[quote] RSU wrote:
The Problem of Evil can now be outlined logically:
Given Premise 1: God is all-knowing
Given Premise 2: God is all-powerful
Given Premise 3: God is all-good
Observed Premise 4: But, Evil exists
Conclusion 1: Therefore, God cannot simultaneously possess all three of the given characteristics.
For those that don’t see the deduction clearly, I’ll explain further.
If God is all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good, then he MUST know what good is at all times, he MUST be able to have good at all times and he MUST want nothing but good at all times. However, there isn’t good at all times. This means that at least one of the three aforementioned attributes is wrong to some degree. Perhaps he is two of the three. Perhaps less. Perhaps he is MOSTLY good, or SOMEWHAT powerful, or FAIRLY knowledgeable, for example, but not “OMNI…” [/quote]
There is an underlying assumption in this argument: namely, that we, being non-omniscient, can enforce a definition of “good”, and demand it apply.
If you go back and get into the actual differences among the protestant sects, you will come upon a lot of stuff written about the “free will” connundrum. For instance, Calvinists believe in pre-destination, and thus that there is no actual “free will” per se. God, being omniscient, knows how you will choose before you are even created, so there is no actual choice being made. However, other sects, such as the Presbyterians, believe there is free will – even if an omniscient God knows how we will choose, he is not enforcing a choice - he simply knows how the choice will turn out. I’m sure I’m horribly simplifying it, but that’s it in a nutshell (provided my memory is working properly). If the Calvinists are correct, I can see where Doogie is coming from…
Now, you may think that’s off topic, but I don’t. I think the analysis of this problem is similar, although the above only hits on the omniscience aspect.
Let’s re-state our problem in more everyday language. The idea is that if you want something, and have the power to make it so, you must make it so – is that the idea?
However, if God did indeed grant free will, he could know what is good, want what is good, and even know when good will not be chosen, yet choose not to intercede to enforce his preferred outcome. I don’t pretend to know why God would choose to do so – but if he is omnipotent, I would think it would fall within the powers of that omnipotence to choose to grant other than his preferred outcome in a particular situation.
And this circles back to our attempt to impose a definition on “good.” As I said, I am not at all pretending to know why it would be good to allow evil to exist for a set period of time – but then again, I’m not omniscient. If we do go with our original 3 premises, that God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibeneficent, and if evil does exist, then an acceptable assumption would be that somehow allowing evil to exist is part of an overall plan for good. That would solve the logical connundrum, even if that assumption seems counter-intuitive to us non-omniscients.