God Must Not Exist : The Argument From Evil

One of the oldest dilemmas in philosophy is also one of the greatest threats to Christian theology. The problem of evil simultaneously perplexes the world’s greatest minds and yet remains palpably close to the hearts of the most common people. If God is good, then why is there evil? The following essay describes the problem of evil in relation to God, examines Christian responses to the problem, and concludes the existence of God and the existence of evil are fully compatible.

In this paper, I will argue against the problem of evil, and I will give an adequate amount of information to prove why I believe Rowe’s Problem of Evil argument is not cogent, because although it is strong, all the premises are not true. This paper will also include me explaining, discussing, and evaluating Rowe’s Problem of Evil argument. In the argument, he discusses logical reasonings about why there is a strong argument for why atheism is true.

This essay features the discussion of the problem of evil in relation to the existence of god. Specifically outlining two sections where the problem of evil is discussed from atheist and theistic viewpoint.

But since evil exists, no such being exists. Therefore, God doesn’t exist. Atheists believe this to be a problem because they say that the first and second premises contradict each other, therefore proving the existence of God false. God, as we know it, is a perfectly good God. Since this God is perfectly good and all-powerful, then we assume he would eliminate evil whenever/wherever it is present. While this does hold a strong standpoint against theists, they can come back with an argument that basically states that evil can be allowed if it gives way to the opportunity of a greater good coming from that

J. L. Mackie’s “Evil and Omnipotence” criticizes the argument that God exists by showing that religious beliefs are positively irrational and that parts of the essential theological doctrine are inconsistent with one another. The problem of evil is one of the oldest problems in philosophy. The problem of evil is a logical problem for only the people who believe that there is a God who is both (1) omnipotent and (2) wholly good; yet (3) evil exists in the world. If God is wholly good and omnipotent, then how can there be a presence of evil in the world. Given the presence of evil, we must either conclude that God does not have the power to prevent the suffering that evil causes in which case God is not omnipotent or that God does not wish

In this paper, I will break apart J. L. Mackie’s stern defense of the logical problem of evil, which he uses to suggest the God does not exist. I will attempt to defend the notion that both God and evil, in the form of human creation, can exist in the world by way of suggesting that freewill is the answer. Furthermore, I will strengthen the argument for freewill against Mackie’s defense, which suggests that the argument of freewill also compromises the Omni-three nature of God. In part, I will back freewill by using Mackie’s own logic against him. In its totality, I will build up a strong force against the logical problem of evil, leaving room for both the existence of human formed evil and God in this world under the

It’s only not depict a logical argument intended for a disciple, however, he give an dispute of such extent as to style a disciple’s religious opinions wholly illogical in as much as a disciple grips to something that can be proved moreover believe on what can be present refuted from extra theories they grip.

The logical problem of evil basically states that there is an inconsistency with the existence of God and the existence of evil. In other words, saying that God is all good, omnipotent and omniscient, meaning that he knows everything and has absolute power, it doesn’t not make sense to conceive that he would let evil exist in the world. It explains that evil is bad and a good God want to get rid of it and he would know exactly how to do that. So if evil still exist then God must not exist according to the logical concept. At first look, this argument makes complete sense and seems unbreakable, however there were some evident holes in the argument. The part that this argument did not take into account is that God may have not caused evil to exist or maybe he has but for a special purpose.

The existence of God has been a major topic in the history of philosophy. For long, philosophers debated and each tried to seek out for an answer to rationally prove that God is an existing being and not merely a fragment of human imagination as an attempt to explain the world and its origin. One of the approaches that philosophers took to prove God’s existence is through the problem of evil. Philosopher, J.L. Mackie, used a deductive analysis on the problem to challenge his predecessors in what they claim to be rational proof. Mackie believed that the problem of evil exist within men solely due to the fact that many theists are not willing to accept God as a being that is any less than what they presuppose God is and his defining qualities.

Does the problem of evil pose a challenge for theists and the existence of God? The problem of evil argues that there is so much suffering in the world that an all-good and all powerful God would not allow such suffering to exist. Therefore, a God with those characteristics does not exist. Unless the suffering is necessary for an adequate reason. Some people argue that suffering is necessary for there to be good and for us to able to understand what good is. In this paper, I will argue that suffering does not need to exist in order for good to exist, because the existence of good does not depend on suffering. I will then argue that good and suffering are not logical opposites. Finally, I will conclude that since evil is not justified, then the God that we defined does not exist.

Another attempt to prove the problem of evil is the evidential version of the argument. This argument attempts to show inductively that the existence of God is not likely. This form is much

In this essay, I am going to argue that God exists. The three main concepts that I’m going to talk about which which are the problem of evil, the fine tuning argument and the moral argument. According to theism, God is: “that being which no greater is possible, and he is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.”. By having a God who only desires good, and us living in a world where evil exists, it is logically impossible and that is what created the problem of evil. There are two sides of the problem of evil which are the logical and evidential argument. The logical side states that:

Important point: Evil does not mean God does NOT exist, but only implies that God’s probably has a lesser chance of existing.

The problem of evil is an argument against the existence of God. The argument is that God cannot exist because evil exists and evil is incompatible with a benevolent and omnipotent God. The epicurean paradox explains this well:

In this paper, we are interested in two versions of the problem of evil. The first is the Logical Problem of Evil which claims that any existence of evil, ranging from paper cuts to genocide, is incompatible with the existence of an all-loving, all-knowing and all-powerful God. It follows that from the mere existence of evil we can conclude that God lacks at least one of his “Omni” attributes which poses a problem to some theists who believe in a perfect God. The other type is the Evidential Problem of Evil which claims that even if we are able to reconcile evil with the existence of God, the sheer amount of evil in this world makes it highly unlikely that God exists. That is, it is not the existence of evil that contradicts with God’s qualities;