Search The Problem of Evil The problem of evil or argument from evil is the problem of reconciling the existence of the evil in the world with the existence of an omniscient all-knowingomnipotent all-powerful and perfectly good God. The argument from evil is the atheistic argument that the existence of such evil cannot be reconciled with, and so disproves, the existence of such a God.
Introducing the Problem Journalist and best-selling author Lee Strobel commissioned George Barna, the public-opinion pollster, to conduct a nationwide survey. The survey included the question "If you could ask God only one question and you knew he would give you an answer, what would you ask?
If God is all-powerful, all-knowing and perfectly good, why does he let so many bad things happen? This question raises what philosophers call "the problem of evil.
As it is, however, thousands of good-hearted, innocent people experience the ravages of violent crime, terminal disease, and other evils. Michael Petersonp.
An earthquake kills hundreds in Peru. A pancreatic cancer patient suffers prolonged, excruciating pain and dies. A pit bull attacks a two-year-old child, angrily ripping his flesh and killing him.
Countless multitudes suffer the ravages of war in Somalia. A crazed cult leader pushes eighty-five people to their deaths in Waco, Texas.
Millions starve and die in North Korea as famine ravages the land. Horrible things of all kinds happen in our world—and that has been the story since the dawn of civilization.
They claim that, since there is something morally problematic about a morally perfect God allowing all of the evil and suffering we see, there must not be a morally perfect God after all.
Mackie and McCloskey can be understood as claiming that it is impossible for all of the following statements to be true at the same time: Any two or three of them might be true at the same time; but there is no way that all of them could be true. In other words, 1 through 4 form a logically inconsistent set.
What does it mean to say that something is logically inconsistent? None of the statements in 1 through 4 directly contradicts any other, so if the set is logically inconsistent, it must be because we can deduce a contradiction from it.
This is precisely what atheologians claim to be able to do. Atheologians claim that a contradiction can easily be deduced from 1 through 4 once we think through the implications of the divine attributes cited in 1 through 3.
They reason as follows: Statements 6 through 8 jointly imply that if the perfect God of theism really existed, there would not be any evil or suffering.
However, as we all know, our world is filled with a staggering amount of evil and suffering. Atheologians claim that, if we reflect upon 6 through 8 in light of the fact of evil and suffering in our world, we should be led to the following conclusions: From 9 through 11 we can infer: Since evil and suffering obviously do exist, we get: Putting the point more bluntly, this line of argument suggests that—in light of the evil and suffering we find in our world—if God exists, he is either impotent, ignorant or wicked.
It should be obvious that 13 conflicts with 1 through 3 above.
To make the conflict more clear, we can combine 12 and 3 into the following single statement. There is no way that 13 and 14 could both be true at the same time. These statements are logically inconsistent or contradictory. Statement 14 is simply the conjunction of 1 through 3 and expresses the central belief of classical theism.
However, atheologians claim that statement 13 can also be derived from 1 through 3. Because a contradiction can be deduced from statements 1 through 4 and because all theists believe 1 through 4atheologians claim that theists have logically inconsistent beliefs.
They note that philosophers have always believed it is never rational to believe something contradictory.As keenly-felt as the problem of evil may be, however, it doesn't represent a strong intellectual or logical obstacle to God's existence. Mackie was wrong: the existence of God and the existence of evil aren't mutually exclusive.
Jun 27, · The Problem of Evil and the Existence of God.
Socrates Socratic Dialogues June 27, June 27, 22 Minutes [PDF version] My wonderful friend, Paul, visited me yesterday. He was most excited to share his proof that God does not exist.
The God and Evil Problem A strong argument against the existence of a Christian God is contained in the theodicy problem. The existence of suffering is not compatible with an omniscient, omnipotent, omni benevolent superior being.
This problem has brought up the issue of God’s existence in religious philosophical discussions. For centuries, many have tried to dismiss the existence of God on the basis of the existence of evil. Let’s consider where God has been placed in people’s lives throughout our history.
The problem of evil argues in one direction, from the existence of evil to the non-existence of God: If there were an omniscient, omnipotent and benevolent God then there wouldn’t be any evil, but there is evil, and there therefore can’t be an omniscient, omnipotent and benevolent God.
The problem of evil is one the greatest obstacles to belief in the existence of God. Sh. Mohammad Elshinawy argues that the existence of evil offers neither a logical nor probable case against God's existence, and that Islam offers a comprehensive theodicy: that .