T
Thundergod
Guest
Put simply…
God is said to be all omnipotent(all powerful), omnibenevolent(all good), and omniscient(all knowing). However, there is evil in the world and we come to the problem.
If god knows of evil and does nothing then he is not all good. If god knows of evil and can do nothing then he is not all powerful. If god does not know of evil then he is not all knowing.
This problem is further complicated by the fact that god is supposed to be all knowing. As such at the creation of the universe all choices were known to the creator, which makes even the concept of evil his responsibility. Upon creating the universe God intentionally created the universe with Evil in it which forces us to reject eitheromnibenevolence, omnipotence, or omniscience.
To state that Evil is the result of the fall is to twist responsibility from God to Man but this cannot be done because an all knowing creator knew that man would do exactly what was done before it was done. The fall can only be attributed to God and not Man as god knew it would happen and did nothing to prevent it from happening. As a result we can refer to the fall as ‘a’ cause of evil but the cause of the fall will always be the creator, who must have had fore knowledge of this event and through inaction did nothing to prevent it. Which makes God responsible for Evil.
In addition the idea that Evil is to be attributed to the Devil is again not an acceptable answer since our Omnipotent creator is responsible for the creation of the devil. Once again, there is no action or result that the Devil can be related to that God did not know of before creation was even undertaken. This throws the responsibility of any action perpetrated by the Devil back upon god which again requires that we decide which attribute is not applicable, Omnipotence, Omnibenevolence, or Omniscience.
To argue in another way this issue can be resolved by stating that evil is not relative to us but to God and as such we cannot know that something like the Holocaust was actually bad rather than good in Gods eyes does nothing for us. This perspective either justifies all actions or eliminates the idea of evil in the first place. This is not a solution since it is nothing more than reclassifying actions and events to make them not evil but I think that we can all agree that omnibenevolence and something like the Holocaust are mutually exclusive regardless of what you call the Holocaust.
So, in conclusion how does an Apologist defend the idea of an Omnibenevolent, Omniscient, Omnipotent God in the face of Evil. I am very curious to understand how all three traits are defended of which of the three must be rejected from Gods Nature.
God is said to be all omnipotent(all powerful), omnibenevolent(all good), and omniscient(all knowing). However, there is evil in the world and we come to the problem.
If god knows of evil and does nothing then he is not all good. If god knows of evil and can do nothing then he is not all powerful. If god does not know of evil then he is not all knowing.
This problem is further complicated by the fact that god is supposed to be all knowing. As such at the creation of the universe all choices were known to the creator, which makes even the concept of evil his responsibility. Upon creating the universe God intentionally created the universe with Evil in it which forces us to reject eitheromnibenevolence, omnipotence, or omniscience.
To state that Evil is the result of the fall is to twist responsibility from God to Man but this cannot be done because an all knowing creator knew that man would do exactly what was done before it was done. The fall can only be attributed to God and not Man as god knew it would happen and did nothing to prevent it from happening. As a result we can refer to the fall as ‘a’ cause of evil but the cause of the fall will always be the creator, who must have had fore knowledge of this event and through inaction did nothing to prevent it. Which makes God responsible for Evil.
In addition the idea that Evil is to be attributed to the Devil is again not an acceptable answer since our Omnipotent creator is responsible for the creation of the devil. Once again, there is no action or result that the Devil can be related to that God did not know of before creation was even undertaken. This throws the responsibility of any action perpetrated by the Devil back upon god which again requires that we decide which attribute is not applicable, Omnipotence, Omnibenevolence, or Omniscience.
To argue in another way this issue can be resolved by stating that evil is not relative to us but to God and as such we cannot know that something like the Holocaust was actually bad rather than good in Gods eyes does nothing for us. This perspective either justifies all actions or eliminates the idea of evil in the first place. This is not a solution since it is nothing more than reclassifying actions and events to make them not evil but I think that we can all agree that omnibenevolence and something like the Holocaust are mutually exclusive regardless of what you call the Holocaust.
So, in conclusion how does an Apologist defend the idea of an Omnibenevolent, Omniscient, Omnipotent God in the face of Evil. I am very curious to understand how all three traits are defended of which of the three must be rejected from Gods Nature.