3 ms·

If a parent locks up their small child and isolates them from society, so that the child never has the opportunity to tell a lie or steal another child's toy, y

If a parent locks up their small child and isolates them from society, so that the child never has the opportunity to tell a lie or steal another child's toy, you could say that parent has willingly used their power to prevent evil, within the little world that they have created. A benevolent parent, one could say, according to the definition you have supplied. For some reason, as a society, we tend to prefer parents who lovingly grant their children freedom to make mistakes, and present them with appropriate consequences after the fact. Growth and authentic love only come from a situation where we have the freedom to reject those values. A truly benevolent, omnipotent God would not force the people he created to obey him (i.e. to do good, because God is love), he would allow them the freedom to choose good, which necessarily grants them the freedom to choose the opposite.

dale_glass 3y ago
God isn't comparable to a parent. Parents are limited and imperfect, God is not. If parents were unlimited in their abilities, granting children freedom to make mistakes would be completely unnecessary.
avgcorrection 3y ago
Look at the problem statement. “Omnipotent”, “omniscient”… things that parents are not. Parents are just humans and are just at the mercy of the world. Unlike God. God made the rules and could have created a completely different world which doesn’t have the limitations that this one has. Meanwhile parents have to work with what they were given.
- bart_spoon 3y ago
  > God made the rules and could have created a completely different world which doesn’t have the limitations that this one has. This is an assumption you are making that many (most?) religions do not.
  - krapp 3y ago
    > This is an assumption you are making that many (most?) religions do not. We're really only talking about the Abrahamic faiths here, which are the ones making claims about God being omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. Any limitation to God's abilities implies that God is not all-powerful. If it is the case that this universe of sin and decay and the literal hail Mary of self-sacrifice on the cross with the result, as described in the book of Revelations, that the vast majority of humans who have ever lived will still burn in Hell for eternity is really the best God can do, then God cannot be all powerful. If God is all powerful then everything is arbitrary to Him. He chooses to allow evil. He chooses not to forgive sin. He chooses a pyrrhic victory at the end of time where evil still mostly wins. Incompetent, yes. Malicious, certainly. To quote George Carlin, this is not work that belongs on the resume of a Supreme Being. All powerful? Obviously not. Other religions don't have this problem. The gods of many other religions are limited in their capabilities and often exist within the framework of a cycle that allows constant redemption and renewal through reincarnation. In many ways, the cosmos itself is the highest power, and the gods are just what sits above humanity, but it's all still a part of the same flawed yet transcendental machine. There's always hope. With the Abrahamic faiths, there is only always existential dread. God by default will cast you into perdition, your sins are absolute and immutable, and if you fuck up the one life you have there are no second chances.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - avgcorrection 3y ago
    Oh my God. Of course I’m presupposing the idea of the omnipotent/omniscient/… God: > > 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 from whence comes evil? Because that’s the premise of the problem statement! > This is an assumption you are making that many (most?) religions do not. And?
    - bart_spoon 3y ago
      The original problem is only a problem is you are making those assumptions. When most religions aren’t making those assumptions, the entire thing becomes a strawman argument

dale_glass 3y ago

God isn't comparable to a parent. Parents are limited and imperfect, God is not. If parents were unlimited in their abilities, granting children freedom to make mistakes would be completely unnecessary.

avgcorrection 3y ago

Look at the problem statement. “Omnipotent”, “omniscient”… things that parents are not. Parents are just humans and are just at the mercy of the world. Unlike God. God made the rules and could have created a completely different world which doesn’t have the limitations that this one has. Meanwhile parents have to work with what they were given.

bart_spoon 3y ago
> God made the rules and could have created a completely different world which doesn’t have the limitations that this one has. This is an assumption you are making that many (most?) religions do not.
- krapp 3y ago
  > This is an assumption you are making that many (most?) religions do not. We're really only talking about the Abrahamic faiths here, which are the ones making claims about God being omniscient, omnipresent and omnipotent. Any limitation to God's abilities implies that God is not all-powerful. If it is the case that this universe of sin and decay and the literal hail Mary of self-sacrifice on the cross with the result, as described in the book of Revelations, that the vast majority of humans who have ever lived will still burn in Hell for eternity is really the best God can do, then God cannot be all powerful. If God is all powerful then everything is arbitrary to Him. He chooses to allow evil. He chooses not to forgive sin. He chooses a pyrrhic victory at the end of time where evil still mostly wins. Incompetent, yes. Malicious, certainly. To quote George Carlin, this is not work that belongs on the resume of a Supreme Being. All powerful? Obviously not. Other religions don't have this problem. The gods of many other religions are limited in their capabilities and often exist within the framework of a cycle that allows constant redemption and renewal through reincarnation. In many ways, the cosmos itself is the highest power, and the gods are just what sits above humanity, but it's all still a part of the same flawed yet transcendental machine. There's always hope. With the Abrahamic faiths, there is only always existential dread. God by default will cast you into perdition, your sins are absolute and immutable, and if you fuck up the one life you have there are no second chances.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  Oh my God. Of course I’m presupposing the idea of the omnipotent/omniscient/… God: > > 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 from whence comes evil? Because that’s the premise of the problem statement! > This is an assumption you are making that many (most?) religions do not. And?
  - bart_spoon 3y ago
    The original problem is only a problem is you are making those assumptions. When most religions aren’t making those assumptions, the entire thing becomes a strawman argument