juliod wrote:BTW, has anybody yet offered a working definition of “evil” for the purposes of this debate?I don’t think it is relevant. Like Lotan, I don’t believe in evil. We can leave it to the theists.
It is quite relevant on several counts. First off, in all debates, it provides a common starting point for debates. If we don’t even have an agreement on the definitions of the words used in the debate question, then we’ll just be going round in circles. Secondly, the PoE is primarily an atheistic argument. That is, it is the atheist that is the prosecutor. And the theists are the defendents. And it is the prosecutors job to clearly lay out what is the nature of the case, not the defendents.
juliod wrote:If you start picking and choosing what is possible and impossible, you will enter the realm of Special Pleading.
Melis wrote:Also, logical and impossible as we understand it, obviously doesn’t have to apply to god, as he might have his own logic.
Scrotum wrote:Im sorry Otsend, but i must agree, this is really no debate, Omnipotent MEANS being able to do ANYTHING, even aLogical things, else its/he/her is not omnipotent.
Let me try to clarify what I mean by illogical and impossible. I am not referring to what is contrary to the laws of physics. I do not believe God is bound by the laws of physics. So, God can do things that are physically impossible. (Perhaps this debate should be another thread?) But, God (and our discussions as well) is bound by the laws of logic. God is not able to make false equivalent to true. God is not able to do something that is logically impossible. If it were the case, and we logically arrived at a conclusion of God’s existence, then the conclusion, whatever it may be, would not apply to God since it would not be bound by logic.
Suppose we concluded that God is not able to make a rock so big that it could not lift it. And that it is also not bound by logic. Since God is not able to do something, then it is not omnipotent. Therefore there is no God. But, since God is not bound by logic, then the logical conclusion that there is no God could be false. So, God then does exist.
As we can see, if we do not apply logic to our discussions and to God, then ultimately everything we conclude will be illogical.
The Happy Humanist wrote:After much consideration, I’m afraid I must reluctantly side with the theists on this one, for the following reason: It is possible to conceive of a universe created by a creator-being, not necessarily this one, who has ultimate power over that universe, except that he is constrained by the principles with which he created it. It is axiomatic that such a being would be constrained by logic; if not, there is no point to debating his existence, and this entire board is a waste of energy.
Another voice of reason. 
https://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=65212#p65212