So that you’re either faced with the heretical assertion that God is evil, or the heretical assertion that there’s no such thing as sin. However, I learned a few weeks ago that even if you’re a Calvinist who’s willing to assert in the face of common sense that God would be good even if He caused evil, that leads into another problem namely that there’s no such thing as sin in the world. If divine determinism entails that God is morally evil, and yet God is cannot be morally evil, then it follows by modus tollens reasoning that divine determinism cannot be true. It is logically impossible for God to be morally evil. This is logically impossible as God isn’t just good, but necessarily good (see The Ontological and Moral Arguments). It makes God into the ultimate sinner in the universe and also cruel and crooked judge. How can God hold people accountable for their sins if He is the reason they committed those sins in the first place? How can you blame someone for an action if you are the reason they committed that action, and if they would have done otherwise if you had only determined them to do otherwise? How can human beings be truly responsible for what they do if they had no control over what they do? Determinism makes the courtroom of God a joke. We’d realize the parent was to blame for the other child getting slapped, not the child who’s hand was inevitably wrought to slap the child by the parent.
What would you think if a parent grabbed the hand of his child and made it reach out and slap another child, and the parent then proceeded to spank the child in punishment? We’d think that parent was not only unjust, but mentally ill. While I have no philosophical objections only scriptural ones to a God who wouldn’t want to save everyone - because God isn’t obligated to save anyone - I do have a problem with a god who would punish people for sins He made them commit. Universal Divine Determinism entails a God who is the ultimate sinner!Īnd if that weren’t bad enough, this God punishes people for all eternity for the sins that He causally determined them to commit! God determines people to do evil, and them torments them in Hell for all eternity for the sins that He made them commit! Calvinism teaches that Jesus only died for a certain select few individuals and that God only sends grace to those individuals (i.e the elect). After all, a cause is responsible for its effect. If God causally determines people to sin, then that entails that He is responsible for their sin. But if this is true, then that means that every sin ever committed was caused by God. Every feeling, thought, and action by every single human being who has ever lived, is living, and ever will live, was, will be, and is causally determined by God. Divine Determinism is the view that everything that happens happened because God decreed it to happen. Before I talk about the fallacy some determinists commit in responding to my argument, let me summarize the argument for you briefly. One of the biggest reasons I reject Calvinism is because their view of divine determinism logically entails an extremely ugly conclusion about God, a view not only repugnant, but logically impossible. In other words, this fallacy is when someone answers criticism with criticism. This logical fallacy is committed when someone avoids having to engage criticism by turning it back on the accuser. This logical fallacy is pronounced (too-kwoh-kway).
#LOGICAL FALLACIES UTEP TU QUAQUA LOOK WHOSE TALKING SERIES#
We’ve looked at many logical fallacies in this series so far.
Perhaps one of the premises attacked the opponent instead of the issue, or perhaps one word stated in different premises take on different definitions of the word. For example, an argument may follow the rules of logic, but the conclusion still be unjustified because a fallacy is located in the content of the argument. Informal fallacies, by contrast, are committed when the content of the argument is logically fallacious. Formal fallacies are committed when the form of the argument is logically invalid that is to say, when it doesn’t follow any of the 9 rules of logic (e.g modus ponens, modus tollens, hypothetical syllogism, disjunctive syllogism, etc.). I’ll address just a few more of them and then I’ll move on to formal fallacies. So far, we’ve gone through informal fallacies. Fallacies come in 2 types formal and informal. A logical fallacy is when someone makes a mistake in reasoning. This is part 17 in a series I’m writing on logical fallacies.
0 kommentar(er)
