- In response to Hookflash vs. World’s Carnival of the Godless entry.
In your post, you presented the argument from Evil.
The Argument from Evil essentially goes like this: If God is willing but not able to prevent evil, then he is not omnipotent. If he is able but not willing, then he is not benevolent. If he is neither able nor willing, then why call him God? If he is both able and willing, then why is there evil?
Well, let me give you an example, from the theology I know, to answer that argument, and see what you think, ok?
Let’s take it at a run. Should you be interested in the dialogue after that, we’ll continue. It’s a tough one - most good questions are.
———-
I’m interested in why you are reducing the individual questions to either-or. I’m also curious as to why you are making the assumption that those two choices are, in fact, the only two options in those particular cases.
I would define “free will” per the dictionary: “The power of making free choices that are unconstrained by external circumstances or by an agency such as fate or divine will.”
Note the “or”. Let’s focus on the second half of that. “unconstrained by the divine will”, as that is the meaning pertinent to the discussion. Every will is, by necessity, not entirely free. Circumstances impinge, and always will. Within those circumstances, we have the ability to choose our own course of action, to the extent to which we are able.
