@byzlyan: Plantinga & thomas aquinas my pookies 🥺#theism #atheism #metaphysics #philosophy #religion

erikkadze :

But then you mention natural evil😱

helin :

god could just make free will and no evil coexist hes all powerful isnt he?

Betjo_509 :

13.8 billion years evolution or 7 days 🥀

Plantinga :

Is metaphysics hard to study?

ffear :

Regarding P1:there seems to be a misinterpretation. The paradox never claims that God MUST eliminate evil. It is a logical question: if God is good and can prevent evil, why does evil exist? The argument in the video tries to deflect this by saying "God may have a morally sufficient reason," but that does not answer the question , it only avoids it. The paradox does not demand that God act; it asks why He does not act. It points out that it would make no sense for a perfectly good God to create a world with the possibility of evil if He could have chosen a path of goodness and, through His omnipotence, prevented the emergence of evil. The paradox places its focus at the very beginning of the narrative ,not on intervention ("MUST"). Regarding P2 :Aqui. view is excellent, but it has flaws: If evil is merely the "privation of good," then why was the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil already present in Eden? Evil already existed as a real possibility before the first sin. This shows that evil is not merely absence, it is an option that God created from the very beginning. Evil is the opposite of good; being an opposite does not necessarily imply deriving from it. Regarding P3: perfect, but we still have natural evil. The argument only "answers" the evil committed by human actions. The rest of the argument is acceptable to some extent, but the fact is: when free will is brought up, we can criticize not only omnibenevolence and omnipotence, but also omniscience. If God is omniscient, He is aware of our choices before we even make them ,even before we are born, God already knows everything. Yet He does not intervene to prevent evil (which conflicts with omnipotence and, above all, omnibenevolence). Having knowledge of something and of its outcomes, when applied to God, conflicts not only with the three main attributes, but also with free will itself. For if there is foreknowledge, if there is destiny, then free will does not truly exist, and that also invalidates the response regarding evil committed by humans.

🜏 Bidewaaq🏴🟩 :

P3 doesn’t explain natural evil

babouche :

where in the epicurain paradox it says "god create evil " ?

Vittorio2009 :

Stopped reading seeing the first point is wrong

𒌐 Defalt 𒌐 :

P6 : isn’t it a contradiction with the Classic concept of heaven then? As God remove the ability to sin therefore he is removing genuine freedom and moral responsability

x :

So that means it ain’t all powerful

L :

reject p5. first, god can make humans not be able to choose evil in their essence, since then free will still applies and it does not follow that humans are programmed. Free will acts according to essence, not with essence. second, if a being needs to choose evil in order to have free will, then god cannot have free will in the same sense, since god cannot perform evil but still has free will. If god is maximally good and has free will, i see no objection to that humans can be maximally good and have free will.

nyhroxc :

Glad to be one of the pros on ur team🥹

#1 Yeat fan in Naples⚛️ :

"May have a reason" like no? What kind of hypocritical reason is that?

︎ :

but in the day of judgement do you agree that we humans who have finite lives committed sins to suffer an infinite torment of hell do you think this is logical?yet we never asked to created in the first place but have no other choice but to accept,praise and believe this almighty creator to thank of our existence,that supposedly created everything.also of course this is a real scenario that I'm gonna state when two humans have different lives one lived being rich but humble and good person so technically he goes to heaven in the other hand the second person was being abuse and torture and killed when he still a child but a child is an ignorant so he goes to heaven but in the heaven are still the memory of the those two keep remain so in that case in the heaven suffering can still exist in the mind that horrible agony and pain are still exist in his memories but if in the heaven the memories is gonna be wiped out or gone are they still the same person?can you give a answer i know this is an hypothetical only but what do you think?

musamura2 :

I reject premise 1 because there is no morally just reason for evil

Giorgi :

powder :

mid argument

little girl from ebay ♡ ～ :

why do we have to fight if a person exists or not when we can just ciexist is it really that difficult to not fight over if something exists or not

femtofilms :

Bro thinking that nobody would read allat, first thing P1: god can allow some evil?! What reason can it be? God also as u said creates thing that can be corruptible, god is perfect so how can a perfect being create something not perfect? And why a perfect being has the need to create, if it’s perfect then it’s good as it is. If u take god as something that has not a will and we are created as an emanation of his light, goodness(Plotino, Neoplatonism) I can count it as right but then god has no will and how can a perfect being cannot have something? The only one explanation is that God is above logic and cannot be proven through logic(Kant).

🇮🇱 benjamin kirkanyahu 🇮🇱 :

was disproved ages ago, this is nothing new.