<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.19046">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Joe writes:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>"First, determinism does not entail
predictability." & "Nor does predictability ensure
determinism."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>For ordinary mortals, this is true. Events may be
completely determined, but not enough is known to predict them with 100%
accuracy, for example, the weather.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>However, in the context of the Problem of Evil, these
claims are irrelevant:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>An alleged omnipotent, omniscient God is a God that knows
everything can predict with 100% accuracy all outcomes, events, etc. In this
case 100% error free predictability means that everything is determined -- it is
bound to happen, it can happen only in the manner predicted by God, especially
in this context where this alleged God knew everything that would happen
henceforth in its creation at the moment of creation. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Similarly, in this context if everything was determined by an
omnipotent, omniscient God, then that God can predict everything with 100%,
error free accuracy.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Simply, in the context of an alleged omnipotent,
omniscient God, determined entails predictability by that God and
predictability entails determined.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In this context, asserting there is freewill or choice means
that the chooser can choose something (an event) not determined or predicted by
an omnipotent, omniscient God, an obvious contradiction.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>What others may have said including big name philosophers at
this point is irrelevant to the simple arguments presented. If you want to
refute these argument, then do it by showing a mistake in logical structure, not
by changing the context of the assertions or changing the meaning of words that
I have taken pains from the beginning to make clear.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>You offer the following:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>"C) God created the world fully determined and
humans have free will. Further the world is chaotic and <FONT size=3><FONT
color=#000000><SPAN><FONT color=#0000ff size=2>God is unable to predict the
outcome of the world in complete detail even though it is fully
determined.</FONT> </SPAN></FONT></FONT>You are likely correct that on this
model you'd have to reject God's omniscience but there would be an explanation
of his "ignorance," e.g. the chaotic nature of the universe.<BR><BR>D) God
created an undetermined world and humans have free will. Since the world is
undetermined he is unable to predict the outcome of the world in complete
detail. In this option God is still omniscient since the future is unsettled;
God still knows all that is true it is just that propositions about the future
are neither true nor false, so he doesn't know those."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Earlier, to forestall these kinds of claims, I defined
the "omniscience" of the alleged God: "At all times past, present and
future God knows everything, past, present, and future."<SPAN> There are
no gaps in God's foreknowledge or knowledge. I believe that this is the
traditional definition used by philosophers and theologians who have discussed
this subject. Regardless, this is how I have used the concept of
omniscience in this discussion.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In the context of the Problem of Evil including an omnipotent,
omniscient God the creator.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In C above <FONT color=#0000ff> "<FONT
size=3><SPAN><FONT size=2>God is unable to predict the outcome of the world in
complete detail even though it is fully determined" <FONT color=#000000>means
that God's foreknowledge at the moment of creation is denied. As you point
out, this is contradictory to God's omniscience since foreknowledge is part of
definition/conditions of
omniscience.</FONT></FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In D above <FONT color=#0000ff>"God still knows all that is
true it is just that propositions about the future are neither true nor false,
<STRONG>so he doesn't know those</STRONG>" </FONT><FONT
color=#000000>acknowledges that there is something that an omniscient God with
complete foreknowledge doesn't know. This is a
contradiction.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>D is curious in other ways. It assumes that an
omniscient God's knowledge is propositional. There can be many ways of
knowing which are not propositional, this </FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Me ssage ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=philosopher.joe@gmail.com href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com">Joe
Campbell</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=deco@moscow.com
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">Art Deco</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A title=vision2020@moscow.com
href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">Vision 2020</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 18, 2011 7:41
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Response to
Joe, Donovan [More]</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>A few points. <BR><BR>First, determinism does not entail
predictability. Chaotic systems, for instance, may be determined yet not
predictable. Nor does predictability ensure determinism. I make predictions
all the time about a variety of human behavior and so do you. That in and of
itself does not mean that human behavior is determined. So you can't use
"determinism" and "predictability" as if they mean the same thing. They don't.
One is a metaphysical thesis about the structure of the universe; the other is
an epistemological thesis. See this article for support of these
claims:<BR><BR><A
href="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/">http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/determinism-causal/</A><BR><BR>Second,
you can't just assume that free will is incompatible with determinism. Some
people (Descartes, Leibniz, Hume, Kant, G.E. Moore, myself) believe that
determinism is compatible with free will, that the very same event may be
determined from the beginning of time and still (if it is an act) be free. You
yourself pointed out the pitfall of thinking of free will as indeterminism,
for undetermined events are random and randomness is not the same as freedom.
Well if randomness can't get you free will, it is hard to see how the opposite
-- determinism -- can take free will away. <BR><BR>My own view is that the
thesis of determinism as absolutely nothing to do with free will. If we think
the two are linked it is pretty easy to show that no one has free will. Too
easy. This was the point of my thought experiment. We need a better conception
of "free will" than the one we get by contrasting it with determinism. That in
a nutshell is what most of my own philosophical research is concerned with
doing: providing us with a better understanding of what it means for a human
act -- or any act -- to be free.<BR><BR>Putting these two points together, I
think that there are more options available than the two that you sketch out
below. Here are some of the other options:<BR><BR>C) God created the world
fully determined and humans have free will. Further the world is chaotic and
God is unable to predict the outcome of the world in complete detail even
though it is fully determined. You are likely correct that on this model you'd
have to reject God's omniscience but there would be an explanation of his
"ignorance," e.g. the chaotic nature of the universe.<BR><BR>D) God created an
undetermined world and humans have free will. Since the world is undetermined
he is unable to predict the outcome of the world in complete detail. In this
option God is still omniscient since the future is unsettled; God still knows
all that is true it is just that propositions about the future are neither
true nor false, so he doesn't know those.<BR><BR>Of course, this is not really
a response to your argument. At most, there will just be a few more options to
consider -- maybe just one more, in fact -- and likely you'll find that model
unsatisfactory in light of the evil in the world and God's supposed
attributes. I don't suppose to have a solution to the problem of evil! I just
think that fully stating the argument is difficult and that it isn't obvious
that God's existence is inconsistent with the existence of evil.<BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Tue, May 17, 2011 at 5:12 PM, Art Deco <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A>></SPAN>
wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV><FONT size=2>Joe,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I just can't follow your argument, nor your thought
experiment. I suspect that we are using different definitions of "free
will" and "determinism."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Let's start with the word "determinism" in an effort to
clarify. [Note: "God" in the following means "alleged
God."]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Suppose you had a perfect die throwing machine, a machine
that tossed a die in a completely controlled
micro-environment. This machine was set to hold and to toss the die in
the exact same way each time. </FONT><FONT size=2>Barring some anomaly
in what in what are called for the sake of expediency the "laws of
nature" -- in this case physics -- the result will always be the same.
</FONT><FONT size=2>The outcome is "determined." Given the constancy
of the "laws of physics", no other outcome is possible. Betting on the
outcome would be a sure bet; a bet that is never lost. The outcome is
complete predictable without a chance of error.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If, however, the "laws of physics" were not constant, but
were subject to an occasional anomaly, then there would be some randomness,
and there would not be any sure bet. There would be errors in
predictions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>In short, I am using the word "determined" to mean always
completely predicable without error or chance of error.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Given the above, the issue of determinism and freewill in
the context of the Problem of Evil can then be characterized
thusly:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>A. Did God when creating the
universe, plan it down to the very last detail and then executed that plan
exactly? Did God impose upon all things a "law of all things" from the
beginning such that everything in the universe always acts like the die
in the perfect die throwing machine -- all outcomes, events,
etc were/are completely predictable (known) to God. If so, that
is what I mean by "determinism" in the context of the Problem of Evil.
There is no outcome that God, being omniscient, did not know (predict)
would happen. There is no randomness in the system.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Or</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>B. Did God when creating the
universe leave an element of randomness in its plan of
the universe, and did not attend to every last detail, randomness say
in the form of human "freewill," so that not all outcomes were completely
predictable (known) by God.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If the later, then there are random events of
which God would not have been cognizant of at the moment of creation or
before they occurred, and therefore God would not be omniscient at the
moment of creation or at anytime before any of these random events
occur.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Simpler: </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>A. Did God plan everything, and being
omnipotent, everything happens that way, and being omniscient, God knows
exactly what will happen, and hence everything is determined (predictable by
God), despite appearances?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>or </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>B. Did God plan almost everything, but
left an element of chance/randomness in its plan in the form of the freewill
of humankind, and thus God could not predict everything from the moment of
creation, and hence God not omniscient?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Simpler yet (like the old Clairol ads):</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>A. Does He know</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>or </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>B. doesn't He know?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If A, then all is determined, regardless of the conscious
feeling of choice experienced by humankind.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If B, then freewill exists, but God is not omniscient
having chosen to give up complete predictability.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>What is very important in discussing this issue is to
distinguish between there being actual freewill and there being the
appearance of free will. There is little doubt that many people
believe they are exercising free will. That belief may or may not be
true. The more we learn about human behavior, the more determined (and
predictable) it becomes.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>God, being omnipotent, could certainly create a universe
where people believe they were exercising free choice, but in fact, their
actions were completely determined (predictable) by God at the point
of creation. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>w.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=im>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4"><B>From:</B> <A
title=philosopher.joe@gmail.com href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com"
target=_blank>Joe Campbell</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=deco@moscow.com
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com" target=_blank>Art Deco</A> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=h5>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, May 17, 2011 2:26
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] Response to
Joe, Donovan [More]</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">I
can agree with much of this argument, Wayne, but not the claims about free
will.</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">For
instance, you write: “If A, then all actions of humankind were part of
God's creation plan, and thus <B>all</B> human actions were
predetermined/preprogrammed including acts of disobedience from the
beginning according to God's plan, and hence, freewill cannot and does not
exist, and thus evil is totally and completely the creation and the fault
of God, and therefore God is not omnibenevolent.”</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Maybe the best way to make
my point is that I deny the slide from “determinism” to “predetermined” to
“preprogrammed.” Or if I accept the slide, I deny that being preprogrammed
is incompatible with being free and morally responsible for one's actions.
In other words, I don't find determinism to be particularly problematic
for free will -- at least not any more problematic than
indeterminism.<BR></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"><BR></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Here is a thought
experiment. Suppose you get to "rollback" time and relive a choice 100
times over. You choose the black iPod over the white iPod and you get to
make this same choice 99 times over again. But each time the situation is
exactly the same. Each time you have the same reasons, the same
information, etc. What would you choose?<BR></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">If
you choose the black iPod 100 times out of 100 choices, it seems like no
choice at all. What you did was determined and not up to you. That is the
problem of free will and determinism.</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">Suppose instead you choose
the black iPod 50 times and the white iPod the other 50 times. Then your
choice was random and, for that reason, no choice at all. This is the
problem of luck, the problem of free will and indeterminism.</SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt"></SPAN> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">And
what set of probabilities would satisfy you? 90-10? </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">75-25</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; FONT-SIZE: 10pt">? 51-49? This is the problem
of free will. Free will is an enigma whether determinism is true or
false.</SPAN></P><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Art Deco <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:deco@moscow.com"
target=_blank>deco@moscow.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV><FONT size=2>
<TABLE style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border=0 cellSpacing=0
cellPadding=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; PADDING-LEFT: 5.4pt; WIDTH: 7.65in; PADDING-RIGHT: 5.4pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 0in"
vAlign=top width=734>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Thank you, Joe for pointing my out
unintended use of "omnificent" and "omnificence" instead of
"omniscient" and "omniscience."<SPAN> </SPAN>This mistake
originally started with a lapse of not carefully looking at spell
check alternatives.<SPAN> </SPAN>I have replaced correct
versions of the initial post and the response to Donovan's initial
reply below.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">I hope the following will address
your questions.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">The discussion of the Problem of Evil
that has occurred was not intended to show that some superior
being, a possible creator of the universe, or at least some God
does not exists.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">The scope of the discussion was much
more limited.<SPAN> </SPAN>The intention was, and I hope,
did show that the following assertion leads to a
contradiction:<SPAN> </SPAN>"The universe was created by an
omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God."<SPAN>
</SPAN>And therefore such an assertion is false.<SPAN>
</SPAN>As you know, the belief in such a God with these traits is
dogmatically asserted by many religious sects including the
Catholic Church and our own local cult.<SPAN> </SPAN>In
shorter terms the demonstration was that "The existence of an
omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God who created the
universe is a logical impossibility."</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">It is possible, though at this point
in time, clearly undemonstrated, that the universe was created by
some being, call it God, who was<B> not</B> omnipotent,
omniscient, and, omnibenevolent.<SPAN> </SPAN>For example,
one possibility is that of a God as described by Alfred North
Whitehead.<SPAN> </SPAN>That particular God was not quite up
to the entire task, though it tried its best, and therefore
humankind needs to help it achieve a moral earth.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Each argument purporting to show the
existence of some God(s) or other must be examined on its own
merits including looking at the evidence for included or assumed
knowledge claims, looking for logical consistency, looking for
consistency with known probabilities, etc.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">But on the issue of whether freewill
and combined omnipotent/omniscient God are possible in the
universe as we now know it, I can only repeat and augment a little
the simply stated argument I made in response to
Donovan.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Assuming an omnipotent God had a plan
and from that plan created the universe exactly according to that
plan, then:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Simply put, at the point of creation,
either:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">A.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God knew that humankind would disobey it, and knew all
other actions of humankind that would occur.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Or</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">B.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God did not know that humankind would disobey it, and did
not know some of the actions of humankind that would
occur.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If A, then all actions of humankind
were part of God's creation plan, and thus <B>all</B> human
actions were predetermined/preprogrammed including acts of
disobedience from the beginning according to God's plan, and
hence, freewill cannot and does not exist, and thus evil is
totally and completely the creation and the fault of God, and
therefore God is not omnibenevolent.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If B, God lacked specific knowledge
of the outcomes of his creation plan at the point of creation, and
therefore God is not omniscient – there is something that God did
not know.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Freewill (vs. determinism) is
possibly compatible with the assertion that God is <B>not</B>
omnipotent and/or omniscient.<SPAN> </SPAN>But whether
freewill exists in reality would be difficult to prove or disprove
-- no one has yet to do so.<SPAN> </SPAN>Certainly there is
there appearance of freewill, but as you know with the advancement
of the psychological sciences, particularly the work of B. F.
Skinner and followers, and the advancement of the biological
sciences, particularly the work of geneticists, the amount of
freedom of choice available to humankind when carefully examined,
appears to have shrunk and continues to shrink.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">You posit:<SPAN>
</SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">"God could create a world where
determinism is false (to say otherwise means he's not
omnipotent)," or rephrased:<SPAN> </SPAN>"Could God create a
world where determinism is false (to say otherwise means he's not
omnipotent)?"</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">This is asking whether an omnipotent,
omniscient God could create a world where that God itself was not
omniscient, or asking if God could negate his own
omniscience.<SPAN> </SPAN>This argument analogous to the
argument in the form of a question: <SPAN> </SPAN>"Could God
create a stone so heavy that it could not lift it?"<SPAN>
</SPAN>When a question contains a contradiction, then there is no
possible comprehensible answer except that the question calls for
the existence of an impossible state of reality.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Although omniscience is used as a
separate property in the discussion of the Problem of Evil, in
really omniscience is a sub-property of omnipotence -- the power
of knowing everything.<SPAN> </SPAN>So then the question
becomes:<SPAN> </SPAN>"Could an omnipotent being destroy its
own omnipotence?"<SPAN> </SPAN>This is another example of a
question containing or leading to a contradiction, and thus
without a possible comprehensible answer except that the question
calls for the existence of an impossible state of
reality.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">The question of whether causation is
transitive or not, or stated as "Is the universe a system of
inexorably related (call the relation cause) between everything in
it or not?" is not relevant to the issue.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Either an omnipotent God knew exactly what it was doing
when it created the universe or not.<SPAN> </SPAN>If so,
then everything resulting from his plan of creation is determined,
and if not, then God lacks omniscience.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">I am at a loss to understand your
fourth point.<SPAN> </SPAN>In the context of those who
believe in an omniscient God, the word "omniscient" means:
<SPAN> </SPAN>"At all times past, present and future God
knows everything, past, present, and future."<SPAN>
</SPAN>There is nothing (no bit of knowledge, fact, fancy, or
feeling) that God does not know or did not know."<SPAN>
</SPAN>In my discussion that is the meaning I have
taken.<SPAN> </SPAN>How can there be a lesser kind of
omniscience than full and complete knowledge?<SPAN>
</SPAN>"God is omniscient and knows everything except what will
happen next Tuesday" would be a contradiction.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">There are very interesting questions
arising from the assertion that an omniscient being exists or
could even exist.<SPAN> </SPAN>How could such a being be
sure of its knowledge?<SPAN> </SPAN>Where and how is this
knowledge stored?<SPAN> </SPAN>What does it mean to say that
some being knows everything? <SPAN> </SPAN>Etc.<SPAN>
</SPAN>I have not addressed these issues.<SPAN> </SPAN>I
have only addressed the problems that arise when it is asserted
along with other statements that "At all times past, present and
future God knows everything, past, present, and
future.<SPAN> </SPAN>There is nothing (no bit of knowledge,
fact, fancy, or feeling) that God does not know or did not
know."</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Further, I make no claim that the
traditional usage of the words "omnipotent," "omniscient," and
"omnibenevolent" make sense or describe possible states of
reality.<SPAN> </SPAN>I am merely taking the words as they
are used by certain believers and apologists then showing that
such linguistic usage leads to a contradiction.<SPAN>
</SPAN>I suspect that asserting "God is omnipotent" makes about
the same amount of sense that asserting that "The square root of
jelly vulcanizes justice" does.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><FONT
size=3></FONT></SPAN> </P></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4"><B>From:</B> <A
title=philosopher.joe@gmail.com
href="mailto:philosopher.joe@gmail.com" target=_blank>Joe Campbell</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=deco@moscow.com
href="mailto:deco@moscow.com" target=_blank>Art Deco</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Cc:</B> <A
title=vision2020@moscow.com href="mailto:vision2020@moscow.com"
target=_blank>Vision 2020</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Monday, May 16, 2011 10:36
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020]
Response to Joe, Donovan</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>My own view is that the problem of evil is unsolvable, an enigma.
Thus, I don't think you can that God does not exist, given the
existence of evil, either.<BR><BR>Thanks, Wayne! A few quick questions
and points. <BR><BR>1/ Why think that you can settle one of the
perennial philosophical debates (whether or not God exists) by
assuming the answer to another perennial philosophical debate (whether
free will is compatible with determinism)? <BR><BR>2/ Neither
omniscience nor predetermination wrecks free will. It is predetermined
that you will leave some of your clothes on while purchasing your next
set of groceries. I am certain that you will. Is it unfree? No, I
think you freely do so.<BR><BR>3/ Why must an omnipotent, omniscient
(omnificent = unlimited in creative power), and fully benevolent being
be the CAUSE of everything? (Note, I'm not denying that God is the
cause of everything. I take it that that is the issue in (2). Here I'm
questioning this view.) First, God could create a world where
determinism is false (to say otherwise means he's not omnipotent).
Second, causation is not transitive. It might be true that something I
wrote caused you to write one of the sentences below but it doesn't
follow that I wrote the sentence below.<BR><BR>4/ You write: <FONT
size=2><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><SPAN></SPAN>If there is
something that is not predetermined (unknown to or unpredicted by
God), but somehow left to chance at the moment of creation, then God
is not omnificent [or omniscient].<BR><BR>Suppose "omniscience" means
"someone knows everything that is true," that states of affairs make
things true, and that the future is open: undetermined and unrealized.
God might know everything there is to know -- he might not miss any of
the facts -- yet still not know everything (all that was, is, or will
be true).<BR><BR>More later!<BR></SPAN></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>
<TABLE style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border=0 cellSpacing=0
cellPadding=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; PADDING-LEFT: 5.4pt; WIDTH: 7.65in; PADDING-RIGHT: 5.4pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 0in"
vAlign=top width=734>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Donovan writes:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: blue">"I just think you have
too many false assumptions and false definitions of words in
your arguments."</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">However, no specific examples of
false assumptions or false definitions (which is taken to mean
words used in other than their ordinary established manner) are
cited even though the arguments have been presented in a
numbered sequence making them easy to cite and to
discuss.<SPAN> </SPAN>Therefore, Donovan's above assertion
has not been shown to have any merit, but has the appearance of
a rhetorical trick used when one side of a debate does not have
a plausible answer to the arguments presented by the
other.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Next, Donovan cites one of Zeno's
paradoxes to show that anything can be proven by false
assumptions and definitions.<SPAN> </SPAN>However, there
is no explanation or illustration of how the arguments presented
in the discussion of the Problem of Evil are structured in a
similar manner to Zeno's argument that was given.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Since no evidence of false
assumptions and definitions has been presented, and no
demonstrations of specific invalid or fallacious arguments have
been made, these two claims are without even attempted
demonstrated merit.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Moving on, Donovan then
writes:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: blue">"Evil, is to disobey
God's command. It is not a specific act in and of itself. God
created people with the ability to decide if they wish to obey
or not obey. He can do that because He is all powerful. Humans
create evil by doing what God has given them the ability to do,
disobey God. God gave humans this ability because He wants
people to freely choose to be with Him, not be forced to. Just
like me and you don't want to be around just people that are
forced to be.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: blue"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: blue">God always does the
most benevolent thing He can without eliminating our ability to
disobey Him. If God prevented people from killing or hurting
each other He would be doing something far less benevolent then
anything else by eliminating our ability to obey and be with Him
after we die."</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Consider:<SPAN> </SPAN><SPAN
style="COLOR: blue">"Evil, is to disobey God's command. It is
not a specific act in and of itself."</SPAN><SPAN>
</SPAN>This is an example of the fallacy [<A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasive_definition"
target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persuasive_definition</A>]
of offering a persuasive definition:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">"A persuasive definition is a form
of definition which purports to describe the 'true' or 'commonly
accepted' meaning of a term, while in reality stipulating an
uncommon or altered use, usually to support an argument for some
view, or to create or alter rights, duties or crimes. …
Persuasive definitions commonly appear in controversial topics
such as politics, sex, and religion, as participants in
emotionally-charged exchanges will sometimes become more
concerned about swaying people to one side or another than
expressing the unbiased facts."</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Clearly, a persuasive definition is
given for "evil" in above argument offered by
Donovan.<SPAN> </SPAN>For most people, the real evil of
the rape and murder of young children is found in the harm,
pain, degradation, and other life long consequences suffered by
the victims, their families, and associates, not that some
alleged God was disobeyed.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">There are many other problems with
the above argument, including that it is full of knowledge
claims about the traits of some alleged God which appear
impossible to verify or even to give any cogent evidence
for.<SPAN> </SPAN>Once it asserted that God is omnipotent,
then it follows that God can do anything, which includes
deceiving humankind without any fear of detection, therefore all
knowledge claims about any other traits of God cannot be given
any convincing or reliable evidence.<SPAN> </SPAN>Only
those claims which contain contradictions can be conclusively
refuted.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">The Problem of Evil shows that
asserting the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient,
omnibenevolent God leads to a contradiction, and thus one or
more of the premises of the argument (omnipotence, omniscience,
omnibenevolence) must be false.<SPAN> </SPAN>Elementary
logic.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">The above argument given by Donovan
asserts:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: blue">"God created people
with the ability to decide if they wish to obey or not obey. He
can do that because He is all powerful. Humans create evil by
doing what God has given them the ability to do, disobey God.
God gave humans this ability because He wants people to freely
choose to be with Him, not be forced to…"</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">This claim does not refute the
conclusions drawn from the Problem of Evil, but, in fact,
supports them.<SPAN> </SPAN>This is the claim of the
existence of 'freewill' or 'freedom to choose' to explain the
existence of evil.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">To see the fallaciousness of this
claim of freewill in Donovan's assertions masquerading as an
argument, consider <B>the fundamental question</B> engendered by
the assumption that some alleged omnipotent, omniscient,
omnibenevolent God created the universe:<SPAN>
</SPAN>"<B>Did God know exactly what it was doing at the moment
of creation</B> <B>of the universe</B>?"</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If God knew <B>exactly what all the
consequences/outcomes of his act of creation were at the moment
of creation</B>,<B> </B>including whether humankind would
"choose" to disobey him or not, then these so-called "free
choices" by humankind were totally and completely predetermined
by God's creation plan and execution thereof, and therefore, the
freedom to choose to do anything not originally planned by God
does not exist, freewill/freedom to disobey God is an
illusion/delusion, and thus any argument using freewill or
freedom of choice to justify the existence of evil is erroneous
without any hope of redemption.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">On the other hand, if God did not
know whether humankind would choose to disobey him or not, then
God had gaps in his knowledge at the moment of creation, and
thus is not omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Hence, the conclusions drawn from
the Problem of Evil withstand Donovan's perhaps quite
emotionally satisfying for some, but transparently fallacious
attempt to explain evil, among other things, away.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Simply put, at the point of
creation, either:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">A.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God knew that humankind would disobey it.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="TEXT-INDENT: 0.5in; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in"
class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Or</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">B.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God did not know that humankind would disobey
it.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If A, then all actions of humankind
were part of God's creation plan, and thus all human actions
were predetermined/preprogrammed including acts of disobedience
from the beginning, and hence, freewill cannot and does not
exist, and thus evil is totally and completely the creation and
the fault of God, and therefore God is not
omnibenevolent.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If B, God lacked specific knowledge
of the outcomes of his creation plan at the point of creation,
and therefore God is not omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Points of Interest and
Corollaries</SPAN></B></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Ironically and similarly, the
Bible, allegedly the Word of this omnipotent, omniscient,
omnibenevolent God, offers many illustrations that God, in fact,
is not omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, but prone to
error, intemperate, childish, irritable, petulant, and
vengeful.<SPAN> </SPAN>These illustrations include the
terminal incident in the Garden of Eden and the advent of
Jesus.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Did God know at the moment of
creation that those ingrates, Adam and the particularly fickle
Eve, would choose to disobey God's big command?<SPAN>
</SPAN>If God knew, then Adam and Eve's actions were
predetermined – they had no real choice in deciding to chomp the
apple, but were acting in a preprogrammed manner.<SPAN>
</SPAN>If God didn't know what these naked, thankless rotters
would do, then Got is not omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">The Garden of Eden incident also
raises extremely serious, if not fatal, objections to the
assertion that God is omnibenevolent.<SPAN> </SPAN>God
punishes all succeeding generations of humankind with
innumerable instances of pain and suffering because two people
disobeyed him by performing the heinous act of eating an apple
or the symbolic act of attempting to acquire
knowledge.<SPAN> </SPAN>Punishing billions of people for
one misdeed of someone else, a deed over which the billions
punished had no control or choice, is good?<SPAN>
</SPAN>Sorry Charley, but this is next to impossible to accept
as a sane assertion, let alone a plausible one.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Most of us find it abhorrent when only one person is
punished for some evil they did not commit, let alone
billions.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Why was it necessary for Christ to
appear to save humankind from their folly?<SPAN>
</SPAN>Did God know at the moment of creation that people were
going to turn out to be such rascally miscreants?<SPAN>
</SPAN>If not, God is not omniscient.<SPAN> </SPAN>If God
is, in fact, omniscient and knew exactly and completely all the
outcomes of his creation plan, then all the sins and
debaucheries of humankind were predetermined at the point of
creation, and regardless of any claim of freewill, such evils
were inexorably part of God's creation plan, pure and
simple.<SPAN> </SPAN>And yet most of humankind is to
suffer eternal punishment for their actions which were
completely determined by God's creation plan.<SPAN>
</SPAN>And this is omnibenevolence?<SPAN>
</SPAN>Wonderful.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Both the alleged incident in Garden
of Eden and the advent of the alleged Savior Jesus also raise
serious, if not fatal objections to the claim of God's
omnipotence.<SPAN> </SPAN>If God had to intervene at least
at these two points of its creation, thus have to try to alter
its original plan due to unanticipated events, errors, and
bumblings, how can God be omnipotent?<SPAN>
</SPAN>Omnipotent beings, by definition, cannot make
mistakes.<SPAN> </SPAN>And if God screwed up in the
creation of parts of the universe (humankind), what else has it
screwed up?<SPAN> </SPAN>Can it deliver without error on
any of the many fantasies of some alleged heaven?</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Donovan's argument further
asserts:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: blue">"God always does the
most benevolent thing He can without eliminating our ability to
disobey Him."</SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">So killing millions of people,
sometimes in very torturous, grim, and disgusting ways via
natural disasters is "t<SPAN style="COLOR: blue">he most
benevolent thing He can without eliminating our ability to
disobey Him,</SPAN>" and is good, not evil?<SPAN>
</SPAN>God is doing us wondrous, great, colossal favors by
causing natural disasters and murdering millions?<SPAN>
</SPAN>Get real.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If God cannot prevent natural
disasters, events like earthquakes, volcanoes, and tidal waves,
over which humankind has no control or choice, events that have
killed millions in horrible ways and deprived the living of
their presence, God is not omnipotent.<SPAN> </SPAN>If God
can prevent these natural disasters, God is not omnibenevolent,
unless God considers these gruesome, painful deaths to be good,
not evil, something that most of us do not.<SPAN>
</SPAN>If God considers these events to be good and not evil,
what kinds of surprises await humankind in some alleged heaven,
a place of allegedly infinite good?</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Consider also the following
assertion:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0.5in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; COLOR: blue">"God gave humans this
ability </SPAN><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">[freewill]<SPAN
style="COLOR: blue"> because He wants people to freely choose to
be with Him, not be forced to."</SPAN></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Poor God.<SPAN> </SPAN>God is
lonely and insecure, and thus needs our praise, reassurance, and
company.<SPAN> </SPAN>If so, then God is incomplete, has
vulnerable human traits, and thus cannot be said to be
omnipotent, but dependent on some lowly beings to satisfy its
cravings for attention, love, and approbation.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Further, as illustrated by characterizations in the
Bible, God is tetchy, petulant, spiteful, and vengeful to the
point of inflicting immense and widespread pain, suffering, and
sorrow on those that displease it.<SPAN> </SPAN>These
cannot be the traits of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, or even
greatly forgiving being, but are the traits generally found in
maladjusted, egotistical, power hungry humans who cannot brook,
and are not open and mentally healthy enough to brook
dissent.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Does it make sense that some
alleged being, a being with the alleged ability to create the
universe with all of its complexities and to keep it operating,
is so vulnerable and incomplete that it craves humankind's
praise and approval, and then tests the strength of that
approval by making damningly evil many things it knowingly and
intentionally programmed as natural parts of humankind's
biological, psychological, and social makeup?<SPAN>
</SPAN>Such a view is really a damning insult to this alleged
God intelligence, powers, and goodness by its
believers.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">So failing to show any false
assumptions and definitions, failing to show that any fallacious
arguments have been offered, and offering as an alternative an
argument which also proves that God cannot be omnipotent,
omniscient, and omnibenevolent, we await the next transparent
attempt to deny reality.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">[Footnote:<SPAN> </SPAN>In
addition to authoring the present sacrilegious discussion of the
Problem of Evil, I have been reprimanded for calling God, the
alleged creator of the universe, "it" instead of
"He."<SPAN> </SPAN>I am unaware of any credible argument
demonstrating that the alleged creator of the universe has male
genitals.]</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"> <FONT
size=2>_______________________________</FONT></SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><FONT size=2></FONT></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"><FONT size=2></FONT></SPAN></P>
<TABLE style="BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" border=0 cellSpacing=0
cellPadding=0>
<TBODY>
<TR>
<TD
style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; PADDING-LEFT: 5.4pt; WIDTH: 7.65in; PADDING-RIGHT: 5.4pt; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; PADDING-TOP: 0in"
vAlign=top width=734>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">The Problem of Evil:<SPAN>
</SPAN>One Formulation</SPAN></B></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Did some allegedly all-powerful
(omnipotent), all-knowing (omniscient), perfectly good
(omnibenevolent) God Create the Universe?</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Let's assume so for the sake of
argument.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If this omnipotent, omniscient,
omnibenevolent God created the universe, then God is the
cause/determiner of everything which happened/happens/will
happen or exists in the universe because if this God is
omniscient, it had exact foreknowledge of everything that would
happen as a result of this omnipotent creation from the moment
of creation.<SPAN> </SPAN>To say otherwise would be to
contradict God's omniscience and omnipotence.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Hence, <B>everything</B> that
happens in the universe was predetermined by God at the moment
of creation.<SPAN> </SPAN>This includes <B>all acts of
humankind</B>, and excludes completely the possibility of actual
freewill/freedom to choose between performing good and/or evil
acts, but not does not exclude the possibility of the fallacious
appearance to humankind that freewill exists.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Simply stated:<SPAN>
</SPAN>If there is something that is not predetermined (unknown
to or unpredicted by God), but somehow left to chance at the
moment of creation, then God is not omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If all is predetermined, the
appearance that freewill exists is like a Hollywood set –
possibly convincing to look at, but with naught behind
it.<SPAN> </SPAN>To say there is a meaningful,
left-to-chance choice is to say that God did not either
cause/determine and/or know what the result of that choice would
be – a denial of God's omnipotence and/or
omniscience.<SPAN> </SPAN>If there is real choice
(something God left to chance), then there is not
predetermination, and thus a gap in God's knowledge, and
therefore God would not be omnipotent and/or
omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If God is omnibenevolent (perfectly
good), then <B>everything within God's control that happens,
including all human acts is good, not evil</B>:<SPAN>
</SPAN>God would not knowingly and intentionally perform any
evil act, any act that would result in evil, or even allow
anything evil in itself to exist.<SPAN> </SPAN>Nothing
evil (the opposite of good) can exist if God is omnibenevolent
and in total, complete control and the determiner of all that
happens in the universe.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">For example, the acts of Jeffrey
Dahmer where he tortured and murdered at least seventeen persons
(<A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer"
target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Dahmer</A>)
were good, not evil acts.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Nor were the acts of Joseph Duncan
evil acts, who among other crimes murdered three adults who were
in the company of eight-year old Shasta Groene, abducted her and
her nine year old brother Dylan, then raped, sexually tortured,
and murdered Dylan in view of Shasta (<A
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III"
target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Duncan_III</A>).<SPAN>
</SPAN>But such acts, having been initially knowingly and
intentionally determined by an omnipotent, omniscient,
omnibenevolent God, were good, not evil acts.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Therefore, the belief by humankind
that evil exists is in grievous error, if God is omnipotent,
omniscient, and omnibenevolent.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">The Problem of Evil occurs because
many persons believe that evil acts actually exist – the acts of
Dahmer and Duncan would be called evil by many.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Asserting that these acts were evil (not good) and were
knowingly predetermined/caused by an omnibenevolent God, who
could have done otherwise, creates an obvious contradiction
between God's alleged omnipotence and omniscience on one hand,
and God's alleged omnibenevolence on the other.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If evil acts exist,
then:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">A.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God, if omnibenevolent, could not have foreseen nor
prevented such acts or God would have prevented them, hence God
is not omnipotent and/or omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">B.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God could not be omnibenevolent in that God knowingly and
intentionally caused/determined evil acts to occur despite that
if God were omnipotent and omniscient, and thus the determiner
of everything, could have prevented such acts.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">C.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Therefore, <B>God cannot be omnipotent, omniscient, and
omnibenevolent</B>.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Once the premises are accepted that
this alleged God is omnipotent, omniscient, and thus this God
created and determined the universe as it now exists and
everything it contains and all occurrences within it, then it
follows that God, given all the infinite choices open to
it:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">A.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Knowingly and willfully chose to create/determine the
universe in the way it now exactly exists, and</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">B.<SPAN>
</SPAN>This God knew exactly everything (perfectly, to the last
watermelon seed) what would occur as a result of its
creation.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">C.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Therefore, <B>Evil is a knowing and intentional creation
of God</B>.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">There is no wiggle room here,
despite centuries of theological attempts to solve this
disturbing-to-the-faithful dilemma by various transparent
ruses.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If God is omnipotent and
omniscient, then it knowingly and intentionally
caused/determined all things that happened in the universe from
the point of creation onward including the acts of Dahmer and
Duncan.<SPAN> </SPAN>To attempt to say otherwise is to
deny either the omnipotence, omniscience, or both of
God.<SPAN> </SPAN>This would be in effect
saying:<SPAN> </SPAN>"Poor God.<SPAN> </SPAN>God
didn't quite know or quite care enough about what it was doing
and/or the consequences of its act of creation, and consequently
bumbled a bit.<SPAN> </SPAN>Nice try."</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">To further assert that evil does
not exist is to deny the basic reality of humankind's experience
and pervert the established use of language beyond credibility,
and thereby call certain acts not evil, thus good, that most of
us find extremely and horridly evil.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">There are many interesting
corollaries to the consequences of the Problem of Evil – that
God cannot be omnipotent, omniscient, and
omnibenevolent.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">One is that the Bible (allegedly
the Word of an alleged God), for example, acknowledges/asserts
that evil acts do occur, and, in fact, asserts that God punishes
and will eternally punish some people for their evil
acts.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">{According to the Bible didn't
Jesus show up because something went radically wrong with God's
creation – the super-prevalence of evil?<SPAN>
</SPAN>(Isn't this assertion about Jesus an admittance by the
Christian followers of God that God admits that it screwed up
and needed to find a way to unscrew things [which doesn't appear
to have worked either, in fact seems to have been
counterproductive] another contradiction to the assertion of
God's alleged omnipotence?)}</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If this God is the omnipotent,
omniscient creator of the universe and determiner of everything
in it, then God is the determiner of all the evil acts and
occurrences within it.<SPAN> </SPAN>Punishing someone for
acts not even remotely within their control hardly constitutes
omnibenevolence.<SPAN> </SPAN>Citing that punishing seven
subsequent generations of progeny for the acts of one individual
as an example of omnibenevolence indicates that such
citers/believers are in greatly need of the services of
competent mental health professionals and/or that their
understanding of very elementary logic is egregiously defective,
perhaps beyond repair.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Another problem that arises is the
promise of and the nature of an afterlife.<SPAN> </SPAN>If
evil does not exist, especially in the eyes of an alleged
omnibenevolent God, then the good (not evil) acts of Duncan and
Dahmer would not be barred from heaven, but would be
allowed.<SPAN> </SPAN>The horrors experienced by Shasta
Groene could be re-experienced by her and others for an eternity
to provide a paradise for the Dahmers and Duncans.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">If evil exists, then God cannot be
omnipotent and/or omniscient.<SPAN> </SPAN>Hence, how can
this God or any of its followers be confident that God can
deliver on its promises of heaven and what will occur there, or
even the correctness of its choices about whom will be housed
there?</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Another problem with the assertion
of omnipotence and omniscience of some alleged God is that it
makes both entreating and laudatory prayer meaningless except as
phatic communication.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Why would an omnipotent, omniscient
God ever change its intentions about the operation of its
creation, the universe, when entreated by a
much-less-wiser-than-God member of humankind?<SPAN>
</SPAN>To do so would be a clear indication that God had made a
misjudgment/error during the act of creation, and thus a
contradiction of God's omnipotence and omniscience.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Such an entreating prayer would be a gross insult to God,
insinuating that God is not running things as it should and
should heed the exhortations or requests of a much less
knowledgeable human.<SPAN> </SPAN>Such entreating prayers
are indirectly, but clearly telling God that he lacks
omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence and that God
better pay attention so that it gets things right.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">To say that God needs or wants
praise or approval for his act of creation and its consequences
is attributing to God a fundamental weakness of
humankind.<SPAN> </SPAN>If God is omnipotent, and thus
completely and totally confident and completely assured about
all its acts, why would it crave, need, or relish the approval
and reassurance of one small, clearly not omnipotent or
omniscient being of its creation?</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">A fourth problem that arises is the
problem of faith in God's alleged trait of benevolence [or any
other alleged trait].<SPAN> </SPAN>If God is omnipotent
(or even greatly wiser than humankind) then God could easily
deceive humankind about its (God's) alleged
goodness.<SPAN> </SPAN>To say that God could not deceive
humankind would be to assert that humankind, or at least the
believers among them, think that they are smarter than God and
have him correctly pegged, clearly a contradiction to God's
omnipotence.<SPAN> </SPAN>It also should be clear that
asserting the omnipotence of some alleged God makes any other
knowledge claims about any other of this God's alleged traits or
intentions unverifiable in any way since this God could be The
Great Omnipotent Deceiver, and therefore humankind would not be
in a position to verify any other claims about God, or to refute
them except by finding contradictions in such.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">So that responses to the above, if
desired, can be discussed without irrelevant side trips and
emotional pleas and confessions of faith, below is the main gist
of the above formulation broken down by premises, inferences,
and conclusions.<SPAN> </SPAN>Those disagreeing can then
state by number which they disagree with and why.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">In what follows, if not explicitly
stated, "God" should be read "alleged God."</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Main Initial
Premises.</SPAN></B></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">1.<SPAN>
</SPAN>There is a God.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">2.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God is omnipotent (all powerful, can do anything it
chooses, etc).</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">3.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God is omniscient (knows <B>all/everything</B> there is
to know, past, present, and future including the
consequences/determinants of all its acts and all the conscious
and unconscious thoughts and feelings of every
human).</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">4.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God is omnibenevolent (<B>perfectly</B> good, abhors and
would not permit anything evil (clearly not good) ever to exist
or to occur, if it could prevent it.)</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">5.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God knowingly and intentionally created the universe as
we know it and exactly as it is.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">Beginning of
Inferences</SPAN></B></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">6.<SPAN>
</SPAN>If this God is omnipotent, omniscient, and
omnibenevolent, and created the universe, then God is the
cause/determiner of everything that happens as a result of its
all-knowing and intentional act of creation from the moment of
that creation.<SPAN> </SPAN>God was/is/will be in complete
control and the determiner of everything at all
times.<SPAN> </SPAN>To assert there is something that God
is not in complete control of (something somehow left to chance)
is to deny either God's omnipotence and/or
omniscience.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">7.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Since God is omniscient, God had exact foreknowledge of
everything that would occur/be determined as a result of its
omnipotent act of creation.<SPAN> </SPAN>To say God didn't
know exactly to a tee what would occur or be determined as a
result of his creation would be to contradict God's
omniscience.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">8.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Since God is omnipotent and omniscient, <B>everything</B>
that happens in the universe was knowingly and intentionally
predetermined from the moment of creation.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Therefore, all future acts of humankind were
predetermined at moment of creation.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">9.<SPAN>
</SPAN>If all acts of humankind are predetermined, then there
can be no freedom of choice or so-called free will.<SPAN>
</SPAN>If there are acts of which God did not have foreknowledge
of, then God is not omniscient.<SPAN> </SPAN>If there are
acts of which God is not in control of or the determiner of but
are somehow left to chance, then God is not
omnipotent.<SPAN> </SPAN>Therefore, the appearance of
freewill is an illusion/delusion if God is omnipotent and
omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">10.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Any act that occurs in the universe was either
predetermined at the moment of creation or not.<SPAN>
</SPAN>If God is omnipotent and omniscient then God
intentionally and knowingly created/determined the universe to
be the way it now exists.<SPAN> </SPAN>If there is
something, like a human act which is not predetermined, but has
been somehow left to chance (an unknown outcome), then God is
not omniscient.<SPAN> </SPAN>If there is real choice, and
thus an indeterminate gap in God's knowledge, there is not
predetermination, and thus God is not omniscient. If there was
no gap in God's knowledge/foreknowledge at the moment of
creation, then all acts are therefore knowingly and
intentionally predetermined by God.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">11.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Therefore all acts of humankind are predetermined and
occur regardless of the appearance of choice/freewill, if God is
omnipotent and omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">12.<SPAN>
</SPAN>If God is omnibenevolent (<B>perfectly</B> good), then
every act that God has control over or determines would be good
and not evil.<SPAN> </SPAN>God would not knowingly and/or
intentionally perform or allow the performance of any act that
was not good, that is, evil.<SPAN> </SPAN>If God is
omnibenevolent (<B>perfectly</B> good), and thus totally and
completely abhorrent to and completely opposed to evil, and this
omnipotent, omniscient God was in complete control and the
determiner of everything that happens in the universe from the
moment of creation, then nothing evil would or could ever exist
in the universe.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">13.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Since God is omnipotent, omniscient, and thus is in a
position to unequivocally impose its omnibenevolence, then
<B>evil does not and cannot not exist</B>.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Hence, no acts by humankind are evil, but <B>all such
acts are good</B>.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">14.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Since evil cannot exist if God is omnipotent, omniscient,
and omnibenevolent, the belief of humankind holding that evil
exists is in grievous error.<SPAN> </SPAN>Evil cannot
exist if God is omnipotent, omniscient, and
omnibenevolent.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">15.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Therefore, the acts of child torturers, rapists, and
murderers are not evil, but good acts.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">16.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Further, since evil cannot exist, the acts called evil in
the Bible, the alleged word of God, are not evil, but
good.<SPAN> </SPAN>Therefore the Bible is in error, and
could not have been authored, even by proxy, by an omnipotent,
omniscient, and omnibenevolent God.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Therefore, the Bible is not the Word of this God, but a
grand, but not evil deception of God since there is no evil –
everything is good.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">17.<SPAN>
</SPAN>The Problem of Evil occurs because many persons believe
that evil exists, for example, the acts of child
molesters.<SPAN> </SPAN>Since these acts of child
molestation would not have occurred unless they were knowingly
and intentionally predetermined by an omnipotent, omniscient
God, then God cannot be omnibenevolent if <B>child
molestation</B>, for example, <B>is evil</B>.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">18.<SPAN>
</SPAN>If evil acts exist, then:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">A.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God, if omnibenevolent (<B>perfectly</B> good), could not
have foreseen nor prevented such acts or God would have, hence
God is not omnipotent and/or omniscient.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">B.<SPAN>
</SPAN>God is not omnibenevolent in that God knowingly and
intentionally caused/causes evil acts to occur since God, if
omnipotent and omniscient, could have prevented such acts of
which he was the determiner.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">C.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Therefore, <B>God cannot be omnipotent, omniscient, and
omnibenevolent</B>.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">19.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Once the premises are accepted asserting that this
alleged God is omnipotent, omniscient, that evil exists, and
this God knowingly and intentionally created the universe and
everything in it, then it follows that God, given all the
infinite choices open to it:</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">A.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Knowingly and willfully chose to create the universe in
the way it now exactly exists, and</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 1in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">B.<SPAN>
</SPAN>Hence, this God knew exactly everything (perfectly, to
the last watermelon seed) what would occur as a result of its
creation at the moment of creation, and <B>evil</B>, as we now
know it <B>is God's creation</B>, and thus clearly demonstrates
that God is not omnibenevolent.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana">20.<SPAN>
</SPAN>We are left with the unavoidable, but unpalatable-to-some
conclusion that God cannot be omnipotent, omniscient, and
omnibenevolent.<SPAN> </SPAN>We are then left with a host
of problems created by that this clearly demonstrated
insufficiency of God, if God as presently conceived by
humankind, exists at all.</SPAN></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt 0.5in" class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN> </P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style="FONT-FAMILY: Verdana"></SPAN></B> </P></TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P></P>
<P style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt" class=MsoNormal><FONT size=3
face="Times New Roman"></FONT> </P></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>=======================================================<BR> List
services made available by First Step Internet,<BR> serving the
communities of the Palouse since 1994.<BR>
<A href="http://www.fsr.net"
target=_blank>http://www.fsr.net</A><BR>
mailto:<A
href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">Vision2020@moscow.com</A><BR>=======================================================<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>