Topic: An Argument Against The Free Will Defense For The POE (Read 9572 times)

Cogito · « **on:** May 31, 2006, 08:52:52 PM »

Theists often defend the occurrence of moral evil in God's creation by writing it off as an unfortunate, but necessary consequence of human free will.

But is it necessary?

To believe that our free will choices must sometimes result in evil actions seems to illegitimately conflate "choice" with "action."

For example, a bank robber can intend to murder a potential witness to a bank robbery and still not succeed in doing so: His gun might jam. He himself might be shot by security before he commits the murder. He might simply miss and only wound, not kill. He might miss altogether. And so forth.

It would seem that "intention" can be conflated with "action" only if it is the case that once a certain action is chosen or intended, that act is always executed in actuality. But since clearly this is not the case, how then would God's preventing the worst of the worst evil actions from occurring significantly interfere with free will?

God could have prevented or mitigated the Holocaust, but He didn't. God could prevent most or even all abortions, but He doesn't. Why?

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #1 on:** May 31, 2006, 09:08:42 PM »

"Theists often defend the occurrence of moral evil in God's creation by writing it off as an unfortunate, but necessary consequence of human free will."

I do not make that argument. I can't say I've met a theist that does, but I don't deny the plausibility that you have come across theists who do.

"But is it necessary?"

Theists don't say it is 'necessary.' They say it must be POSSIBLE, or else free will is an illusion.

Big difference.

"God could have prevented or mitigated the Holocaust, but He didn't. God could prevent most or even all abortions, but He doesn't. Why?"

That sort of intervention is the same as rendering free will impossible.

Keep in mind that Christian theists also point out that God is not indifferent. He stepped into the brokenness of the world as a character inside his own story and endured some of the same terrible things we endure- not in the abstract, but in the flesh. And these terrible things will not go unanswered, either. There will be a reckoning.

Of course, while that should be a chalk mark in God's favor, atheists will then complain about there being a reckoning.

Bdean · « **Reply #2 on:** May 31, 2006, 11:27:20 PM »

Quote

God could have prevented or mitigated the Holocaust, but He didn't. God could prevent most or even all abortions, but He doesn't. Why?

From an orthodox Christian perspective, I would agree that God can prevent most or all abortions, could have mitigated the Holcaust, and could have prevented many other acts of evil in the world....without trampling upon free will. After all, there are plenty of examples in the Gospels with Jesus healing ailments, disabilities, and even bringing people back from the dead.

And, in view of this, you pose a question that has been brought up by students in every theology class that I have ever taught. If God can prevent these things, why didn't he?

Many Christians scholars have sought to answer this question. To a degree, their answers align with the primary source of Truth in Christondom, divine revelation in the form of the Christian and Hebrew Scriptures. However, I have yet to find (or at least fully understand) these explanations apart from revelation...I do not see them as firm logical stand-alone proofs.

Even C.S. Lewis, after addressing this question in The Problem of Pain, later wrote what I consider to be his greatest work, A Grief Observed. It is a troubling, painful journaling amid the loss of his wife. It virtualy abandons his logical appraoch in the former book and dives deep into the very personal experience of grief and human suffering.

I place the answer to the "why" question amid the mystery of God. As troublesome or apalling as it may be to some outside of Christondom, the Scriptures do indeed call for trust in and reliance upon God even when there is no known (to the individual at a given moment) rational explanation for something like this. There is a "because I said so" dynamic to the Christian faith that can't be avaoided or hidden if one is to be consistent with the Scriptures. I am convinced that Scriptural Christianity is a faith first, understand second perspecitve of life (e.g. "Faith seeking understanding.").

For the Christian, I am convinced that the most important answers to the big "why" question that you pose are existential more than logical, highly personal (although oftentimes transferable), and closely connected the human struggle with life as suffering. My answers to the "why" question are the ones that allow me make sense of life in a messy and uncertain world. Others Christians require very different answers. While there are a number of fundamental doctrinces in Christianity, the answer to this question is not (well not directly) one of these fundamental doctrines. We are given some doctrinal paramenters, but within those parameters there is much room for a variety of individual narratives that people use to work through questions of suffering, grief, and injustice in the world.

Most of these answers can be logically attacked or rejected as easilty as one can logically critique a parent's words of comfort to a grieving child. From a Christian perspective, the answer must align with bibilical revelation, but that answer could take a variety of forms:

The child: "Why father?!"

The Father: "Shhhhh. It is ok. I love you. No matter what happens, know and trust that."
OR "Even when it does not appear to be so, know that I remain in control and that I have not rejected the world."
OR "As impossible as it may be for you to grasp, all suffering on earth is but a moment." OR "You can't understand the answer to this, but I call upon you to fight against this evil until your last dying breath. That is your charge."
OR....add a thousand other possibilities.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #3 on:** June 01, 2006, 12:00:50 AM »

"From an orthodox Christian perspective, I would agree that God can prevent most or all abortions, could have mitigated the Holcaust, and could have prevented many other acts of evil in the world....without trampling upon free will. After all, there are plenty of examples in the Gospels with Jesus healing ailments, disabilities, and even bringing people back from the dead."

I agree, but this did not come without a price. These actions prompted people to immediately come to a decision. When Jesus cast the demons into the pigs, his divinity was indisputable but rather than acknowledge it, some of the religious leaders decided to attribute it to Satan himself. Jesus characterized that attitude as akin to "Blasphemy of the Holy Spirit," or the "unforgiveable sin."

But had he not cast out the demons, they would not have been in jeapordy of committing the sin.

I don't dispute that you are right in saying that God can do those things without 'trampling' free will, but its also clear in the Scriptures that whenever God did do such things, certain responses were precipitated. Acceptance here, hardened hearts, there.

When the Pharisees once said they understood something, Jesus said, roughly, "Very well, since you claim you can see, your guilt remains."

Ie, if Jesus hadn't committed the very miracles that established his credibility, the people around him would have been excused or judged more leniently. Indeed, you could almost say that their disbelief would have been warranted. So, God's acting is not precluded, but it is not without impact, either.

Perhaps God delays the final days out of mercy. When he shows himself, men will be without excuse.

SML · « **Reply #4 on:** June 01, 2006, 12:07:41 AM »

POE = problem of evil? Is that what it stands for? I can only really speak to the problem of evil/pain from a Biblical Christian perspective.

Christians I know (with whom I have actually discussed such things), based on scripture, agree that the existence of free will does not necessitate the occurance of evil. Free will is the ability to choose to obey God or to choose not to. What is obedience if disobedience is impossible? What Christians I know will argue about is whether fallen man actually retains free will to choose to obey God apart from faith. Please note that disobedience to God does not automatically mean a person is doing evil things to other people (though it may be the case).

Quote

It would seem that "intention" can be conflated with "action" only if it is the case that once a certain action is chosen or intended, that act is always executed in actuality. But since clearly this is not the case, how then would God's preventing the worst of the worst evil actions from occurring significantly interfere with free will?

God could have prevented or mitigated the Holocaust, but He didn't. God could prevent most or even all abortions, but He doesn't. Why?

Actually, it is entirely possible that (based on scripture, I would say entirely accurate that) God actually does mitigate or prevent the occurance of some evil. I don't believe, based on those same scriptures, that God's interference is at all random. I also don't believe it interferes with free will. The question becomes (I think) "Is the existence of suffering as the result of evil wrong?" It's closely connected with "What is the highest good?" or "What is God's ultimate goal?" and "What are the limitations free will places on that goal?"

SML · « **Reply #5 on:** June 01, 2006, 12:16:00 AM »

Hmm, well, reviewing the posts that showed up before mine, I would add this: evil and pain can not be understood apart from scripture. Even with scripture, the immediate purpose may not ever become evident, but the overarching purpose is always known.

cimics · « **Reply #6 on:** June 01, 2006, 10:23:36 AM »

Cogito --

How do you know God DIDN'T mitigate the Holocaust? Hitler was defeated. The Jewish people survived. I have a book on how Hitler could have easily won WWII if he had made the right decisions (an excellent read, BTW). If that had happened, there might have been no survivors.

Cogito · « **Reply #7 on:** June 01, 2006, 11:24:30 AM »

Quote from: cimics

How do you know God DIDN'T mitigate the Holocaust?

I don't know that He didn't. The problem here, however, is that my ignorance cannot be used to justify a belief in any proposition whatsoever.

How do we know that God didn't make the Holocaust much worse than it would have been otherwise or that He didn't cause it to happen, intending it as some sort of divine rebuke toward his former "chosen" people? We don't.

However, here as before, we cannot rationally conclude anything based on our ignorance. The thing that we know is that the Holocaust happened and that it was vile and that God allowed it to unfold exactly as it unfolded.

Bdean · « **Reply #8 on:** June 01, 2006, 12:02:03 PM »

Quote

The thing that we know is that the Holocaust happened and that it was vile and that God allowed it to unfold exactly as it unfolded.

As an aside (although related to my earlier existential comment), this is why I am intruged by reading the autobiographical accounts of those who endured the Holocaust first hand and wrote about how they made sense or worked through the experience while it was occurring and after the fact.

Viktor Frankl, Ellie Wiesel, and Corrie TenBoom are three favorites.

However, to get a quick view of my favorite Christian exploration of suffering and evil, take two hours to read Richard Wurmbrand's Tortured for Christ. For an agonistic or atheist reader, I suspect that it will give a ton of excellent fodder for further illustrating Christianity as foolish, irrational, etc.

cimics · « **Reply #9 on:** June 01, 2006, 03:24:28 PM »

Quote

I don't know that He didn't. The problem here, however, is that my ignorance cannot be used to justify a belief in any proposition whatsoever.

How do we know that God didn't make the Holocaust much worse than it would have been otherwise or that He didn't cause it to happen, intending it as some sort of divine rebuke toward his former "chosen" people? We don't.

However, here as before, we cannot rationally conclude anything based on our ignorance. The thing that we know is that the Holocaust happened and that it was vile and that God allowed it to unfold exactly as it unfolded.

But for POE, the burden is on you to show the inconsistency between evil and theism. Your assertion that "God could have prevented or mitigated the Holocaust, but He didn't" is without support. All you can say is "God could have prevented the Holocaust, or made it less severe than it was, but He didn't."

Of course, now we're getting into degrees. How much does God have to do for it to be enough? And who are you to judge that?

Cogito · « **Reply #10 on:** June 01, 2006, 05:30:36 PM »

Quote from: cimics

Your assertion that "God could have prevented or mitigated the Holocaust, but He didn't" is without support.

Not only is my assertion not without support, my assertion is absolutely true! It is based on the assumption that the definition of God includes the phrase "a being who is omnipotent."

Quote from: cimics

And who are you to judge that?

Does this mean that you believe humans are incapable of recognizing evil? Does this mean that simply because an act appears evil to us, the same act on a Godly scale actually may be benign or even good?

cimics · « **Reply #11 on:** June 01, 2006, 07:26:28 PM »

Quote

Not only is my assertion not without support, my assertion is absolutely true! It is based on the assumption that the definition of God includes the phrase "a being who is omnipotent."

This response leads me to believe you are not paying attention. You have already conceded that you cannot know whether God acted to mitigate the Holocaust.

Quote

And who are you to judge that?

Does this mean that you believe humans are incapable of recognizing evil?

Not at all. That wasn't the question I asked. The question was, with regard to mitigating evil, who are you to judge how much is enough?

Quote
Does this mean that simply because an act appears evil to us, the same act on a Godly scale actually may be benign or even good?

Wrong question. The issue is whether permitting the amount of evil that exists is consistent with God being good.

Anthony Horvath · « **Reply #12 on:** June 01, 2006, 07:45:06 PM »

Cimics,

He forgot he said 'mitigated' in his first post.

Cogito · « **Reply #13 on:** June 01, 2006, 10:14:53 PM »

Quote from: cimics

This response [edit: i.e., that since God is omnipotent he could have mitigated or prevented the occurrence of the Holocaust] leads me to believe you are not paying attention. You have already conceded that you cannot know whether God acted to mitigate the Holocaust.

So what? Simply because I don't know whether or not God actually mitigated the Holocaust has nothing to with the fact that I know that if god is omnipotent, then he had the power to mitigate the Holocaust.

The argument that you continue to make is an argument from ignorance. The fact that you and I don't know something (in this case, whether or not God mitigated the Holocaust) is not the slightest justification to believe something else (in this case, that God DID mitigate the Holocaust).

What we both know -- well, unless you are Mel Gibson's father -- is that the Holocaust occurred and that God could have prevented its occurrence.

Quote from: cimics

"Does this mean that you believe humans are incapable of recognizing evil?"

Not at all. That wasn't the question I asked. The question was, with regard to mitigating evil, who are you to judge how much is enough?

If we cannot save all the babies in a burning orphanage, should we for that reason not save any of them?

There are obvious unnecessary evils that occur in this world that could be prevented if an omnipotent God desired that those evils be prevented. And this has nothing to do with anyone's free will.

SML · « **Reply #14 on:** June 02, 2006, 12:10:56 AM »

Cog, you're approaching this from a totally different frame of reference than any Christian would (this is very understandable - expected, even). What do you know about the nature of the Christian God? I mean - do you understand His characteristics as described in scripture?

cimics · « **Reply #15 on:** June 02, 2006, 07:59:11 AM »

Quote

So what? Simply because I don't know whether or not God actually mitigated the Holocaust has nothing to with the fact that I know that if god is omnipotent, then he had the power to mitigate the Holocaust.

Sure, you know He had the power to. But if He did, then what's your beef? I think I know what it is: you're not going to be satisfied. More below.

Quote

The argument that you continue to make is an argument from ignorance. The fact that you and I don't know something (in this case, whether or not God mitigated the Holocaust) is not the slightest justification to believe something else (in this case, that God DID mitigate the Holocaust).

It does mean, however, that you can't know that God DIDN'T mitigate the Holocaust. And the burden is on you. What you can say is that the Holocaust could have been less than it actually was. But that is a question of how much is enough.

You'll have an even bigger problem if you claim God could have accomplished this covertly. And overt action by God would be a huge violation of free will, only to be engaged in when needed to accomplish God's other purposes.

Quote

What we both know -- well, unless you are Mel Gibson's father -- is that the Holocaust occurred and that God could have prevented its occurrence.

Ah, but now you're implicitly jettisoning "mitigate" altogether. God could have prevented the Holocaust, but doing so would have majorly compromised free will. One thing about humans is they are capable of learning not only from their own mistakes and successes but also from others. History is a teacher of the human race in general. Humanity in general learned from the Holocaust -- a hard, harsh lesson -- but these types of lessons help with human maturity without compromising free will.

The Holocaust in particular accomplished something else -- the re-creation of the nation of Israel, which in both Christianity and Judaism, is destined to figure into future events.

Quote

If we cannot save all the babies in a burning orphanage, should we for that reason not save any of them?

We would save as many as we can. Again, that gets back into how much is enough. If the Holocaust cannot be prevented without an unacceptably compromising free will, then the question becomes can it be mitigated without unacceptably compromising free will. You haven't shown that it can, and you haven't shown that God did not already take the appropriate steps to do so. You think it's not enough, but as a finite human with a very limited life span, you are in no position to judge.

Quote

There are obvious unnecessary evils that occur in this world that could be prevented if an omnipotent God desired that those evils be prevented. And this has nothing to do with anyone's free will.

Right now I am interested in talking about the Holocaust. We can get into other evils later, but this is where I waded into the discussion, so let's first deal with it. The Holocaust has free will written all over it. Hitler's free will to attempt genocide of the Jews, the free will of those who helped him carry it out, the free will of those who permitted him to rise and stay in power (not only the German people, but other countries of the world who attempted to appease him rather than stand up to him).

TheDoctor · « **Reply #16 on:** June 02, 2006, 08:46:30 AM »

Quote from: Cogito

If we cannot save all the babies in a burning orphanage, should we for that reason not save any of them?

Yes, it is very sad that ALL of the Jews in Nazi-occupied territory were killed. Oh, wait, they weren't all killed, some escaped, some were hidden by non-Jews, etc.

Copernicus · « **Reply #17 on:** June 02, 2006, 12:04:05 PM »

Quote from: cimics

The argument that you continue to make is an argument from ignorance. The fact that you and I don't know something (in this case, whether or not God mitigated the Holocaust) is not the slightest justification to believe something else (in this case, that God DID mitigate the Holocaust).

It does mean, however, that you can't know that God DIDN'T mitigate the Holocaust. And the burden is on you. What you can say is that the Holocaust could have been less than it actually was. But that is a question of how much is enough.[/quote]

There is no burden on Cogito to prove that God did or did not mitigate the holocaust, since either argument would be an argument from ignorance. Anyway, pesky lawyer that you are, you have just tried to entrap Cogito (and probably yourself) in a case of presupposition-failure. To assert that God did or did not mitigate the Holocaust is to presuppose that God really exists. It is like saying that the King of France likes cream cheese on his bagels. Since there is no King of France, it is essentially meaningless to argue either way.

Quote

You'll have an even bigger problem if you claim God could have accomplished this covertly. And overt action by God would be a huge violation of free will, only to be engaged in when needed to accomplish God's other purposes.

Again, all such claims end up being rooted in an arguments from ignorance and begging the question of God's existence. Cogito has no burden of proof here. You are ignoring yours. If God existed, then it would be difficult to explain the difficulty inherent in an omnipotent being's inability to accomplish simple tasks. To explain it, religious apologists have constructed elaborate speculations about God's being constrained by a need to give humans "free will". Usually the speculation comes down to our ignorance of what motivated God. Some logical constraint might exist that we just can't fathom. In other words, an argument from ignorance.

Quote

Ah, but now you're implicitly jettisoning "mitigate" altogether. God could have prevented the Holocaust, but doing so would have majorly compromised free will. One thing about humans is they are capable of learning not only from their own mistakes and successes but also from others. History is a teacher of the human race in general. Humanity in general learned from the Holocaust -- a hard, harsh lesson -- but these types of lessons help with human maturity without compromising free will.

History is a teacher--and God's showing up on the scene, as he is reported to have done numerous times in the Bible. One of the most recent times was when he sent Jesus to die in relatively obscure conditions and with relatively few eyewitnesses. That aside, there is no apparent reason why God could not have intervened again on behalf of all the innocent victims in the holocaust who fell victim to evil. It comes down to an argument that there must have been some factors or considerations weighing on God's mind that we aren't privy to. An argument from ignorance.

Quote

The Holocaust in particular accomplished something else -- the re-creation of the nation of Israel, which in both Christianity and Judaism, is destined to figure into future events.

Depending on how you choose to interpret the Bible. A case can be made that those prophecies were about events in the distant past, and not our future at all.

Cogito · « **Reply #18 on:** June 02, 2006, 01:06:30 PM »

Quote from: TheDoctor

"If we cannot save all the babies in a burning orphanage, should we for that reason not save any of them?"

Yes, it is very sad that ALL of the Jews in Nazi-occupied territory were killed. Oh, wait, they weren't all killed, some escaped, some were hidden by non-Jews, etc.

If we cannot save all the babies in a burning orphanage, should we for that reason save only three of them and not the six that it is possible for us to save?

Quote from: cimics

The Holocaust has free will written all over it. Hitler's free will to attempt genocide of the Jews, the free will of those who helped him carry it out, the free will of those who permitted him to rise and stay in power (not only the German people, but other countries of the world who attempted to appease him rather than stand up to him).

Did Hitler intend to eradicate all the Jews in Europe via the "Final Solution" or to eradicate all but, say, 80,000 of them?

If Hitler fully intended to kill all the Jews in Europe but didn't, then who or what interfered with Hitler's free will?

God?

But according to some Christians God does not interfere with free will.

The free will of other humans?

Then who or what determines which human free will intentions become actualized and which do not?

God?

See above.

TheDoctor · « **Reply #19 on:** June 02, 2006, 01:10:26 PM »

Quote from: Cogito

Quote from: TheDoctor
"If we cannot save all the babies in a burning orphanage, should we for that reason not save any of them?"

Yes, it is very sad that ALL of the Jews in Nazi-occupied territory were killed. Oh, wait, they weren't all killed, some escaped, some were hidden by non-Jews, etc.

If we cannot save all the babies in a burning orphanage, should we for that reason save only three of them and not the six that it is possible for us to save?

I stand by my statement.

Author Topic: An Argument Against The Free Will Defense For The POE (Read 9572 times)