AJG Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Just finished reading a philosophy paper on the subject of skeptical theism. Skeptical theism is a response to the PoE where it is proposed that just because we cannot think of a justification for evil of suffering does not mean that a justification does not exist. Typical "Man cannot fully understand the ways of God" pablum. The author presents an interesting and, IMO, devastating attack on scripture using this line of argument. The author puts forth the idea that not only is it possible that God causes evil or suffering for a greater good we cannot see, he also could lie to us for the same reason. We can all think of times when it is acceptable to lie to children for their own good. For example, if a friend of your child was kidnapped and murdered, you might not want to reveal the details to the child for his own good, at least not until he is mature enough to understand it. So too, God can have very good reasons for lying to us that we cannot understand. After all, God's ways are mysterious... Left with this possibility, there is no way to know whether the Bible, if it truly was God's word, could be trusted to mean what it says. For example, maybe salvation really does come from works and not from faith and God's lie is a test to see who will live a life worthy of salvation. Maybe those who are skeptical about something simply because it's found in an ancient book but still live good lives are the ones who will pass the test. Of course, I think that's nonsense, but the argument does seem to be a solid attack on Biblical authority. If Christians want to continue to argue that God might have a good reason for the Holocaust, we should point out that God might also have a good reason to lie to them in their authoritative book. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 Actually, given the pervasiveness of suffering, an evil and malicious God would actually make sense. So, when you say "theism" naturally the next question is going to be what the nature and character of this God is. Personally, an afterlife of continuous bliss does not make up for the mental and physical torment even the average person endures in life, and I don't accept the reality of this supposed afterlife, considering what we experience now is the only sort of life we really know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJG Posted April 14, 2014 Author Share Posted April 14, 2014 Actually, given the pervasiveness of suffering, an evil and malicious God would actually make sense. So, when you say "theism" naturally the next question is going to be what the nature and character of this God is. Given that we are talking about the Christian God, the God is an omni-benevolent one in the traditional sense. I do agree that if an all-powerful god exists, the evidence of the world points toward a cruel one. This line of argument is a direct attack on the traditional defense of a good God who allows evil to exist for some greater good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deva Posted April 14, 2014 Share Posted April 14, 2014 OK, its the so-called all good deity of the Christian God. Necessarily, the afterlife must be without suffering, if this putative God is in any way "good". Unfortunately, there is no proof of such a place. The "greater good" must have more evidence than someone's word for it, no matter how "God inspired." That's the way I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts