Does God Exist? Dr. Peter Kreeft vs Dr. Keith Korcz - Part 4

Summary

The transcript explores the concept of divine omnipotence and moral evil, arguing that God cannot perform meaningless actions like creating a rock too heavy to lift. It discusses the problem of natural evil and suffering, suggesting that suffering may be necessary for wisdom and moral growth. The dialogue also touches on the idea that God's actions are not always understandable by humans, drawing parallels to the relationship between humans and pets. The conversation concludes with a rebuttal questioning the necessity of a perfect being for the existence of truth and order, proposing that things can be orderly without design.

Takeaways

• ❌ The concept of a rock so large that even omnipotence cannot lift it is considered meaningless due to its self-contradictory nature.
• 🚫 God's inability to perform certain actions, such as dying or sinning, is attributed to His perfection, not limitations.
• 🧐 The existence of natural evils does not disprove God, as they are consistent with the idea of an omniscient, benevolent, and omnipotent deity.
• 🤔 The lack of understanding of God's actions is compared to pets not understanding their owners, suggesting a natural limit to human comprehension.
• 😇 The problem of evil, such as the suffering in Haiti, is seen as a challenge for both theists and atheists, with theists arguing that suffering can lead to wisdom.
• 🌍 The correlation between wealth and happiness is questioned, with the example of Africa being the poorest yet one of the happiest continents.
• 🤝 The argument from design is critiqued, suggesting that order can exist without a designer, and natural laws can create order without randomness.
• 🔄 The possibility of an infinite regression of causality is raised, challenging the necessity of a first cause or mover.
• 🌌 The argument from contingency is questioned, suggesting that the existence of contingent beings does not necessitate a non-contingent being.
• 🤔 The argument from divine hiddenness is addressed, suggesting that God's existence is known, albeit inadequately, by all people.

Q & A

What is the main argument against the idea of divine omnipotence?

The main argument is that God cannot perform meaningless actions or create contradictions, such as making a rock so big that even omnipotence could not lift it.

What does the speaker suggest about the nature of God's actions?

The speaker suggests that if God exists, we would not understand why God does most of the things He does, similar to how pets do not understand their owners' actions.

How does the speaker address the problem of natural evils?

The speaker addresses the problem of natural evils by suggesting that they are consistent with the God hypothesis due to God's omniscience and that suffering teaches wisdom.

What is the Epicurus' dilemma mentioned in the script?

Epicurus' dilemma is the question of why there is evil if there is a God, and why there is good if there is no God.

What does the speaker imply about the distribution of happiness and wealth?

The speaker implies that happiness is not directly proportionate to wealth, using the example of Africa being the poorest yet smiling the most, compared to wealthier but potentially less happy places like America.

What is the speaker's stance on the problem of evil?

The speaker believes that the problem of evil is not a logical contradiction to the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient God, but rather something we cannot fully understand.

How does the speaker interpret the story of Adam and Eve?

The speaker interprets the story of Adam and Eve as a metaphor for the psychosomatic unity of body and soul, suggesting that moral evil leads to natural evil.

What is the speaker's view on the necessity of faith in relation to God?

The speaker views faith as necessary to understand and trust God's actions, comparing it to the trust a pet must have in its owner.

What does the speaker argue about the argument from divine hiddenness?

The speaker argues that God desires a personal relationship with us, which requires knowledge, and that God provides just enough light for seekers without compelling non-seekers.

How does the speaker differentiate between the infinite and the finite?

The speaker differentiates by stating that while there is no greatest number or best possible world, the concept of God as the most perfect being is positively infinite, not finite.

What is the speaker's response to the argument that atheism is a kind of faith?

The speaker disagrees, stating that atheism is not a kind of faith but rather a position based on reasons and evidence.