Uncle Joe,
The distinction between the essence of the triangle- and the good- and black jack- and the game of life is the key to seeing why voluntarism- saying that what is good or evil is based upon God's will, is false, and essentialism- that good and evil are based upon the Logos, is true.
One must distinguish between an essence that gives itself as an intrinsic absolute necessity, and an essence that gives itself as non-necessary. Necessary absolute essences are eternal and unchanging; non-necessary essences are temporal and changeable. Triangles, and the good and evil are known by their given intrinsic necessity and are eternal- unchanging. In any possible world, in an infinite number of worlds the nature of a triangle and the good remains. If one says I can think of a world where a triangle has 4 sides, then its not a triangle. If one says I can think of a possible world where bomber Jihadi's actions are good, then its not the good. What does one mean when he says that a man is good? We mean that he is just, kind, charitable and benevolent. These are the properties of moral goodness. These properties are not contained in the actions of the bomber in any possible world.

Furthermore, the game of life that God has set, do indeed have rules- the laws of nature, but these laws, gravity, strong and weak nuclear force, and electromagnetism have a kind of necessity- but not an absolute necessity. We know this because if the frequency of the point of singularity in the Big Bang would have been different- these 4 laws of nature would change. Since, they do not have an absolute necessity- they are alterable- and hence, miracles are possible. But, the nature of triangles and moral goodness are not alterable.

Which brings us to the problem of evil. Wouldn't there be a distinction between the passive will and active will? The passive will, which allows evil to occur for the greater good, for the purgation of of the soul that he might be saved in the final analysis, all the way showing the soul that is wracked in pain and physical suffering that he is indeed loved and comforted in a way that is quite within the ken of human knowledge and graspable through an inner perception- something that souls who seek to be in communion with Him know- as is the phenomenon of the Saints, which give evidence of this, show. It is peace of soul in the mist of suffering! Thus, the passive will remains benevolent and objectively good. In contrast, an active will that intentionally commits an act of evil way is not benevolent, nor does it seek the good of the soul. What is given in the datum of an intentional evil will is hatred. Those, individuals whose lives are ended through the bombers Jihad are done out of malice, with no concern for the soul, but only to destroy it, both physically and spiritually. This is clearly distinct from a benevolent albeit passive will.

I have had this debate with Muslims before, and their idea of God, is that he does hate, and commit evil (ones recognizable by humans), but in order to do that God must contradict himself, but then thats not "the that than which nothing greater can be conceived", but it only gives us a pseudo-god- a cosmic Saddam Hussein that sets up a totalitarian society based upon the lustful will of a general-statesman-prophet Mohamed and his followers. Mohamed in the Haddith, tells his followers that they may drink wine, but then one day he returns from raiding a caravan (theft- but don't worry its o.k. because God said so), and finds them drunk and acting stupid. He then tells them, I just got a revelation, and God said, alcohol was now prohibited. Mo was the master of violating the law of non-contradiction.

I’m not a pacifist, so, self defense or the defense of the innocent, against Jihad and any attempt to impose injustices such as a Sharia-law upon society is perfectly in conformity with the essence of the good, and justice itself.

philosopher,

The 4 sided triangle analogy brings our suicide bomber back to his days at a Catholic university. :o)

The bomber would like to put the question in language that he more readily understands. While playing blackjack, God is showing 2 Queens and I have an ace and a ten, who wins this hand?

I win and God loses! (gasp) The reason is that God will not violate the rules of the game of blackjack. He could but in so doing He would destroy the essence of the game itself.

The “game” of life is infinitely more complex than a game of blackjack but the same principle should apply. God will not interfere with the laws of nature which He Himself, in His infinite wisdom, has ordained. That is not to say that there could be miracle on occasion. There can be but a miracle is, in fact, the exception and a manifestation of a higher law that is ordinarily not seen in human experience.

You wrote:
an Absolute Being that is absolute love

For the suicide bomber, I think he would agree that God is love. However, God sometimes demonstrates characteristics that, from a worldly point of view, are extremely harsh and, in a sense, appear to be unloving to those adversely affected: the 6 year-old child dying of cancer, the wife with 4 kids whose husband wants to leave her and take up with a tramp, the 12 year-old boy who has been sexually abused by a cleric. God is love but what He permits to occur in this miserable short existence of ours, can oftentimes appear to be cruel. The Book of Job comes to mind.

With reference to scripture and its seemingly non violence mandate. As you wrote, Scripture does say that Christ told St. Peter to put away his sword when he was being arrested. But, how is that line to be interpreted? Are we to think that violence is no longer permitted especially when Christ in another passage of scripture, advised his disciples:

Douay-Rheims Bible
Then said he unto them: But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise a scrip; and he that hath not, let him sell his coat, and buy a sword.

Certainly Jesus must have a deeper meaning in mind than the violent use of weapons spoken of in the above passage and likewise He must have had a deeper meaning in mind when he told Peter to put away his sword the night before the crucifixion. (Pacifists consistently interpret the non-violence references in scripture to suit their own worldview but that's for a different discussion)

The point the suicide bomber is trying to make is that there seems to be a place for violence even for the followers of Christ since this is one of the characteristics of His heavenly Father with respect to events that occur in our world. This violence was not only written about centuries ago in the OT but it is demonstrated daily on a large scale with natural disasters that flow from God Himself. On a more personal level, it is also demonstrated in tragedies that occur in our own lives and in those near to us.

That's a good question Uncle Joe. If the bomber acquiesces to the nature of God as Absolute, which as St. Anselm argued, is so by necessity, otherwise He wouldn't be the Absolute- the highest thing in all reality must necessarily be Absolute. I would then ask our bomber if, God could make a triangle with four sides or a circle with two sides, or a 7 sided cube. Can he make a rock too heavy for himself to lift? He might say, God can do anything? Can he lie, or do evil? Yes, he might reply. Well, then he wouldn't be God, because a four sided triangle, is not a triangle- the essence of a triangle is by an absolute necessity a three sided object; a two sided circle does not exist, and can not exist, otherwise it wouldn't be a circle if it has sides. An Absolute Being that is omnipotent can not make a rock that is too heavy for himself to lift. All of these statements have non-existence. They are like saying that 2+2=5; you can say that, but it isn't so, and can never be. Our bomber will reply, but you are putting limits on God, and an omnipotent being can do anything. Yes, anything that is possible- but illogical states and 4 sided triangles are non-sense. An Absolute Mind is absolutely logical, and those non-sense questions are contradictions. Now, what about evil? Well, again an Absolute Being is absolute Good, and murder is something intrinsically bad, not because people or society says, but intrinsically within the act it carries properties of evil, malice and hate, which moreover, would be a contradiction for an Absolute Being that is absolute love to dictate. Muslims, atheists, and useful idiot liberals often use a straw man fallacious argument by collecting all the violent sayings in the Old Testament and then saying, see, Christianity teaches violence too. But, the Koran is interpreted prescriptively for all times, the Bible is interpreted by Christians contextually, analogically, historically, and descriptively, which is why you don't see any Christian's or Jews carrying out violent Jihad to spread the faith by force. The use of forced conversions both in Judaism and Christianity has been condemned because its counter to the Logos that became man- Christ, who told St. Peter to put away his sword when he was being arrested. So, the passage you cited refers God's created order where his will permits evil, because only in freedom can man the creature love, fall from grace, repent and be redeemed, but that freedom comes with the risk of the possibility that humanity will not always do the right thing- or worse commit the evil act of Jihad in the name of God.

philosopher,

Let's say that the suicide bomber is a former Catholic and is somewhat familiar with Aquinas and Catholic theology and that he agrees that the Absolute contains all the perfections that you mentioned.

However, the bomber believes that the Absolute, although there obviously are cosmic reasons for it, also demonstrates what we mortals would consider extremely negative qualities as well. Sickness, death, catastrophes of nature (acts of God) causing massive destruction and pain eg. Hurricanes, typhoons, earthquakes etc.

The bomber would agree that either through the permissive or active will of the Creator, all these things (along with goodness, beauty, truth, logic and love that you mentioned) flow from His hand. The bomber might even quote scripture to support his point.

Douay-Rheims Bible
I form the light, and create darkness, I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord that do all these things.

So then, if the Creator manifests such seemingly negative destructive qualities along with the positive qualities, why wouldn't it be permissible under certain circumstances i.e., directives written in what they consider their divinely inspired "holy book", for humans to do likewise?

@Uncle Joe. I think Socrates, along with St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas would have said to the suicide bomber, that the essence of a supreme transcendent infinite Absolute Being- God, is the absolute of all perfections, goodness, beauty, truth, logic and love. These properties of the Logos are reflected in all of the created cosmos and both in quantitative and qualitative reality. Thus, if one says that I just got a message from God to lie, steal, and cheat on my spouse- or to carry out violent Jihad on innocent people- then this is totally incompatible and illogical because it contradicts the essence of not only goodness and love, but also the absolute divine mind that goodness is grounded in.
But, just like the Sophists who walked away from Socrates when they couldn't take the heat- the truth, our Suicide Jihadist would probably do the same when refuted. More than likely, he would show his value blindness to reality through his prejudiced erroneous assumptions emanating from the faulty teachings of Islam.

What argument might Plato (or Socrates) have used to convince the suicide bomber that it was not “good” to kill Barbara Walters?

What are the chances that Plato's argument would have done any good?

I would add to this discussion, along with the honest and politically incorrect explication from Uncle Joe (I mean that as a compliment!), that Islam is theologically voluntaristic, while Christianity is essentialist. This was also debated by Socrates and Euthyphro on the nature of the essence of piety. Voluntarism says that what makes something right, true and good, is solely based upon the will of God. Essentialists posits that virtue, goodness and truth have within them necessary and intrinsic intelligible properties, which while grounded in God, and are nevertheless recognized by him as something we ought to inculcate in our actions- God wills us to do the good because it is good, in and of itself. Contrariwise, for example when the ABC journalist Barbara Walters (a Jew) traveled to Israel in 2009 or 10? to interview a suicide bomber in an Israeli prison, she asked him something to the affect, you know I'm a Jew and I mean you no harm, but if you were released what would you do? He replied that he would destroy her. Then she asked, but why kill innocent people who mean you well? And, (here we see theological voluntarism in action) he retorted, "because it’s God's will, and whatever he wills makes it right."

There is no rule of cause and effect for these murderous savages. Islam is evil and their goal, as clearly outlined in their Satanic Qur'an, is to destroy the infidel. Killing, maiming and butchering is nothing new for these animals and has been their modus operandi for 1400 years and certainly longer than the existence the United States.

Believing Muslims must follow Sharia. It is obligatory for all Muslims, everywhere, for all time. Sharia - based upon Muhammad's Quran and Sunna (Muhammad's acts, deeds, thoughts, behavior, etc. as recorded in the hadiths and Sira) - explicitly commands deceit, hatred, misogyny, racism, and warmongering against non-Muslims. There is no other "religion" that does this and this is why Islam cannot be considered merely a "religion" like any other - and it most certainly cannot be called "moderate".

For this is the command from Allah to all Muslims, as recorded in the Qur'an:

Al Tauba 9:29 "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and his apostle [Muhammad] nor acknowledge the religion of truth [ISLAM] (even if they are) of the People of the Book [Christians & Jews] until they pay the Jizya [onerous Tax for not being a Muslim] with willing submission and feel themselves humiliated"

Muhammad 47:4 "Therefore when ye meet the Unbelievers smite at their necks; at length when ye have thoroughly subdued them bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom"
*********************************

1. Islam is NOT a Religion but most definitely a CULT belief system as well as a legal, military, political, and social system of totalitarian control.

2. Allah is most assuredly NOT the same as the God of Jesus, Moses and Abraham because Allah is only the NAME of the supreme moon god of Pagan Arabia centuries before Muhammad and his Quran and represented to this day in the Kaba'a by an ancient meteorite called the Black Stone.

3. Jihad is most definitely NOT a spiritual struggle to commune with God but eternal WAR against all Unbelievers until all humanity is subject to Sharia.

4. No god called Allah nor any angel called Gabriel ever revealed a single verse to Muhammad because every letter, word, verse and Chapter in the Quran is the product of Muhammad's imaginings, the secretions of his depraved mind, his Alter Ego, his Autobiography, but very cleverly projected into the unsuspecting mouths of Allah and Gabriel to give them the aura of sanctity and divinity.