Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AntiGuv
"What is not rationally consistent is an omnipotent, omniscient god who creates anything that he considers evil."

They you are saying that a rational omnipotent Omniscient God would never create anything with free will.

26 posted on 04/11/2005 10:53:50 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: DannyTN

I didn't say that. An omnipotent, omniscient god could very well create free will - although that would require that he limit himself, which would then make him a limited god. However, what I said was that an omnipotent, omniscient god would not rationally create anything that he considers evil, in which case nothing evil would exist to be chosen by free will. If nothing evil exists in the judgment of a god, then there can be no transgression in judgment of such a god, in which case the god is irrelevant from a practical standpoint, because anything that would upset the god doesn't exist to be done.

If a god creates anything that he considers evil then he is a dualist god. Creating the option of engaging in evil is creating evil.


34 posted on 04/11/2005 11:02:56 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

To: DannyTN

PS. And a dualist god is irrelevant to us from a rational standpoint because there is no way to know whether the good or evil dimension is 'speaking' to us - an evil god lies, even if evil only in part. From a rational standpoint, a god who is altogether evil is no different from a god who is altogether not - then it's just semantics - and he is irrelevant for the same reason.


40 posted on 04/11/2005 11:08:30 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson