The problem of evil or problem of suffering is an argument against the existence of God. It claims that the existence of evil, such as pain and death, is incompatible with the existence of an omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient God. The first statement of this problem is presented by the greek philosopher Epicurus. He basically says that “if God is willing to prevent evil but not able then he is not omnipotent if he is able to prevent it but not willing then he is not omnibenevolent. If he is both, able and willing then where does evil come from, and if he is neither able nor willing then why call him God”. J.L Mackie, an Australian Philosopher addressed this problem as well. Mackie presents three propositions: God is omnibenevolent, …show more content…
St Augustine of Hippo created the Augustinian theodicy in which he says that God created a perfect world free of all types of evil. He says that God gave us free will, therefore when Adam and Eve sinned for the first time, they destroyed the state of perfection and created a lack of good within themselves. St Augustine describes God as a loving and just father, and states that by allowing his children to suffer the punishment for sin, God is being just. But God is also loving and through the death of Jesus he grants us all a place in heaven. I have several problems with this theodicy. The first one is the fact that how could a perfect world go wrong. If God created a perfect world, why was there a snake telling Eve to eat from the tree, which God told her not to do. Furthermore, why did she choose to eat it? How could a perfect being choose to do the wrong thing? It is a contradiction to say that God created a perfect world and it went wrong. Either it wasn’t perfect to begin with or it was enabled to go wrong from the beginning therefore not being perfect. This, of course, goes back to the problems of evil presented to us by Epicurus and J.L Mackie. Maybe God doesn’t have the power to create a perfect world where evil is nonexistent or maybe he just wanted to see humans suffer and he is not omnibenevolent after …show more content…
This argument can, in fact, be challenged. The free will defense claims that when God was creating the universe he was faced with two choices: free will, with pain and suffering or maximum pleasure at all times but no free will. J.L Mackie says there was another choice; he says that if God created humans that have free will and can make the right choice at least once then he could’ve created humans with free will and also able to make the right choice every time. Due to this evidence it makes it impossible to solve the problem of evil while maintaining God’s goodness and omnipotence. There hasn't been one theodicy yet (at least not open to public knowledge) where this has been
Therefore, it is not the case that God is an omnipotent and wholly good being.
If god was all good, all powerful and all knowing, he would not allow the existence of evil.
John Hick discusses in his essay The Problem of Evil, the objections to the belief in the existence of God is the presence of evil in the world. He begins by posing the traditional challenge to theism in the form of the dilemma: That if God was perfectly loving, he must wish to abolish evil, and being all powerful, is able to perfectly do so as he will its. He then proceeds to present some views regarding this issue, giving insights from three point of views, that of contemporary Christian Science, the Boston Personalist school, and the theologian Augustine. The first opinion takes evil as an illusion, as a construct of the human mind. The second confers upon God finity, God as a struggling ruler,
The existence of pain and suffering in a world created by a good and almighty God is a fundamental theological dilemma and may be the most serious objection to the Christian religion. In the book, The Problem Of Pain , author C.S. Lewis addresses the issue of pain as a mere problem that demands a solution; he formulates it and goes about solving it. "If God were good, He would make His creatures perfectly happy, and if He were almighty He would be able to do what He wished. But the creatures are not happy. Therefore God lacks either goodness, or power, or both" (p. 16). According to Lewis, this is the problem of pain in its simplest form. In his attempt to solve the problem of pain Lewis evaluates the past and the origin of religion, he
The problem of evil as suffering is a problem of what to do with the obstacle for the believer but also an obstacle to unbeliever to converge because they do not think it harmonising. In contradiction to compatibility, an atheist often suggested that the present of evil entails the absence of God. Atheist argued, if God exists, then as an omnipotent, he is able to prevent the evil occurrence. For omniscient, it implies under any circumstances evil will occur if he does not act. Then, being perfectly good, he will prevent its occurrence and so evil will not exist. Based on this above proclamation, the existence of God does not compatible with the evil of whatever kind. However, theists response to this logical problem of evil by an atheist is that necessarily perfectly good being, foreseeing the occurrence of evil and able to prevent it, will prevent evil. The essay will first, define what evil is according to Swinburne as one of the philosopher of religion, Second, Swinburne four categories of evil will be discussed (Physical evil, mental evil, state evil, moral evil). Third, Phillip logical and existential problem evil will be discussed through. How will all these above assertions be a problem to those that and does not believe in God.
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.
The problem of evil (the problem of suffering) is an argument against the existence of God
owe to prove his thesis about the problems of evil and atheism, Rowe asks three fundamental questions. The first question, “is there an argument for atheism based on the problem of evil that could rationally justify atheism?” Supporting his question, Rowe by uses the idea of human and animal suffering.is it reasonable for omnipotent, omniscient being(s) to permits its creation to suffer by extinguish each other for their own personal benefits. If there is such a thing as an omnibenevolent, omnipotent holy being how come the ultimate and unescapable suffering is this world has no vanish. How good is a god(s) that permits humanity to suffer greatly? In religious Christian Bible study, Jesus, many times referred to as god, vanish evil from
William Rowe defines gratuitous evil as an instance of intense suffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse.(Rowe 335) In a world with so much evil it raises the questions If God is all powerful, all knowing and all good, how can he allow bad things to happen to good people? Can God even exist in a world with so such gratuitous evil? These are questions that has afflicted humanity for a very long time and has been the question to engross theologians for centuries. The existence of evil has been the most influential and powerful reason to disprove the existence of God. It is believed among many theist that God is the creator and caretaker
These passions, like great winds, have blown me hither and thither, in a wayward course, over a deep ocean of anguish, reaching to the very verge of despair. Love and knowledge, so far as they were possible, led upward toward the heavens. But always pity brought me back to earth. Echoes of cries of pain reverberate in my heart. Children in famine, victims tortured by oppressors, helpless old people a hated burden to their sons, and the whole world of loneliness, poverty, and pain make a mockery of what human life should be. I long to alleviate the evil, but I cannot, and I too suffer.3 The Greek philosopher Epicurus is most likely the first recognized philosopher to ask how the existence of evil could be compatible with the nature of God (The Wrath of God 13).4 According to Epicurean philosophy, the notions of good and evil are identified with pleasure and pain respectively. The Epicurean claim is that only pleasure is good. Accordingly, this translates into “pursue pleasure (good) and avoid pain (evil).”5 David Hume in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion says of Epicurus: “Epicurus’ old questions are yet unanswered. Is he (God) willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?”6 Even if Epicurus is regarded as the first to raise
God cannot determine the outcome of our free choice. So either there is no omniscient god or we are created without free will and therefore are forced/unable to avoid doing evil. Again this shows that god is not benevolent, nor omniscient, therefore he is non-existent. Theists may argue the following reason for god to have granted humans free will. It is possible that god raised homo sapiens to rationality giving the gift of abstract thought, language and disinterested love. And so it is arguable that god gave us free will to allow for love, as free will is necessary for love. Although this may be one of many reasons that god granted us free will, it is one that we may understand. Free will is necessary for both erotic and platonic love. One may argue that evil is only trumped by love. And that the existence of evil, although in its masses is worth it for the sake of
all-good means that he only wants good to exist. But, look at all the bad and
“The absolutely impossible may also be called the intrinsically impossible because it carries its impossibilities within itself, instead of borrowing it from other impossibilities which in their turn depend upon others” (Lewis 561). “In the developed doctrine, it is claimed that Man, as God made him, was completely good and completely happy, but that he disobeyed God, and became what we now see” (Lewis 590). In the very beginning of the Bible in the Garden of Eden, the fall of man occurred. Adam and Eve ate from the tree of life and it brought sin into the world (Genesis 2:4-3:24). Once sin was entered into the world then every human was created in imperfection.
It's a classic question in theology that asks how can a loving, yet omnipotent God permit evil and suffering in the world? The argument goes as follows: A God that allows suffering to continue is either a) not all-powerful (not omnipotent) and is thus unable to prevent the suffering; b) not loving because this God has the power to prevent suffering but is unwilling to do so; and/or c) not all-knowing (not omniscient) because God only is aware of the suffering after it has already occurred and it’s too late to prevent it. This problem of evil and God’s inability or unwillingness to do anything about it is known in theology as “theodicy.”
There are several theodicies presented in the textbook all of which attempt to explain why bad things happen if there is a loving God. Gottfried Leibniz argues that God is obligated to create the best possible world. He states “The metaphysically richest world must contain the greatest number and variety of beings” (page 1185 thick book) Leibniz believed for the world to be the best it had to have both good and evil existing in it. According to Leibniz a world without diversity would not be the best possible world. The fact that there is good and evil proves that God made the best possible world, that He is just, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent. Leibniz is correct in his belief that god is just, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent however God as part of His nature,because He is holy, cannot be the author of evil. Also God was nor is not obligated to create or do anything against His will. Augustinian tradition first states that God did not have to create any world and that His existence alone is the ultimate in excellence. Second