You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.
Do you agree with this theory?
Yes
0.00% (0 votes)
0.00% (0 votes)
Nope
100.00% (1 vote)
100.00% (1 vote)
Total Votes: 1
The Problem of Evil - Inconsistent Triad
Posted:
The Problem of Evil - Inconsistent TriadPosted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 607
Reputation Power: 30
Hey guys, I was recently looking through some gifs for my avatar and came across a triangle. It reminded me of something I had learnt earlier that year in R.E.
This was the problem of evil and how it is explained with the inconsistent triad.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
It basically means, if God is omnipotent, he knows the existence of evil and suffering and knows how to stop it. If God is omni-benevolent he will want to put a stop to it. Yet evil and suffering does exist.
This leaves 3 possible outcomes:
1. God is not omnipotent
2. God is not omni-benevolent
3. Evil does not exist
We all know that evil exists as most have experienced it.
So if God exists he is either: Not omnipotent or not omni-benevolent. This is not in line with most theist religions e.g Christianity.
Therefore God doesn't exist. (In this theorists eyes).
Key:
Omnipotent - All Powerful
Omni-benevolent - All loving.
This theory is by David Hume by the way.
This was the problem of evil and how it is explained with the inconsistent triad.
[ Register or Signin to view external links. ]
It basically means, if God is omnipotent, he knows the existence of evil and suffering and knows how to stop it. If God is omni-benevolent he will want to put a stop to it. Yet evil and suffering does exist.
This leaves 3 possible outcomes:
1. God is not omnipotent
2. God is not omni-benevolent
3. Evil does not exist
We all know that evil exists as most have experienced it.
So if God exists he is either: Not omnipotent or not omni-benevolent. This is not in line with most theist religions e.g Christianity.
Therefore God doesn't exist. (In this theorists eyes).
Key:
Omnipotent - All Powerful
Omni-benevolent - All loving.
This theory is by David Hume by the way.
#2. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Although I'm an Atheist, this argument doesn't really hold up when it comes under scrutiny.
You have to understand that all of the events in the Garden of Eden are completely idiotic.
God put an ignorant child in a room full of power tools then punished it when it hurt itself.
That's the Garden of Eden ^
I am in no way defending that, but from that story, God allows Evil to happen because it's our way to redemption.
Proving that you can be innately Good in a world full of Bad is the test.
In essence I suppose you could see it as All-tough-loving.
Last edited by Jeeves ; edited 1 time in total
You have to understand that all of the events in the Garden of Eden are completely idiotic.
God put an ignorant child in a room full of power tools then punished it when it hurt itself.
That's the Garden of Eden ^
I am in no way defending that, but from that story, God allows Evil to happen because it's our way to redemption.
Proving that you can be innately Good in a world full of Bad is the test.
In essence I suppose you could see it as All-tough-loving.
Last edited by Jeeves ; edited 1 time in total
- 3useful
- 0not useful
#3. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 607
Reputation Power: 30
Sith wrote Although I'm an Atheist, this argument doesn't really hold up when it comes under scrutiny.
You have to understand that all of the events in the Garden of Eden are completely idiotic.
God put an ignorant child in a room full of power tools then punished it when it hurt itself.
That's the Garden of Eden ^
I am in no way defending that, but from that story, God allows Evil to happen because it's our way to redemption.
Proving that you can be innately Good in a world full of Bad is the test.
Good post, I don't really know what else to say, I see no gaps in your argument. Never really thought about the Garden of Eden in that way. Thanks for the insight.
- 1useful
- 0not useful
#4. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Given that Biblically, the Garden of Eden is a controversial story I thought I'd tackle this from a logical perspective.
I take it that you're quite the smart one so this shouldn't be too hard to follow.
If we take the 4 Premises:
P1) God is omnipotent
P2) God is omniscient
P3) God is omnibenevolent
P4) Evil exists in the world
P4 is neither a presumption, a contradiction or the conclusion either.
It is an observed premise, though may be subjective in interpretation.
It assumes a standard definition of evil, which is widely accepted to exist in the world.
The Contradiction is this:
If God is omnibenevolent then there should exist no evil in the world, unless he is not powerful enough to eliminate evil, from P3.
God is powerful enough to eliminate all evil in the world, and is morally bound to do so, from P1 and P3, unless he is unable to recognize that an act will lead to an evil deed, and therefore, evil existing in the world, or he is unable to recognize evil when faced with it.
God is able to recognize evil, even in the future events of one act leading to another from P2.
God is powerful enough to rid the world of evil, and good enough to necessitate such an action, but does not.
So, basically, if you take out the reason behind Evil existing, The Garden of Eden, this argument holds up.
I take it that you're quite the smart one so this shouldn't be too hard to follow.
If we take the 4 Premises:
P1) God is omnipotent
P2) God is omniscient
P3) God is omnibenevolent
P4) Evil exists in the world
P4 is neither a presumption, a contradiction or the conclusion either.
It is an observed premise, though may be subjective in interpretation.
It assumes a standard definition of evil, which is widely accepted to exist in the world.
The Contradiction is this:
If God is omnibenevolent then there should exist no evil in the world, unless he is not powerful enough to eliminate evil, from P3.
God is powerful enough to eliminate all evil in the world, and is morally bound to do so, from P1 and P3, unless he is unable to recognize that an act will lead to an evil deed, and therefore, evil existing in the world, or he is unable to recognize evil when faced with it.
God is able to recognize evil, even in the future events of one act leading to another from P2.
God is powerful enough to rid the world of evil, and good enough to necessitate such an action, but does not.
So, basically, if you take out the reason behind Evil existing, The Garden of Eden, this argument holds up.
- 3useful
- 0not useful
#5. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Sep 30, 201211Year Member
Posts: 607
Reputation Power: 30
Another very detailed post, so you think of The Garden of Eden is where Evil came from?
Last edited by Teep ; edited 1 time in total
Last edited by Teep ; edited 1 time in total
- 0useful
- 0not useful
#6. Posted:
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Status: Offline
Joined: Aug 06, 201211Year Member
Posts: 6,360
Reputation Power: 374
Enthusiast wrote Another very detailed post, so you think of The Garden of Eden as where Evil came from?
Yes, for very flawed reasons.
- 0useful
- 0not useful
You are viewing our Forum Archives. To view or take place in current topics click here.