The Evil God Challenge
The Evil God Challenge.
The Evil God (EG) Challengers admit typically that EG is
unreasonable, but they conclude, that any argument you propose for God (G) can
also be given for EG. I may not have understood this, so let me know if my rebuttal
works?
Their argument goes something like this:(1)
1.
EG is highly unreasonable.
2.
G is like EG.
3.
So, G must be highly unreasonable too.
4.
Therefore, G doesn’t exist.
The challenge therefore, needs to explain why G is more plausible
than EG.
According to the EG challengers:
They claim, the symmetry thesis states; Every argument and
everything you can say for G can work for EG.
|
What is God? |
What is Evil God? |
|
o
Necessary o
Cannot cease |
Same |
|
o
Omnipotent o
Can do anything (that is logically possible) |
Same |
|
o
Omnibenevolent o
Cannot hate himself or others o
Other-regarding = gives but does not need to
receive |
Not the Same § Omni-malevolent o Cannot love himself or others Self-regarding
= gives only if gain something in return |
|
Same |
|
§ Perfect o Complete
|
Same |
|
§ Free o Not determined |
Same |
Figure 1.1 (1)
Response to the challenge.
The claim here, is that any individual argument I can make
for G e.g. The Kalam Cosmological Argument can equally be used for EG. This is
true in part, for example, the contingency argument only proves the universe
needs a necessary cause, the Kalam cosmological argument only shows a timeless,
spaceless, immensely powerful, personal cause. These could parody equally well
for an EG. However, I would push back with the moral argument and possibly the
Ontological Argument, as I would conclude a Maximally Great Being (MGB) cannot
be evil by definition, as it wouldn’t be worthy of worship or praise. Evil by
definition is immoral and immorality isn’t a great making property, so cannot
be moral.
Additionally, it seems difficult to pin down what a
Maximally Evil Being (MEB) would be like! It would seem to me that a MEB might
make our planet in bad location (see the Teleological Argument), just close
enough to the sun, so that it can sustain life, but so hot it is unbearably hot
all the time, this MEB might put us in or near the galactic centre so we are shrouded
in thick gases, so we couldn’t see easily other galaxies or stars. Maybe, the
MEB wouldn’t allow a Jupiter-like neighbour to exist, so we would get pounded by
asteroids more often, to add to our misery and pain. This MEB might make all
life badly, to further increase our pain e.g., more harmful mutations. It might
be the case that this MEB makes life ubiquitous throughout the universe so that
in every solar system has at least 1 planet has life like humans to torture in similar
ways! Some getting blasted by gamma radiation, others getting destroyed by asteroids!
So that the misery is maximal in a universal way, making it torturous for all
life continuously. This MEB might make it so we live long ages to increase the
amount of suffering and even if we ever tried to kill ourselves, the MEB brings
us back to life with more pain and misery until we reached our 200 years or
something.
Moreover, I see no reason why a MEB wouldn’t suddenly change
physics or the fundamental constants and quantities randomly so things wouldn’t
be the same! E.g. gravity suddenly becomes weaker or stronger, enough not to
kill life, but make it harder! Or instead of things falling down as they
normally do; they periodically shoot up into the air! And as you look up in
amazement, it suddenly comes back down and always hits you in the head
regardless! To further add to the misery. However, given an MGB, it seems
reasonable that a MGB would want to make the universe understandable,
discoverable and fit for life like us.
However, even if the EG challenger is able to show each
individual argument can be symmetrical with the G, it fails to be symmetrical
with the Judeo-Christian God. Let me explain, G of the Judeo-Christian religion,
is a morally perfect, Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent, which created the
universe ordered so that it could be understood and that we as humans could
discover the universe and life’s order and fine-tuning. Furthermore, G, choose an
individual (Abraham) in the past to be G's chosen people (Gen 12:2.3), G sustained
Abraham and promised on oath to make him a great nation (Gen 15), additionally
promising on oath Isaac will be the offspring that the promise will be fulfilled
(Gen17:1-22). Isaac (Gen26:2-5) and Jacob (Gen 25:23, Gen27:28-29, Gen 28:10-15,
Gen 31:3, Gen 35:9-13, Gen 46:3-4) received additional oaths that they will be
a great nation, through Joseph, G as prophesied in (Gen 15:13-16) foretold of
their bondage to Egypt and preserved His people in Egypt and as promised they
were delivered out of hands of Egypt much later, through Moses, Aaron (Ex 3:10 &
Dt 34:1-4). Through Joshua, The Judges, Samuel, The Kings and the rest of the Prophets’
we see the providence of God to the Israeli people, culminating to the person
of Jesus. (Mt 1:1-17 & Lk 3:23-38)(2)(3)(4)(Acts 3:13-26) for Peter says “Indeed, all the
prophets from Samuel on, as many as have spoken, have foretold these
days. 25 And you are heirs of the prophets and of the
covenant God made with your fathers. He said to Abraham, ‘Through your
offspring all peoples on earth will be blessed.'26 When God
raised up his servant, he sent him first to you to bless you by turning each of
you from your wicked ways.” (Acts 3:24-26) So, it seems to me, (foregoing the
evidence to prove the validity of the case for Jesus being the Christ.) we have
a narrative that has no comparable symmetry with a EG! For what EG would do
this? It is completely alien to any actions an EG would do.
If we were to have a symmetrical EG with the Judeo-Christian religion,
first, Abraham and the patriarchs would be chosen for extra evil treatment, the
10 commandments would be opposite, any objective moral values and duties would
be opposite, Jesus wouldn’t have died for our sins and would likely be the guy
that did extra evil, making people’s lives worse. Given these opposite moral
values, such actions as rape and murder would
be actually good as they would be decreed by God, would further add to the suffering
of the lives, thus the chosen people who will be saved, are those chosen for true
suffering with God on a new even worse earth and those going to hell are continually
outside God’s evil.
I think we have an asymmetry and thus the Good God is more
plausible in this regard.
Lastly, I would also recommend Apologetics Squared video on the
EG, I think it is better than my attempt to disprove this EG challenge.(5)
Reference:
(1) https://drive.google.com/file/d/1EIJbltpE7aCllBuZYxf2bBkQfT_502Ck/view by Professor Carlo Alvaro – discussion with Capturing Christianity https://youtu.be/a0TTCLr8uaw
(3) https://www.jesusfilm.org/blog-and-stories/old-testament-prophecies.html
(5) https://youtu.be/ql_bYX-rKlg
Comments
Post a Comment