K :
I guess the point I'd like to get at, is describing what conception of God is "more fit" such still needs some grounding. Isn't merely opinion or conjecture. And as I understand, that seem to also fall in line with Aquinas made use of "fittingness" forms of arguments.
It is important to acknowledge at the outset that theological arguments from fittingness are not demonstrative. In other words, they cannot prove that a certain conclusion necessarily has to be the way that it is. They cannot prove that the conclusion is true. It may be fitting for someone to ride a horse to reach his destination, but he may in fact have chosen to walk instead. Theological arguments from fittingness do not prove doctrine. They attempt to reveal the inner coherence and the wisdom of the divine design, the theo-drama that has been revealed by a God who is true, good, and beautiful. Nonetheless, these arguments have been deployed by Christian theologians throughout the history of the Church to illustrate the coherence, the intelligibility, and the beauty of the Christian faith. For example, the author of the Letter to the Hebrews argues that it was “fitting [επρεπεν] that God, for whom and through whom all things exist, in bringing many children to glory, should make the pioneer of their salvation perfect through suffering” (Heb 2:10; NRSV). - See more at: http://biologos.org/blogs/archive/st-th ... 5TmTT.dpuf
Trust the past to God’s mercy, the present to God’s love, and the future to God’s providence. -St Augustine
The logic underpinning the fittingness argument K is putting forward is less about proving the Christian conception of God is true because it fits, but strongly implying that the Islamic view of God is wrong because it is incoherent, which we see insofar as it does not fit. Applied to the Christian argument, the "fit" lets us see a beauty we might not otherwise (or else, it helps us express in precise language what we intuitively see).
That's not at all to say that fittingness arguments are subjective or opinion. They do lack the rigor of formal necessity, but that doesn't mean that they're on the level of "I like chocolate ice cream the best." Fittingness, by nature, has to do with our understanding of reality. And our understanding of reality is built on actual observation, on first principles, etc. And that goes all the way back to the OP. The Koranic view of Allah fails to take (in my view) God's perfections seriously such that what it conceives of is less that the "greatest conceivable being" of classical philosophy. So I think a formal argument can be made against their view. We just need to stay away from "better" language (betrays, again, a Molinism I find . . . distasteful). But we can recast the "better" argument term of fit, and I think that is a good route to go. It has the emotional and intuitive appeal of Craig's position (which I read as being a nearly formalized version of what most people are thinking about Allah, anyway) without some of the subjective difficulties I've pointed out, and it is still, in turn, grounded on a deeper issue of coherence that is more formally rigorous.
Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.
I think a really good Christianity vs Islam debate to have would be on God's fittingness in each.
Something like, Whose Conception of God's Character Is More Fitting?
Not only do I think Islam would be in a very sticky spot when it comes to trying to explain their theology of Allah, and its coherency with a logically necessary being who is the source of things like love, patience, mercy, righteousness and the like -- It'd also really highlight just how different "Allah" is from God our God.
I think many just take for granted and don't really think about assuming both worship "God" so that's all that matters. However, it really couldn't be further from the truth.
"Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved." (Romans 10:13)
Of course God loves evil doers. All of us were born that way. We are born with the propensity to/for sin. It's in our nature. And we all deserve hell -- satan would Love to have everyone in utter darkness and perpetually burning and in pain all the time for eternity. Cause that' his own fate and he knows it. But God / the Godhead / provided salvation for mankind. All that's needed is for a person to realize his personal need For salvation. Accept God's gift Of salvation thanking Him for it. That is the greatest way that God shows His love for all of us evil doers.
