In a Substack article on the empirical reality of original sin, Dr. V posits that sin, as opposed to moral evil, is specifically an offense against God. Sin presupposes the existence of God. Moral evil does not. Toward the end of his essay, Dr. V writes:
It is interesting to note that if sin were an observable fact, then, given that [the] concept of sin includes the concept of God, we would be able to mount a quick argument for God from the existence of sin. That is, we could argue as follows: There are sinful acts; If there are sinful acts, then God exists; ergo, God exists.
If I remember correctly, Father Damien Karras, in William Peter Blatty's novel The Exorcist, comes to the same conclusion before he dies: he has encountered a legitimate demon (or set of demons), and if demons exist, then God must exist: demons imply a cosmology that implies God. Karras dies fulfilled.
Dr. V notes that the above argument-from-sin is valid in logical form but not probative (i.e., it doesn't prove anything) because it still presupposes God (getting back to the original meaning of "begging the question," i.e., presupposing the thing you want to prove). Perhaps Father Karras made the same mistake: what if demons exist without there being a God?
No comments:
Post a Comment