Argument from Atrocities

  • Thread starter Thread starter Relinquish
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Gorgias said:
You’re mischaracterizing “God’s plan”, and therefore, you’re making it appear to rely on evil in a way that isn’t quite correct. God’s plan wasn’t to “provide a ‘perfect sacrifice’ for humanity”; it was to will the salvation of all, such that, having given life and free will to all humans, they would return God’s love and attain salvation.

Now… this isn’t what happened. Free will was abused in sinful ways. Therefore, in order for God’s plan to come to fruition, Jesus was made incarnate, and redeemed humanity. God didn’t “require humans to commit evil acts” or “need evil to accomplish his goal”; rather, God utilized the human condition in a way that respected free will and still attained to the salvation that God intended in the first place.
Click to expand...
So you’re saying that God could have saved everyone without requiring us to sacrifice Jesus? He could have done so in a way that didn’t require us to kill innocent people?
Gorgias said:
No. In the first case, the actor is the one performing the evil and hoping to attain to the good. In your statement, you’re implying (whether you meant to or not) that God is doing this same thing. This is not what I’m saying: I’m simply noting that God can take evil acts (of others) and make good come of them. Big difference…
Click to expand...
So it might be acceptable for me to hire someone (not intrinsically evil) to assassinate me (intrinsically evil) because I knew that it would further some greater good? Its ultimately the hitman who does the killing, not me.
 
tonyrey said:
We don’t deny free will; we prevent the decision from being implemented…

God can but He chooses not to because it would defeat the purpose of giving us free will, i.e. to choose what to believe and how to live.
Click to expand...
So what you are saying is that God could prevent the decisions from being implemented without circumventing free will, but does not because it would circumvent our free will?
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
40.png
Gorgias:
God didn’t “require humans to commit evil acts” or “need evil to accomplish his goal”; rather, God utilized the human condition in a way that respected free will and still attained to the salvation that God intended in the first place.
Click to expand...
So you’re saying that God could have saved everyone without requiring us to sacrifice Jesus? He could have done so in a way that didn’t require us to kill innocent people?
Click to expand...
No. Two thoughts: first, what God “could have done” is what God actually willed, and “did do”: God wished us both to have free will and to attain to salvation. Saying this, though, doesn’t place constraints on God’s abilities.

But, there you go again, with this presupposition of a “requirement” placed on God or on us. Does the expression of God’s will for human salvation “require” humanity to sacrifice Jesus? That seems too strongly worded. We know the historical events of Jesus’ life, and we know the significance of them in the context of Salvation History. Can we assert, though, in a human context, that God “required” these actions of us? No, I think not. In the same way that we discussed your previous question (“does God have a ‘ends justify the means’ approach in the context of salvation?”), it’s reasonable to assert that no, God does not “require” actions in a way that impinges on free will; nevertheless, God is able to make good result from any evil that exists (without imputing God’s participation in or causation of the evil).
No. In the first case, the actor is the one performing the evil and hoping to attain to the good. In your statement, you’re implying (whether you meant to or not) that God is doing this same thing. This is not what I’m saying: I’m simply noting that God can take evil acts (of others) and make good come of them. Big difference…
Click to expand...
So it might be acceptable for me to hire someone (not intrinsically evil) to assassinate me (intrinsically evil) because I knew that it would further some greater good? Its ultimately the hitman who does the killing, not me.
Click to expand...

No. But I’m confused by the way you use the term ‘intrinsically evil’: are you saying that the hitman is “not intrinsically evil”, or that the act of hiring a hitman is “not intrinsically evil”? Are you saying that assassination is “intrinsically evil”? I would assert that any person is not “intrinsically evil” – this is a judgment applicable to a particular act, not a particular person.

So, is hiring someone to assassinate a person ‘intrinsically evil’? I would say, in a precise way, “no” – under certain conditions! (That doesn’t mean that it’s not ‘evil’, however, and I’d like to be clear about making that distinction!) My answer, then, is that getting someone to assassinate me, even if I thought it would further some greater good, is evil (but not intrinsically so). The consideration you seem to be offering is pure utilitarianism, and that’s not what I’m advocating. Moreover, you seem to be attempting to make the case that the only way I can keep (myself?) from committing future evil is to have myself killed; that’s not at all defensible. (At the very least, from an Aristotelian perspective, it’s untenable: if I’m completely vicious, then I no longer am aware of my vice, so I wouldn’t be able to recognize the ‘advantage’ of my death; on the other hand, if I’m not completely vicious, such that I recognize my vice, then there’s still a part of me that hasn’t abandoned virtue, and therefore, I can work towards increased virtue, so there’s not the need to facilitate my own death. 😉 )

In any case, even the act of hiring the hitman is evil – it means that you’re enticing another person into committing an act of vice, and embroiling them in that evil!

However, it seems that you grabbed onto the “evil acts of others” part of my assertion, without noting that God is not willing or causing those acts; in your example, you are both willing and causing your own assassination.
 
TheTrueCentrist said:
So what you are saying is that God could prevent the decisions from being implemented without circumventing free will, but does not because it would circumvent our free will?
Click to expand...
God can and does prevent decisions from being implemented without circumventing free will but if He did so too frequently it would be coercive evidence that he exists…
 
tonyrey said:
God can and does prevent decisions from being implemented without circumventing free will but if He did so too frequently it would be coercive evidence that he exists…
Click to expand...
Important correction:
…if He did so too frequently it would be coercive evidence that He exists…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top