Last week, I presented a simple argument against God as defined in Calvinism and Islam. The core shared theological content of both Calvinism and Islam that was under consideration concerned perfection and the denial of omnibenevolence. Thus, the objection was not, in fact, an objection to Calvinism and Islam simpliciter but rather an argument against any version of Calvinism and/or Islam which denies omnibenevolence.
Just to keep the conversation going and unpack the intuition a bit more, I’d now like to present another brief argument that covers similar territory. This time, the focus shifts slightly to the concept of love, both creaturely and divine. Of course, love can mean many things. But in this context, I’m going to be talking about the concept of love in what I understand to be its minimal, essential metaphysical sense, namely, the desire that an entity would achieve shalom (wellness, peace, joy). Thus, to love an entity is to desire that that entity achieve shalom.
With that in mind, here’s the argument:
(1) If I desire that my child achieve shalom and God does not desire that my child achieve shalom, then God loves my child less than I do.
(2) I desire that my child achieve shalom.
(3) If Calvinism is true then possibly God does not desire that my child is elect.
(4) If God does not desire that my child is elect then God does not desire that my child achieve shalom.
(5) Therefore, if Calvinism is true then possibly God does not desire that my child achieve shalom.
(6) Therefore, if Calvinism is true then possibly God loves my child less than I do.
(7) It is not possible that God loves my child less than I do.
(8) Therefore, Calvinism is false.
This is very far from a definitive argument. But at least it is a conversation starter. So let’s talk.
