0:00 Opening Remarks About Theodicy (The branch of theology that defends GOD’s goodness and justice in the face of the existence of evil)
0:50 Is The Problem Of Evil Problematic? … Can The AntiTheist Generate An Argument That Renders Evil A Genuine Problem For Christianity? Can The Case Be Adequately Formulated, And Adequately Specified?
1:39 GLB Proposes To Call Into Question Certain Well Known Formulations Of The Problem Of Evil … GLB Warns Christians Of The Seriousness Of This Issue
2:42 GLB Recommends The Reading Of Novelist, Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s, BROTHERS KARAMAZOV (Book Four), For Anyone Who May Take The Subject Of The Problem Of Evil, Lightly.
7:23 One Must Carry Through His Analysis; One Must Find Solid Ground For His Theistic Or For His Atheistic Commitments…That Evil Which The Unbeliever & The Believer Both See, Must Be Accounted For
7:48 No Cavalier Additude With Respect To The Philosophical Form Of The Problem … GLB Expands To Criticize Evangelicals & Some In The Reformed Faith
8:14 Five Answers To TPOE That Have Been Given In The History Of The Church, AND WHY WE CANNOT TAKE THAT FORM OF THE PROBLEM!
8:25 #1.Evil As The Necessary Counter Part To Good…
9:04 #2…Evil Is A Means To The Good…
10:09 #3…GOD Warns By Means Of Evil & HE Punishes Us By Means Of Evil…
10:13 GLB Gives Caveat To His Five Criticisms
10:50 #3 Resumed (The Story Of The Wind & The Sun Debating How To Get The Traveler’s Coat Off) …The Unbeliever Asks, Why Can’t GOD Be Like That?
12:08 #4…GOD Works Through Evil (GOD Is Going To Clear Up The Mess) … Why Is There A Mess In The First Place?
12:40 #5…Free Will…(Man’s Will In Heaven, Non Posse Peccare)…Why Wasn’t Mankind Made This Way At The Start?)
13:48 GLB Moves To Show TPOE In Its Most Stringent & Logical Form … It Is A Logical Problem At Base.
14:42 David Hume (Scottish philosopher), Puts TPOE In Classical Style – Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, part 10. …Concluded TPOE & The Existence Of GOD Are Logically Incompatible…
15:09 (Christianity Charged As Inherently Self Contradictory) W.T. Stace, John Stuart Mill, Antony Flew, …H.J. McCloskey’s Vigorous Attack On Traditional Theism
16:58 Now, It’s Not The Evidence That’s At Stake, It’s The Very Logical Compatibility Of The Faith That’s At Stake
17:31 Does An Examination Of This Most Stringent Form Of TPOE Warrant The Conclusion That Theism Is Rational Or Not? GLB Starts His Analysis, And The Attempt To Generate The Problem For The Unbeliever…
17:59 GLB Starts His Propositions, With The Aim Of Bringing A Logical Contradiction Into The Set … To Deduce From This Contradictory Conclusions, Thereby Showing Inconsistency
18:30 Premises A,B,C,D
19:22 Comment (Book, Bertrand Russell Speaks His Mind)
19:51 The Proper View/Meaning Of The Premises
20:52 J. L. Mackie, Adds Premises E,F,G …H,I,
22:01 GLB Asks For Student’s Patience …Continues Analysis …Premise J
24:08 Madden and Hare…GLB Continues Analysis …Premise K
25:08 Premise L
26:22 Premise M
27:08 What We Are Down To Considering Logically … THE VERY LOGICAL NECESSITY OF THE ARGUMENT IS GOING TO TRAP THE UNBELIEVER
28:20 Anybody With An Imagination Can Think Of Counter Examples To Premise “M” Where The Good Realized In Avoiding Pain Is Out Weighed By The Greater Good Achieved Only By Enduring Pain … e.g. Giving Blood
30:16 The Antitheist Would Be Driven To Insist On A “Moral Judgment/Evaluation” Consequently, The Cogency Of His Argument Will Rely On Upon The Validity Of His Conception & The Use Of The Word “GOOD,” & Moral Predicates
31:52 Can The Antitheist Provide An Adequate Account Of The Word Good, As It Appears In His Argument? If Not, His Argument Asserts Nothing, And It Has To Be Taken As An Example Of Non-Cognitivism
32:14 We Are Now Going To Insist That “Good” Be Explicated …Meta-Ethics: Explicates The Logic Of Moral Discourse (What Are The Philosophical Foundations For Your Normative Conclusions)…What Is The Basis For Evaluative Statements.
33:28 In The Area Of Ethics, Two Basic Approaches To The Question Of A Logical Form Of The Word Good: Informative Theory (Objectivist View, 2classes:The Naturalist & The Intuitionist) (Subjectivist) (Performative Theory) (Emotivism)
34:53 Performative Theory Example (Trying To Do Something To You…”FIRE!”)
36:28 The Objectivist Naturalist (g.e. moore naturalistic fallacy)…Ethics Does Not Amount To Statistics…
37:43 The Intuitionist…Back To Relativism
39:25 Performative Theories, Imperativism (A.C. Ewing, R. M. Hare,)
40:45 The Unbeliever Is In A Real Quandary …He Cannot Explicate His Use Of The Word Evil, In An Absolutistic Sense … THE CHRISTIAN CAN!
42:51 THE CHRISTIAN’S WORLDVIEW OF TPOE OVER AGAINST THE UNBELIEVER’S
46:08 SUMMARY …The Door Is Open For Us To Ask This Very Significant Question: Whether TPOE Explains One’s Atheism, Or Whether One’s Atheism Explains His Insistence That Evil Is Problematic?
In three separate lectures, Dr. Bahnsen equips believers to confront and answer this favorite objection to Christian theism offered by unbelievers.
