of this I see several holes in this Hypothesis.

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

The idea of good is a human construct to apply to things we find morally reprehensible based upon our own experience or some predetermined trait. And so applying a human based ideal to God is fallacious.

We also must consider the applications of free will. If we allow for free will (which requires a deity on a 3 dimensional plane) then we can use the term omniscient to mean that God is aware of every particle of every speck of matter in every corner of creation as it exists currently (rather then a 4 dimensional entity which would be aware of every particle at every point in time creating a "pre-destiny" scenario) If we accept god as omnipotent that does not mean that God would have to use his power to stop every act of evil or the occurrence of that "first" evil (as we morally define it) because doing so would remove the concept of free will. So really it depends on do you believe we have Free will? or do we have the illusion of free will (which if that is the case none of this matters anyway). But if we do have free will then it would seem that this proof can be countered fairly easily by the above argument. Please point out any holes in my logic! It is late and I am tired so it would be appreciated

 

[The Sum of Awe]

In my opinion Good and Evil are subjective. and that seems to undermine your entire proof. If we allow for a god who is omnipotent and omniscient then we also allow for the fact that the deity's point of view is different from ours. And it is even more different from ours if we assign god to being 3 or 4 dimensional. For the sake of this argument as well as simplicity in keeping us away from the dark realm of theoretical Physics, I will use the example I have heard used that it is possible for a deity to create time and the subsequently enter it following a 3 dimensional time line rather then existing in the same unchanging state at all points through-out time as a 4 dimensional entity (which makes the idea of free will go out the window). Because of this I see several holes in this Hypothesis.


The idea of good is a human construct to apply to things we find morally reprehensible based upon our own experience or some predetermined trait. And so applying a human based ideal to God is fallacious.

We also must consider the applications of free will. If we allow for free will (which requires a deity on a 3 dimensional plane) then we can use the term omniscient to mean that God is aware of every particle of every speck of matter in every corner of creation as it exists currently (rather then a 4 dimensional entity which would be aware of every particle at every point in time creating a "pre-destiny" scenario) If we accept god as omnipotent that does not mean that God would have to use his power to stop every act of evil or the occurrence of that "first" evil (as we morally define it) because doing so would remove the concept of free will. So really it depends on do you believe we have Free will? or do we have the illusion of free will (which if that is the case none of this matters anyway). But if we do have free will then it would seem that this proof can be countered fairly easily by the above argument. Please point out any holes in my logic! It is late and I am tired so it would be appreciated

If I knew something was destined to happen, and caused it to happen that way, do the people who I caused to do X in which hurts them have freewill? How so?

And just because evil is subjective, which I agree, why would God make us have instinctive emotions that determine good and evil in the first place? Why make us with negative emotion at all?

 

[9Westy9]

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?"

 

[TalonXXX]

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

Again you are making the assumption that what human morality dictates as evil is something god is concerned with. If we are allowed free will then the very point of it would be undermined by him stopping every act of "evil" perpetrated by a human being rendering free will an amusing little joke.

And we would call God God because the very concept of God would be an entity powerful enough to everything. What else would you call something that was capable of doing and did that?

If I knew something was destined to happen, and caused it to happen that way, do the people who I caused to do X in which hurts them have freewill? How so?

I am not sure that I am reading this properly but I'll try to explain, just let me know if I missed your question. If you knew something was destined to happen, and you caused it to happen that way, then the people who are impacted by that predestined occurrence do not have free will (assuming you are a deity which was what I think you are asking). Which Is why I would make the case for a God that knows all (3-dimensional) and has power over everything but is content to observe to a point (not taking a personal hand in every situation, thus allowing Free-will)

And just because evil is subjective, which I agree, why would God make us have instinctive emotions that determine good and evil in the first place? Why make us with negative emotion at all?

With free will Evil then seems to become a creation of humanity rather then a creation of God. One that is necessary to allow for free will.

 

[Storm]

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]
​

Fails at the hypothesis, since this is not "the theists' God." I don't know whether the author is ignorant of minority theologies or not, but this doesn't even include all Abrahamics, and ignorance is no excuse in logic.

 

[Breathe]

Other members have already said what I would say.

I don't even believe in a Divinity with omnipotence or omnibenevolence, or even evil, so this isn't proof of anything other than the author doesn't know that not all theists' interpretations of God are identical.

 

[9Westy9]

Again you are making the assumption that what human morality dictates as evil is something god is concerned with.

Not really. You can say that this world is what God views as "good" if you really want. There aren't many theists who do though.

If we are allowed free will then the very point of it would be undermined by him stopping every act of "evil" perpetrated by a human being rendering free will an amusing little joke.

So God cares more about the free will of the evil person than the free will of the good person. i.e. If someone is being raped God cares more about the rapists free will than the womans free will.

And we would call God God because the very concept of God would be an entity powerful enough to everything. What else would you call something that was capable of doing and did that?

an omnipotent being?

 

[TalonXXX]

Not really. You can say that this world is what God views as "good" if you really want. There aren't many theists who do though.

That seems to me to be exactly what you are saying.

So God cares more about the free will of the evil person than the free will of the good person. i.e. If someone is being raped God cares more about the rapists free will than the womans free will.

No, but that first act of evil was one of free will and god did not stop it, why then would god stop subsequent acts of "evil"? And it is being done against her free will by the free will of another human being. It is another human being asserting their free will over another not God using his power to undermine the general idea of free will.

"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?

yes. We call God a God because God was able to create everything out of nothing. The rest of that quote is just fallacious reasoning.

Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.

He also could easily be apathetic or simply observing as things play out. No one knows how God (if there is one) works and to attempt to apply a statement like this to an omnipotent being is plain silly.

 

[9Westy9]

That seems to me to be exactly what you are saying.

My view is that If God exists he's happy with the world.

No, but that first act of evil was one of free will and god did not stop it, why then would god stop subsequent acts of "evil"? And it is being done against her free will by the free will of another human being. It is another human being asserting their free will over another not God using his power to undermine the general idea of free will.

So God does care more about the free will of the person committing the 'evil' act. He cares more about 'evil' people being able to use their free will then he does protecting 'good' people from keeping their free will.

yes. We call God a God because God was able to create everything out of nothing. The rest of that quote is just fallacious reasoning.

1) Which fallacy? Would you care to point it out please.
2) Wouldn't that make God close to omnipotent? Heck he created everything so he must be pretty powerful in comparison to the little ol' universe.

He also could easily be apathetic or simply observing as things play out. No one knows how God (if there is one) works and to attempt to apply a statement like this to an omnipotent being is plain silly.

apathetic wouldn't make him benevolent.

 

[Draka]

All due respect, but a rape victim doesn't lose her ability to choose entirely. A horrible thing was done to her, a crime was committed to be sure, but she still has to choose how to handle it. How to respond. How to deal and cope. How to live. These are things which vary from victim to victim, so obviously there still is some choice afforded to her, even with the loss of the original choice. We don't choose to have our homes hit by tornadoes, or have car accidents, or be assaulted. What we do choose is how we handle such things. How we overcome them, or not.

 

[9Westy9]

All due respect, but a rape victim doesn't lose her ability to choose entirely. A horrible thing was done to her, a crime was committed to be sure, but she still has to choose how to handle it. How to respond. How to deal and cope. How to live. These are things which vary from victim to victim, so obviously there still is some choice afforded to her, even with the loss of the original choice. We don't choose to have our homes hit by tornadoes, or have car accidents, or be assaulted. What we do choose is how we handle such things. How we overcome them, or not.

point noted =3

 

[TalonXXX]

Sorry, In a hurry.... but I do need my philosophical fix xD.

Originally Posted by TalonXXX
No, but that first act of evil was one of free will and god did not stop it, why then would god stop subsequent acts of "evil"? And it is being done against her free will by the free will of another human being. It is another human being asserting their free will over another not God using his power to undermine the general idea of free will.
So God does care more about the free will of the person committing the 'evil' act. He cares more about 'evil' people being able to use their free will then he does protecting 'good' people from keeping their free will.

Not but God can't risk undermining free will as a whole by stopping or intervening in that one act of evil.

 

[9Westy9]

Sorry, In a hurry.... but I do need my philosophical fix xD.
Not but God can't risk undermining free will as a whole by stopping or intervening in that one act of evil.

So God still cares more about the 'evil' persons ability to take away free will than the 'good' persons ability to keep their free will.

 

[sportinnc]

If you have the absolute knowledge that someone is evil, you know that the world would be better without them, and you have the ability to remove them from the world, this does not compel you to remove them. The original proof has been widely discussed. My belief is that God does exist, and has the "three O's" as characteristics and allows evil to exist because of a divine plan. The belief of Christianity (my belief) is that God allows evil to exist because without it, there is no need for a Savior (in the form of Christ), and if evil does not exist, there is no need for a God.

 

[tumbleweed41]

...The belief of Christianity (my belief) is that God allows evil to exist because without it, there is no need for a Savior (in the form of Christ), and if evil does not exist, there is no need for a God.

So evil exists to justify Gods existence?

 

[The Sum of Awe]

If you have the absolute knowledge that someone is evil, you know that the world would be better without them, and you have the ability to remove them from the world, this does not compel you to remove them. The original proof has been widely discussed. My belief is that God does exist, and has the "three O's" as characteristics and allows evil to exist because of a divine plan. The belief of Christianity (my belief) is that God allows evil to exist because without it, there is no need for a Savior (in the form of Christ), and if evil does not exist, there is no need for a God.

What is the need for a need of God?

 

[sportinnc]

It's not necessarily a need for a need of God, it's a reality that simply exists. Evil doesn't necessarily exist to justify God's existence, God can exist without evil, we would just be drones without any concept of free will or need for a God. Evil exists because in the human mind it creates the need for a God.

 

[tumbleweed41]

It's not necessarily a need for a need of God, it's a reality that simply exists. Evil doesn't necessarily exist to justify God's existence, God can exist without evil, we would just be drones without any concept of free will or need for a God. Evil exists because in the human mind it creates the need for a God.

Like I said, it sounds like you are saying evil justifies Gods existence, at least in the minds of humankind.