In Chapter V, Philo devises several arguments that accept that the universe has a designer, but deny that that designer is God. Given our traditional definition that God is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, is Philo correct? Or is there a response to his arguments? Does it matter if the designer is the traditional God?
No, it doesn't matter if the designer is the traditional God. There could be hundreds of scenarios where God is the designer of the universe, and hundreds where he merely takes the reigns of the universe. The possibilities are endless, and there's no real way of refuting the claim that God wasn't the original designer. Sure, you can reference Genesis or the Bible, but that isn't empirical evidence. However, it is possible that someone *could* make the argument that since god is omnipotent, he would have had the power to create the universe, and not vice versa. It's impossible to prove that though since there are so many possibilities. God could've been the result of a crazy universal accident or a result of multiple beings fusing together or any other non-traditional explanation. I don't think the origins matter that much though. The origin doesn't change who God is, even if he was a tyrannical usurper in his origin. Plus, if the current definition of God (omni-everything good) stands true, his origin doesn't change anything since we know it couldn't be bad.
ReplyDeleteThis is Tyler