Defining something as large and complex as God is something hard to process. So for our purposes, we will call God the GCB or greatest conceivable being. A GCB can be agreed upon as a being who is omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, and omnibenevolent, meaning all-knowing, able to do anything, able to be everywhere at the same time, and all-loving. For thousands of years, people have debated the idea of a GCB. This debate has led to countless wars and many deaths. The idea of theism (the belief in a higher power or God) and atheism (the belief that there is no GCB) has been in a constant clash over if a GCB truly exists, along with agnostics who are neutral in this case. In truth, the knowledge that the GCB can be none of the above things
…show more content…
First "God is giving us a test", this idea says that "in allowing us to engage in moral evil, or in allowing us to suffer, God is giving us a test" (Green 54). This test is to determine if we deserve to live eternally in heaven when we die. This could explain the reason behind why the GCB lets us commit such moral evil. But this idea denies the idea of a GCB having omniscience again meaning all knowing. Most theists agree that the GCB is able to see into the future and what specific path each and every one of us will end up taking, so then why is there need for a test if the GCB knows everything? This idea of a test directly contradicts the qualities of a GCB. Making this theistic idea for proof of a GCB invalid. Second "evil is just a privation", which in lamens terms means that the GCB is not responsible for non-things or things that are not really there. Now we can all agree on the fact that terrible things happen in this world. For example, a child being born with a deadly illness and dying before the age of two. This is truly a terrible thing and we can not simply discount the idea that this child was way too young to die, and they were taken away way too soon. There are killers and murderers out in the world which we classify as "evil" and yet evil does not exist? I beg to differ, this again does not explain the reasoning of why the GCB can allow all these bad things to happen to all these people. And finally "things balance out", meaning that for " each quantity of evil in the world,there might be a compensating quantity of good somewhere else in space or time,or even outside of space and time" (Green 55). So for the young child, I referenced earlier who was born with a fatal disease that ended with their death, it was in their best interest because now they are able to spend even more time in heaven. But how can this be in their best interest if they missed out on really living
First "God is giving us a test", this idea says that "in allowing us to engage in moral evil, or in allowing us to suffer, God is giving us a test" (Green 54). This test is to determine if we deserve to live eternally in heaven when we die. This could explain the reason behind why the GCB lets us commit such moral evil. But this idea denies the idea of a GCB having omniscience again meaning all knowing. Most theists agree that the GCB is able to see into the future and what specific path each and every one of us will end up taking, so then why is there need for a test if the GCB knows everything? This idea of a test directly contradicts the qualities of a GCB. Making this theistic idea for proof of a GCB invalid. Second "evil is just a privation", which in lamens terms means that the GCB is not responsible for non-things or things that are not really there. Now we can all agree on the fact that terrible things happen in this world. For example, a child being born with a deadly illness and dying before the age of two. This is truly a terrible thing and we can not simply discount the idea that this child was way too young to die, and they were taken away way too soon. There are killers and murderers out in the world which we classify as "evil" and yet evil does not exist? I beg to differ, this again does not explain the reasoning of why the GCB can allow all these bad things to happen to all these people. And finally "things balance out", meaning that for " each quantity of evil in the world,there might be a compensating quantity of good somewhere else in space or time,or even outside of space and time" (Green 55). So for the young child, I referenced earlier who was born with a fatal disease that ended with their death, it was in their best interest because now they are able to spend even more time in heaven. But how can this be in their best interest if they missed out on really living