Cool Guides

The problem with the argument is that evil is relative, and the relative knowledge of what is or isn't is something subjectively decided, not something inherently known.

Does "all powerful" really mean all? I mean, a lìfe sentence is only about 30 years. Since it's all just social constructs (and even if it isn't) the precise meaning of the word could different that you'd think.

Maybe god was all powerful until they created free will and found that they made free will stronger than themselves. But since god made free will, god is still all powerful.

Like humans making machine learning. We can only influence it, not control it. Does that mean we are not in control? No, we could simply pull the plug.

God could also simply pull the plug, but likely doesn't want to because we are their creation. It's only a last resort.

Anyways, that's my two cents.

Okay, I can partially respond to this. (I'm a satanist, so don't @ me over this.)

First, we're using mortal definitions of good and evil, which may not conform to what a god would define as good and evil. Moreover, if you say that god's will is good, and that everything that happens is the will of god because that god is all-powerful, then everything is good because that is what god wills. That means that, yes, the rape of children is good, because that was god's will. If god created everything and is all-powerful, then this is a logical conclusion.

Second, you can say that god knows the outcome, but that we don't. We believe that we have choice, but god already knows what we're going to choose, even though we don't know until we make the choice. This is determinism. Under this model, god is giving us enough rope to hang ourselves, and we condemn ourselves to hell, rather than god condemning us.

There can't be free-will if there wasn't any choice. If there there are choices, there is the potential for evil choices.

So it's kinda like saying "if God is all powerful could He create a mountain on Earth but also make it so the Earth is a perfect sphere?" It's just pointing out that a planet that's a perfect sphere wouldn't have mountains and a planet with mountains are not perfect spheres. Which isn't exactly deep philosophical thought that needs a flow chart.

Also if proving something about religion is paradoxical proves that religion is wrong, by the same logic proving something about math or science is paradoxical proves those are wrong. Halting Problem? Math is false! Schrodinger's Cat? Physics is false!

But outside atheist dogma, most people accept there are things about the universe that are paradoxical. The Halting Problem doesn't mean we should discard mathematics, Schrodinger's Cat doesn't mean we discard Physics. Following this trend means that all of the efforts by atheists to point out paradoxes in religion doesn't accomplish anything.

You can’t have free will without the option to choose anything. If you can’t choose evil you don’t have free will it’s just a semblance of free will. If you’d prefer a semblance of free will that’s valid