What is your answer?
Mackie claims that these three core beliefs of theism are logically inconsistent with each other: (1) God is omnipotent, (2) God is wholly good, and (3) Evil exists. In response, Plantinga claims that
{ 1 } - these three contain no explicit self-contradictions (like "A" and "not-A").
{ 2 } - we can't derive any explicit self-contradictions from the three by using standard formal logic -- even if we add other implicit premises that are necessary truths.
{ 3 } - he makes both claims.
{ 4 } - the three beliefs in fact are logically inconsistent; but yet, through God's power, all three are true in a way that only believers can understand.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Directions: Click on a number from 1 to 4.
1 is wrong. Please try again.
Mackie claims that these three core beliefs of theism are logically inconsistent with each other: (1) God is omnipotent, (2) God is wholly good, and (3) Evil exists. In response, Plantinga claims that
{ 1 } - these three contain no explicit self-contradictions (like "A" and "not-A").
{ 2 } - we can't derive any explicit self-contradictions from the three by using standard formal logic -- even if we add other implicit premises that are necessary truths.
{ 3 } - he makes both claims.
{ 4 } - the three beliefs in fact are logically inconsistent; but yet, through God's power, all three are true in a way that only believers can understand.
He also makes the second claim.
<= back | menu | forward =>
2 is wrong. Please try again.
Mackie claims that these three core beliefs of theism are logically inconsistent with each other: (1) God is omnipotent, (2) God is wholly good, and (3) Evil exists. In response, Plantinga claims that
{ 1 } - these three contain no explicit self-contradictions (like "A" and "not-A").
{ 2 } - we can't derive any explicit self-contradictions from the three by using standard formal logic -- even if we add other implicit premises that are necessary truths.
{ 3 } - he makes both claims.
{ 4 } - the three beliefs in fact are logically inconsistent; but yet, through God's power, all three are true in a way that only believers can understand.
He also makes the first claim.
<= back | menu | forward =>
3 is correct!
Mackie claims that these three core beliefs of theism are logically inconsistent with each other: (1) God is omnipotent, (2) God is wholly good, and (3) Evil exists. In response, Plantinga claims that
{ 1 } - these three contain no explicit self-contradictions (like "A" and "not-A").
{ 2 } - we can't derive any explicit self-contradictions from the three by using standard formal logic -- even if we add other implicit premises that are necessary truths.
{ 3 } - he makes both claims.
{ 4 } - the three beliefs in fact are logically inconsistent; but yet, through God's power, all three are true in a way that only believers can understand.
So Plantinga challenges Mackie to more clearly demonstrate the inconsistency.
<= back | menu | forward =>
Before continuing, you might try some wrong answers.
4 is wrong. Please try again.
Mackie claims that these three core beliefs of theism are logically inconsistent with each other: (1) God is omnipotent, (2) God is wholly good, and (3) Evil exists. In response, Plantinga claims that
{ 1 } - these three contain no explicit self-contradictions (like "A" and "not-A").
{ 2 } - we can't derive any explicit self-contradictions from the three by using standard formal logic -- even if we add other implicit premises that are necessary truths.
{ 3 } - he makes both claims.
{ 4 } - the three beliefs in fact are logically inconsistent; but yet, through God's power, all three are true in a way that only believers can understand.
Plantinga sees this answer as confused and incoherent. He warns that you're apt to become very dizzy if you concentrate intensely on this answer.
<= back | menu | forward =>
the end