mcbride
Posts: 333
Joined: 1/14/2005 Status: offline
|
Actually, GotSteel, you just didn’t acknowledge the answers. You asked “how people who believe that theirs a benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient deity at work in the world around us explain the death of poor old Gunther Link,” and I explained it in a couple of sentences, but since you’re such a nice guy, I’ll explain again. People who believe that there’s a benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient deity at work in the world know two things. One is that they have God-given free will, and so, necessarily, the world has consequences, and sometimes bad things will happen, so you cannot expect to be snatched away a second before the altar comes down, or before the earthquake happens. The other is that Gunther, if indeed he was a good man, a moment after it came down, was with God, and would experience a joy and relief that would be immeasurably greater than whatever he may have suffered on Earth. On your question about Epicurus, again, this seems like PHIL 101, and I repeat, I can’t figure out why you would think that an omnipotent and omniscient diety is restricted by Epicurus' “logical problem.” As many have pointed out, and I’ll quote an atheist site for you, “the idea that God must not be able to do something because it has not already been completed is rather illogical.” To imagine that humans can decide how and when a benevolent, omnipotent and omniscient deity should deal with evil, and how we could even conceive of all the possibilities, would seem to be a bit of hubris, to put it mildly. I notice you’ve been asked, again, why would you think earthquakes shouldn't happen if an "omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent god actually existed", so I’m looking forward to your answer.
|