|
"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?" -Epicurus (341-270 BC)
1. Christianity proposes:
(a) God is omnipotent and omnipresent.
(b) God created man with the capacity for free will.
(c) Free-will allows man to commit sin.
(d) Sin is the cause of evil.
CONCLUSION 1: God has the power to prevent evil but chooses not to.
2. Christianity's explanation for salvation:
(a) God wishes us to love him freely.
(b) God will reward those who love him freely.
CONCLUSION 2: God requires love from man.
3. Christianity's explanation for damnation:
(a) Not loving God freely is a sin (and therefore evil).
(b) God cannot allow sin (and therefore evil) to go unpunished.
CONCLUSION 3: God punishes man for evil which God chose not to prevent.
4. Summary of conclusions on the nature of the Christian God:
(a) God has the power to prevent evil but chooses not to.
(b) God desires love from man.
(c) God punishes man for evil which God chose not to prevent.
CONCLUSION 4: God is (a) immoral; (b) needy; and (c) irrational.
5. Christianity's explanation for the nature of the Christian God:
(a) God chooses to limit the use of his power.
(b) God allows man free choice in what to love.
(c) God allows adverse events to occur.
(d) God allows man to choose exclusion from salvation.
CONCLUSION 5: God has a "higher purpose".
6. Consequences of the nature of the Christian God:
(a) The choice of love given to man is not genuinely free, because failure to love God results in damnation (and because man cannot love god using reason alone).
(b) God's desire for man to love him is a requirement, because failure to do so results in damnation.
(c) God's choice in not preventing damnation and adverse events is unreasonable, since man is damned for failing to prevent adverse events insofar as it is in reasonably within mans' power to do so.
CONCLUSION 6: God is (a) duplicitous; (b) jealous; and (c) hypocritical.
Further Thoughts
This problem goes to the heart of the notion of "free will". How can will
be truly "free" if it is subject to retribution? The motivations that
Christianity provides for its God are very human ones. This is
logically inconsistent for the omnipotent, omnipresent, all-loving, perfect
being, which Christianity claims God to be.
Christian views of what is meant by damnation vary. (See my Survey of the Christian Hell). Fundamentalists tend to insist that it involves real torment, while more liberal denominations increasingly teach that it is nothing more than separation from God - and eternal death. The question remains, however, as to why an all-loving all-powerful God would require "love" through worship in one particular way...
Another argument often raised by more "conservative" Christians is this:
"God gives us the choice - damnation or salvation. It is man who actually makes that choice. Damnation is, therefore, mans' fault and not God's."
This would be a very strange choice... If Christianity were true, we would be required to make a choice to "love God", not as we choose, but through the figure of Jesus Christ. Further, the choice cannot be made on reason alone, but requires faith. The alternative is damnation. (Not oblivion; not nothingness - not according to the Bible, anyway!). This "choice" would mean that:
- God is immoral, because he allows us to commit evil solely so that some us may freely choose to love him.
- God is needy, because he created us solely so that some of us would choose to love him.
- God is irrational, because he damns us for using reason instead of faith.
- God is duplicitous, because the choices he gives us are not truly free.
- God is jealous, because he punishes us for not loving Him.
- God is hypocritical, because he would punish man for giving the same choice to others.
Say I tell a child: "Grass is blue. Agree with me and I will love you. Disagree with me and I will beat you." The child insists that grass is green, and I beat her. Would you blame me, or the child?
If there is a God, I can't see how "he" could possibly act as Christianity describes.
|
Further reading: "PTET - A survey of the Christian Hell..."
From an original post to the evidence.info weblog on 19 April, 2002.
|
