This is the question that a critic proposed to me. I don't think he was really trying to debate me, nor trip me some way. There are many skeptics who desire to do that. However, I think he was honestly trying to present me a challenge to prove the goodness of God. I have already presented my arguments on this that can be found here.
His YouTube account was basic, and without name, as we ae jus going to call him Melvin. Melvin's words will be in red, while mine will be in blue.
Melvin: prove god is good.
Brian: God is the ultimate standard and source for goodness. God's very existence would constitute Him as the highest of all goodness, for by Him we know what "good" is, and without Him we cannot know what good is. Such a random question that had nothing to do with anything I was commenting on. Are you just trolling random comments?
Melvin: .. not trolling.. just asking apologists questions.. so.. in your answer.. you didn't prove that god was good, u just made claims he's good... how do u know god isn't evil?
Brian: It's like this, your question presupposes God's existence. In order for us to have objective morality there must be an ultimate standard, apart from self, by which is the ultimate standard of morality. This would mean that such a standard must be the highest of all possible good, lest things like "good" and "evil" would be subjected to personal opinion. God cannot be evil, bc then no highest of all possible good would exist which would, absurdly, reduced such notions of good and evil to personal opinions, which would then rendered such concepts meaningless. I guess what it would boil down to is that an "evil Christian God" would be an oxymoron, and, thus, a contradiction in terms. God's very existence which would be the ultimate standard of all morality is how we know evil, too, exist, and such notions aren't reduced to absurdity. Did that answer your question?
Melvin: .. if there is a god.. an all powerful creator etc., etc... I'm willing to concede this god sets the standard for good and evil... in your view, god is good.. so he sets the standard for good..... but..... does that mean he doesn't set the standard for evil? in other words... just because he's good... doesn't mean he doesn't set the standard for evil.. he does set the standard for evil.. he says what is evil... along with what is good... he does both... so... if god were hypothetically evil... that doesn't mean he wouldn't be able to set the standard for good.. he'd still be able to.. he'd just be evil.. its the flip of your current view your current view is that he's good, and sets the standard for both good and evil my view would be he's evil.. and sets the standard for both evil and good do u agree so far?
Brian: I don't agree with any of what you said, let me explain why. First, I think you're still missing my point. God doesn't set the bar by what he commands, for to do so would subject His own holiness to what God commands (Plato's Euthyphro Dilemma), and make such commands themselves arbitrary. Whereas the Christian position is that God's commands flow from his nature, and thus such commands are not arbitrary. God is the ultimate standard by which all objective morality is based upon. God isn't setting the standard by what He tells us, or by what rules He makes up, but He is the standard. Secondly, it isn't just the fact that God is good in my worldview. That's true, but that's not the argument that I am making. Whether I'm saying that for Him to be the ultimate standard of morality, God has to exist, and He must be good. You can't know what evil is unless you know good first. This is why Adam and Eve was able to recognize evil, bc they already knew what good was. Evil is simply the absence of good. You can't drive the wrong way on a one-way street. By setting the standard for all goodness, we know what good is, and therefore evil too. Your own argument divulge the irrational thinking: "if god were hypothetically evil... that doesn't mean he wouldn't be able to set the standard for good.. he'd still be able to.. he'd just be evil.." Yes, it would. This would be like someone saying "Just because a triangle has three sides doesn't mean it can't smooth itself out to a circle." It has that kind of nonsensical thinking to it, bc it would render the very concept of "evil" meaningless anyway. Also, keep in mind, if God was evil He wouldn't have provided us a sacrifice for our sins. He would've just let the whole human race rot in Hell. He's not evil, for if He was so, then "evil" itself would be rendered to a meaningless concept. After all, if "evil" was just your opinion, then how could you accuse God of such evil?
Melvin: .. so.. maybe u can explain again why ur [sic] insisting that god is good... as opposed to being evil.. why is it not the case that god is a natural evil being... from the beginning.. why r u saying he must be good .. because.. maybe someone could say... evil is a thing.. and good is just a privation of evil..
Brian: Listen...God is the ultimate standard of morality. If God did not exist, then there would be no objective morality. Morality is the opposite of evil, so, logically, this would make God the highest of all possible good. It would not make any logical sense for God to be the highest of all possible evil, bc then He would not be the standard for objective morality in the first place, which would then reduce concepts like "good" and "evil" to personal opinions, which then would reduce the idea of an "evil God" to absurdity. It would be like me and you debating rather a triangle can be a circle. It would make no rational sense. Evil is the absence of good. That is how it is usually defined. However, this would get us further in the weeds. Given the fact that God is the highest of all morality, and that we are created in the image of God, good is determined by what concurs, or coheres with God's holy nature, which lacks evil within the Christian-Biblical worldview. Good cannot be the absence of evil without you arguing in a vicious circle. You might think that my view is circular, and you'd be right, but it is a virtuous (necessary) circle by which is required to make objective morality even possible. However, your position would render the very thing you trying to prove to absurdity, and thus make your argument of "good being a privation of evil" a vicious (arbitrary) circle whereby you'd be assuming the very thing you need to prove. God's existence is required for us to even know what true objective evil even is.
Opmerkingen