this is phil hales end chap 3 beg chap 4

objection 2 to divine foreknowledge Aristotle answer

- Aristotle insisted that there are no facts about the future -makes divine knowledge false -God does know everything knowable, but there are no truths to the future

object one to divine foreknowledge -atheism and agnosticism

god is not omisent bc he punished people for doing wrong If he knew before why would he punish them?

A defender of the problem of evil argument can concede that moral evils are the result of people freely choosing to act immorally but still ask

why didn't God intervene to prevent the Holocaust anyway?

One reason to suppose that even moral evils are really GOd's fault is

God irresponsibly created and set loose violent people, knowing the damage they would probably cause

The idea that suffering is part of God's greater plan is often taken to refute the logical problem of evil, by showing that

God might have some good reason as to why suffering is necessary and instrumental to our greater happiness

Problem of evil

The argument that there is no God because worldly suffering is incompatible with the attributes of God.

Divine foreknowledge argument

The argument that there is no free will because God's infallible knowledge of the future precludes free choice.

The free will defense against the problem of evil maintains that

all suffering in the world is our fault because we freely choose to sin

The distinction between moral and natural evils is designed to show that

even if human free will is to blame for moral evils, God is still to blame for natural evils

According to the problem of evil,

the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God is incompatible with all the suffering in the world