I - an atheist - am morally better than the Christian God

[Whateverman]

You claim that by preventing evil people from being born you can eliminate evil. Correct? Then your definition of evil appears to be that it is a core affliction of only some people, and others are not evil, because you can sort them out.

Well no, I'm not making any claim of how many people will eventually choose to commit evil; could be a few, a lot or all. Yes, I am claiming I'd be able to sort them out - because God can. This scenario involves me being in God's shoes, and taking a moral action God refuses to.

So a person who commits one evil act in his lifetime (and who might regret it immediately afterward) should be prevented from being born. Correct?

The extent to which that offends God is the extent to which I'd answer yes. This beyond the scope of the thread, but I'm skeptical of the Christian (fundamentalist) position that all sins are equally offensive to God (with a few exceptions). I'll bet that He recognizes the difference between a lie and child rape, for example. If we assume that I'm right, then whether we call lying "evil" is questionable. AS SUCH maybe it's possible to allow some liars to be born (for example) without them bringing the problem of evil back to life.

That's just a diversion, though. Here, I assume all sins are evil - and thus my answer to your question is Yes.

How many people do you think this would include? Maybe all of humanity?

Maybe, yes. I doubt this, but it's a discussion that would derail the thread, so I'll just leave my answer as-is.

[Whateverman]

You have no clue. You are not interested in actually knowing God.

You run away from the thread's topic, because you're unable to address it.

See my signature.

[Christianbookworm]

aka. you have no pearls to give.

If you could prove that the argument in the OP is flawed, you'd do so - because the idea of an atheist being morally superior to god must be annoying. That you've been unwilling to do this demonstrates the inability.

Or I just don't feel like wasting my time. Jesus can lecture you later.

[Whateverman]

Or I just don't feel like wasting my time.

Well yes, continuing to try doing some you're fundamentally unable to - is a waste of time.

I happily accept your conceding of the argument.

[Ronson]

Well no, I'm not making any claim of how many people will eventually choose to commit evil; could be a few, a lot or all. Yes, I am claiming I'd be able to sort them out - because God can. This scenario involves me being in God's shoes, and taking a moral action God refuses to.

The extent to which that offends God is the extent to which I'd answer yes. This beyond the scope of the thread, but I'm skeptical of the Christian (fundamentalist) position that all sins are equally offensive to God (with a few exceptions). I'll bet that He recognizes the difference between a lie and child rape, for example. If we assume that I'm right, then whether we call lying "evil" is questionable. AS SUCH maybe it's possible to allow some liars to be born (for example) without them bringing the problem of evil back to life.

That's just a diversion, though. Here, I assume all sins are evil - and thus my answer to your question is Yes.

Maybe, yes. I doubt this, but it's a discussion that would derail the thread, so I'll just leave my answer as-is.

I don't think it derails the thread, but you can make that claim if you like. You said your definition of evil is the classic one, and admitted that the fundamentalist position is that all sin is evil.

Since all people sin then all people commit evil. And since you propose to eliminate evil before people are born, then you've eliminated all people. Via the classic definition of evil.

[Whateverman]

I don't think it derails the thread, but you can make that claim if you like. You said your definition of evil is the classic one, and admitted that the fundamentalist position is that all sin is evil.

Since all people sin then all people commit evil. And since you propose to eliminate evil before people are born, then you've eliminated all people. Via the classic definition of evil.

That's certainly a possibility, yes. I've asked this a few times previously, and did not get an answer:

So what?

So what if my solution to the problem of evil results in the end of humanity? I've still done what God does not want to, and I've cleansed the universe of human evil - which is something God supposedly wants.

[Christianbookworm]

You are still missing the point. An apparently omniscient Being that exists outside Time [although some physicists might challenge that contention] cannot make errors of judgement.

It is no error that Bob has to exist for his altruistic daughter to exist. And no one is perfect. The logical problem of evil was solved years ago. God simply has a good reason for allowing evil temporarily. All of human existence in a fallen world is like a bad dream compared to the eternity in a new Universe for His adopted children. Strangers not allowed. Wild goats can fend for themselves.

[Ronson]

That's certainly a possibility, yes. I've asked this a few times previously, and did not get an answer:

So what?

No answer because it sounds like a rhetorical question.

So what if my solution to the problem of evil results in the end of humanity? I've still done what God does not want to, and I've cleansed the universe of human evil - which is something God supposedly wants.

So your solution to end evil is to end humanity. Nihilism. That, in itself, sounds evil.

[Whateverman]

So your solution to end evil is to end humanity.

No. At worst, it's just a consequence of the solution; I'm not suggesting that it's necessary.

At best, the solution would not end humanity, in the same sense that heaven is populated by people doing what I've ensured they'll do: never choose evil. And given my skepticism about the fundamentalist position, I think there's plenty to be optimistic about.

[Whateverman]

So your solution to end evil is to end humanity.

You're the first one in this thread willing to discuss the subject. Thank you.

[Starlight]

The problem of evil can be solved instantly in this way: prevent the birth of anyone who will freely choose to do evil.

Interesting argument.

It's not one I've ever seen before. What source did you get it from? Or did you think of it yourself?

When I was a Christian, I was an 'Open theist' who believed that free will meant there were multiple truly possible futures and not even God would know in advance which possible future would be picked. Obviously your argument wouldn't convince an open theist that their God didn't exist, as they would simply say their God doesn't have the power to know who will and won't freely choose to do evil in the future.

However, the "Christian" posters on this forum tend to hold very strong views of God's omniscience, so your argument presents a rather thorny problem to them. In my observation, some of the posters here are 100% prepared bite the bullet and go they out-and-out God-controls everything double-predestination-Calvinism route and acknowledge God to be a very active participant in planning out a world in which evildoers are born and do evil deeds, and that this is all to God's "glory".

[Christianbookworm]

Hasn't anyone heard of Molinism? Infinite possible universes? And God knows what might have happened if you turn left at an intersection instead of right.

[Starlight]

Hasn't anyone heard of Molinism? Infinite possible universes? And God knows what might have happened if you turn left at an intersection instead of right.

Yes, Molinism is exactly the view that the OP argument works best against.

[Christianbookworm]

Yes, Molinism is exactly the view that the OP argument works best against.

Seriously? What if He wants to do the whole Hero rescues the damsel in distress story? A heroic sacrifice is a good thing that can only happen in a world where good and evil exist. God dealt with the problam of evil 200 years ago. Jesus lived a perfect life, died a shameful death, and rose again so that us sorry sinners who trust in Him can live with Him forever! You can't have a redemtion story if no one is allowed to make a wrong choice or they never exist in the first place!

[Whateverman]

Interesting argument.

It's not one I've ever seen before. What source did you get it from? Or did you think of it yourself?

When I was a Christian, I was an 'Open theist' who believed that free will meant there were multiple truly possible futures and not even God would know in advance which possible future would be picked. Obviously your argument wouldn't convince an open theist that their God didn't exist, as they would simply say their God doesn't have the power to know who will and won't freely choose to do evil in the future.

However, the "Christian" posters on this forum tend to hold very strong views of God's omniscience, so your argument presents a rather thorny problem to them. In my observation, some of the posters here are 100% prepared bite the bullet and go they out-and-out God-controls everything double-predestination-Calvinism route and acknowledge God to be a very active participant in planning out a world in which evildoers are born and do evil deeds, and that this is all to God's "glory".

The argument is mine, and yes, it's directed specifically at the Christian God.

There are all kinds of ways a reasonable Christian might undermine it, such as not referring to all lies as sin or evil, not having such a narrow/rigid understanding of free will, having more nuanced views about responsibility or the problem of evil and morality, rejecting the ridiculous omni-max view of God, etc.

I mean, the fastest way to get me to drop this argument is to be reasonable with me. A signature like Seer's deserves to be refuted harshly, though. And the thing is that I actually do believe the argument, personally. I'm far from perfect but the bible and Christians themselves often describe a creator that I am morally superior to.