Hume concluded that the three points are inconsistent. If God is omnipotent, He is aware of existing evil and suffering, and knows how to put a stop to it. If God is omnibenevolent He will want to put a stop to it. If God is both of these attributes, then evil cannot exist. Since we know evil and suffering is a necessary bi-product of human life, we must acknowledge that evil does exist.
It also puts limits on God’s power. According to the definition of a theistic God, God is omnipotent. If God is all powerful then he should be able to command whatever he wants but by saying that morality is independent of God would mean that God is subject to the rules of morality (Fisher, 359). All in all the main issues with the Autonomy Thesis are that it would only be reasonable if one was not considering the existence of a theistic
Simply put, the fine-tuning argument contends that the universe was designed to ultimately create human beings. Fine-tuning is an argument which is able to contest one of the atheist’s own theories to disprove God. This will be explained in more detail later in this paper. In response to this, McCloskey says the cosmological argument “does not entitle us to postulate an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause.” As mentioned before, the cosmological argument is but one part of a concurrence for the existence of God. It does not prove God’s existence; it argues that there must be a necessary being which created the universe.
Augustine defends the god of theism by rejecting the existence of evil as a force or power opposed to god as it would reject the premise that god is omnipotent. Below are the ways in which he justifies moral and natural evil, which respectively mean evil caused by human acts, and evil events caused by the processes of nature. To justify evil, he solves the problem by defining evil as a ‘privation’ – which means when something is ‘evil’, it is not defined to contain bad qualities but is seen to be falling short of perfection, or what it is expected to be. Take a rapist as an example. Adopting Augustine’s idea of ‘evil’, we are to say that he is not living up to standards expected of human beings.
The issue that arises most commonly comes when all three of God’s characteristics are observed. As an omnibenevolent being, God, in theory, would not allow evil to plague the earth. One might assume God’s omnipotent nature would discount the existence of evil because he is able to stop it. Along with these, God’s omniscient powers would allow him to know of all of the evil. Therefore, believing God to encompass all of these traits would leave anyone in their right mind wondering how anything bad could ever happen in the world.
He solved this problem by saying that god is responsible for the evil in the world by defining evil as “privation”. By this he means when we use worlds like “evil” and “bad” we are saying that something does not meet our expectations of what it should be like ( by nature). Augustine wrote that evil is not a substance but is in fact an absence of kind feelings. Augustine also said that god can’t be blamed for creating evil himself that occurs in the world. As he said that in fact evil comes from angels and human beings who chose deliberately to deny and disobey what God had taught them, by turning away from him and what he had wished for mankind.
Response to Article: On Being an Atheist Cassandra Craig PHIL 201 Liberty University Reading the article ‘On Being an Atheist’ by H. J. McCloskey, was an invaluable experience in considering the views of an atheist concerning his beliefs about God, the universe, evil and suffering. This is the kind of article that may assist people in avoiding what Socrates spoke of in earlier lessons in philosophy as an unexamined life. Even if a person doesn’t agree with McCloskey’s views, you are prompted to think about many issues, what you are doing, what you believe and why, also investing time reflecting on what life is all about. Considering that McCloskey most likely gave a lot of thought to the above issues, he was overall very narrow minded in the way he talked about theism, he implies that proofs for theism should be abandoned, and says the evil that is in the world is one of the main reasons; “It is because evil exists that we believe God does not exist” (McCloskey, 1968, p. 52). In view of the PointeCast presentation, theistic arguments determine the best explanation for and not proof of, God’s existence, while considering the complexity and cause of the universe; and morality.
Earl Putz PHIL201-B06 October 17, 2011 In Response To McCloskey In February 1968, H. J. McCloskey published an article entitled “On Being an Atheist.” It is a work designed to show atheists exactly why they are what they are. As a piece of literature, it is well written and his points are articulated well. However, philosophy is not the opinions of one man or group, but an exchange of ideas that can help people come to a better understanding of their beliefs. McCloskey challenged everything I believe as a Christian, and did so in such a way as to appear that there should be no doubt that his argument is the correct one. As with all debates, however, there is more than one side, and I am going to present my arguments as rebuttals for McCloskey.
The Free Will Defense In this essay I will talk about why the free will defense is a logical and reasonable solution to the problem of evil. I will first define what the problem of evil is, and then I will define and explain why the free will defense works to solve the problem. I will also bring up and support all criticisms against the free will defense. I will continue by responding to those criticisms, and then conclude by summing up my main ideas. The strongest criticism to the free will defense is that God, being an all-powerful being, should be able to create free agents who make only good choices, freely.
However since we already have an idea of God as this perfect and infinite being, he must exist. Furthermore, since the natural light clears deception as an imperfection as well as not existing, God is a non-deceiver, he exist and is perfect. After the cogito argument and natural light examination of the deceptive God, Descartes discards the hypothesis that God is a deceiver. Since God is all-good, he would not deceive us. For that reason, Descartes introduces the evil demon/genius instead.