From: ak574@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (David Choweller)
Subject: Re: Best Wishes
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, (USA)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 20:22:57 GMT


>Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: More "Best Wishes"
Summary: 
Expires: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: 
Organization: California State University, Fresno
Keywords: 

In article <1992Apr10.172109.7579@rz-berlin.mpg.de> dabrowski@rz-berlin.mpg.de (Jarek Dabrowski) writes:
>In <9204061435.AA28084@CSUFresno.EDU> David Choweller recalls the old
>criticism of the "benevolent and omnipotent God" idea:
>
>-David:
>>|> Since God is omniscient, he could have predicted what would happen
>>|> if he created souls; that is, he could predict that this act of 
>>|> creating souls would lead to the future you describe below, a future 
>>|> where horrible evil and indescribable suffering exists.  Yet, he 
>>|> still went ahead and created souls.  Thus, God cannot be benevolent 
>>|> in any reasonable sense of the word.
>-Jarek:
>>|Refutable: Omniscient and omnibenevolent God exists (assumpt.) and evil
>>|exists (fact) => God knows that every created soul will, when mature, 
>-David:
>>I'm saying that Omniscient and omnibenevolent God doesn't exist, and
>>you take it as an assumption?
>>
>I guess you ask for confirmation? Yes, I take it as an assumption and
>using this assumption I refute your criticism aimed against it.
>

But the assumption is contradictory.  I had assumed that your scenario
shows that God can be both Omniscient and benevolent.  By taking what
you're trying to prove as an assumption, you're arguing circularly.


>-Jarek:
>>|treat its past mistakes and suffernig as a fine price for its present
>>|freedom and happiness. There's no logical hole here.
>-David:
>>But since the rule that "past mistakes and suffering" are necessary for
>>"present freedom and happiness" was created by God, God is responsible
>>for the suffering. Remember that God is omnipotent.  He can change the
>>rule, as long as it doesn't defy logic.  You have to show why past 
>>mistakes and suffering are neccessary for happiness.
>>
>Not just for happiness but for freedom and happiness. Drugs can make 
>you happy (as long as they work) but not free. And I did argue that it
>comes out naturally that at least some souls pay with suffering for 
>their complete and stable freedom: Briefly, the very chance to choose 
>the world without God makes such a choice possible. God is responsible 

But if God exists, you CANNOT choose a world without God.  Everything in the
world, it's rules, and your nature, are created by God.  How can you have
unrestricted free will to choose a world without God when the whole universe
around you is created by God.  You cannot escape.  The Free Will is bogus.

>for giving us unrestricted, free will and thus for leaving all choices 
>open to us, while we are responsible for the usage of His gift.
>

What about our desires?  Who or what causes them?  What prompts us to
do evil, or good?

>>Since God created souls, he defines what makes them happy.
>>
>Not necessarily. If God created souls as completely free beings, then
>souls may also decide what makes them happy. Maybe they are unable to

I don't see how souls can decide what makes them happy.  For example, if
you don't eat, you'll starve and be unhappy.  God made the rule that
if I don't eat, I'll starve -> I'll suffer -> I'll be unhappy.  I cannot
choose both to be happy and not eat.  God makes you crave the love of
another human being; I don't *choose* to be attracted to a pretty girl; If
I fall in love with her, I cannot both choose to be happy and have her
not reciprocate.


>execute their decision, but still they may ask God for help. And God
>should help, provided that the wish doesn't conflict with the wishes
>of other souls. I see souls as self-ruling universes, not as beings
>which character depends on outer factors (eg. on God).
>
>>So if he makes them so that they have to go through indescribable 
>>suffering and torture so that they can be happy, then it's his fault.  
>>Again, he's not benevolent.
>>
>I argued above why this conclusion is invalid. (I know you'll disagree)

O.K.  I've used this example a few times before.  God, by making certain
laws in the universe, causes suffering.  For example, the law that organic
material is needed for sustenance.  This causes humans to kill other animals,
causing much suffering to the said animals.  So here is an example of a
restriction on our free will.  We cannot both choose to not eat living
things and still survive (be happy).  So God controls what makes us happy
by making the rules of our environment.

In fact much of the conflict in the world is caused by this very basic
need, the need to sustain oneself.  By creating this need in us, God
restricts our free will.  You see, the notion of "unrestricted free will"
in a world created by someone else, is ridiculous.

>
>>Also, I'm curious.  Do you believe that the God (of your scenario) 
>>has the right to judge his creations?
>>
>In fact we judge ourselves. In the Last Judgement, God shows Heaven and 
>our souls decide whether they want it or not. "Boys and girls, here in 
>Heaven we wear no socks. Do you mind wearing no socks forever?"  :->
>Maybe the Last Advertisement would be a better description. But because
>our preferences are consequences of our deeds, the Last Judgement is
>probably more appropriate.
>

How is our preference the consequence of our deeds?  If I were shown
eternal hellfire on the one hand, and eternal bliss (whatever that means)
on the other, it's clear what I'll choose.  This doesn't depend on my
deeds.

>
>Best wishes,
>             Jarek
>------------------------------------------------------
> .-----.    dabrowski@fhi-berlin.mpg.dbp.de
> `-> <-'           (Jarek Dabrowski)
>I WANT DAN BREDY BACK TO THE NET


Anyway, back to your scenario: supposing I don't like this crappy free will
I've been given, will God take it back, and spare me from his damnation?
You say that I agreed to be on this earth but don't remember doing it.  Can
I change my mind?  Can I demand a refund?  If not, why not?
--
                                                 davidch@zimmer.CSUFresno.EDU
The lunatic is in the hall
The lunatics are in my hall
The paper holds their folded faces to the floor
And every day the paper boy brings more
                -- "Brain Damage," Pink Floyd