Day of Celebration 1

we are justified in affirmed our religious beliefs only if such beliefs are based on objective evidence that no reasonable person can deny

problem: not everyone is convinced that the truth or falsity of religious beliefs canbe established conclusivement by the evidence

1. Because evidential considerations cannot be conclusively establish religious belief, we are justified in avoiding them

2. We shouldnt even consider evidence bcause it demeans, minimizes, and detracts from our spiritual commitment

problem: just because evidence doesn't conclusively settle an issue doesn't mean its not relevant to the issue

We are justified in afirmed religious beliefs even if they are not based on evidence convincing to all, but only after the relevant evidence to which we have access has been considered

God is all controlling, humans are free and responsible for their actions, but all and ony that which God has determined shoud occur does in fact occur. This is the best of all possible world

God could be all controlling, however to the extent that God grants us meaningful freedom He has vluntarily given up control over what will occur (self-limitation)

weak free will theism: God frequently overrides our freedom when it really maters to God

God cannot unilaterally control anything. All entities alwasy reatain some power of self determinination. God is though at every moment attmpeting to persuade all entitites to choose the best available option

The question is not whether God has the power or strength, but whether sinning is consistent with God's nature.

Key Question: Do God and humand function in accordance with the same basic moral standard?

God's nature contains moral principles that guide God's behavior

These are the same moral principles we are to live by

God's nature doesn't contain moral principles God must live by

What God does is right because God does it

God ahs moral principles for us to live by, but God is under no obligation to live by these moral principles

God knows all tha has occured and is occuring and can predict but does not know what people will freely do in the future

problems: limits God, problem with Prophecy

God know all that has occurred, is occuring, and will actually occur

• TIMLESS: God knows what from our perspective is past, present, and future. But God is outside of time. For God, all exists in the eternal now
• problem: then how can God interact inside of time??

In addition to knowing all that has happening, is happening, and will actually happen. God also knows exactly what would happen given every possible situation

God cannot know anything that is false, therefore what He knows must happen. This means that humans have no freedom because they must do whatever God knows.

• Solutions
• TD- God control what you do, but you're still free
• PK- God doesn't actually know what we will freely do in the future
• Timeless: God doesn't foreknow anything because He sees it all at once
• SFK/MK- it doesn't mean that you can't do it, just that you don't and God just happens to know you won't

To be effected emotionally is to change essentially, but God cannot change essentially therefore God cannot have emotional experiences

(essential characteristics make up a person and who they are while relational characteristics describe the relationship between the person and other entities)

God is effected emotionall but this makes God a more admirable being because appropriate emotional dependence is a desirable character trait

• Evil: human pain and suffering
• 2 kinds: moral (the result of human decision making) and natural (all the rest)

• Formal problem:
• 1. God is all powerful, all knowing, and perfectly good
• 2. Therefore any divine creation will be perfect
• 3. Unnecessary is an imperfection
• 4. Unnecessary evil does exist
• 5. If God exists, He cannot be all powerful, all knowing, and perfectly good

• Theological Determinist: There is no unnecessary evil because it is part of God's plan and the best possible world
• --problems: simply implausable to think all evil is necessary, if this is true then can God be considered fair and just?

• Free Will Theism: A world with freedom makes unnecessary evil possible in the most perfect type of world
• --problems: this limits God's control too greatly, doesn't explain natural evil, a perfect God who foreknew what would have happened would not have created the world, God would not destroy meaningful freedom is he intervened more frequently

• Process Theism
• It is not God's fault that evil exists because He cannot intervene

We consider God good in one of two ways, both with present a problem

Synthetic (evidential)- we must know what "good" means in order to see if the evidence shows goodness. We make the definition of "good" by our own standards, meaning we judge God by our standard not His

Analytic- it must be shown that the object possesses these qualities outside of one's own mind, however we must define "good" first. Without doing this, we cannot assign "good" to God

• Solutions:
• We don't judge by our own standards, good is what God does
• or
• God has implanted moral standards within us therefore we can admit that we judge God yet maintain that God is the ultimate standard of morality