The Existence Of God : Evil

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

The argument for the existence of God has been a debate for many centuries. God, in terms of philosophy, must be a supernatural being that: is all-knowing, is all-powerful, and is all-good. Theists believe God exists based on these terms; atheists on the other hand don’t believe in God. Atheists believe that if there is evil present in the universe, then there is no possible way God can exist if he is omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. Evil is defined in three different categories: human evil (evil we humans cause), natural evil (not in our control, of the Earth), and sufferings of the heart (not necessarily human/natural evil). The argument for the problem of evil is that God doesn’t exist because evil exists. In

Therefore, since the theist is justified in his belief in a wholly good, omnipotent, omnipresent being then the

Why does an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God allow natural and moral evil to happen without any restrictions? John Hick, a proponent of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz’s theodicy defense, answered: “in order that human beings, as free responsible agents, may use this world as a place of “soul making,” which involves the spiritual perfection of our character and persons” (Pojman 74). According to Hick, creation has not been finished its work, it is still undergoing a process, that is, the lives of individual human beings. Hick believed that God is omnibenevolent because he is allowing us to learn how to be perfect on our own.

Now that’s all well and good, except for the fact that the logical problem of evil spends so much time focused on the omnipotent and the omnibenevolent aspects of God that is all together neglects the fact that God is also omniscient. He knows everything, past, present, and future. Therefore, it is only logical to assume that God also knows the best way to achieve the greatest good, which as established is the singular goal of an omnibenevolent being. If such knowledge is true, as it must be according to the laws of Omni-three, then it is possible that God has determined that the greatest good can only come by human-choice, also known as freewill, not by His force. In a bit, I will attempt to explain just

If we humans are responsible for “human evil”, then surely, only God can be responsible for “natural evil”. Yet if we apply God’s benevolent feature, the fact that natural evil exist would be contradictory, unless we alter the meaning and definition of natural evil. Either natural evil is not really evil or there is a good purpose behind the natural evils. Though free will defense does not answer these two questions, or at least not directly. We can also assume God cannot create this world without including said natural evil, but then that would, per

That being said, God’s gift of free will to humanity is often used as the prime example as to why evil exist. Free will, theologian's would argue, is among the greatest goods, but for humans to truly have free will they must also have the choice to do evil. This argument is flawed however. The theologian would argue that free will and not being able to do evil is incompatible and therefore not possible, but God himself is a testament to the opposite. God being wholly good, would not freely choose to do evil, and assuming no theologian would argue that God has no free will, it must follow that it is possible to have free will and not do any evil.

God really exists in the world, but he will not stop many evils because he thinks free will is much important for people. The occurrence of certain evils cannot be an evidence against the existence of God. If God stops evil, then people have no free will to do everything they want and express their need. By talking about theodicy and the free will defense, Swinburne provides a sufficient response to solve the problem of evil. There are rational grounds for belief in God despite the existence of evil.

In his essay, "The Magnitude, Duration, and Distribution of Evil: a Theodicy," Peter van Inwagen alleges a set of reasons that God may have for allowing evil to exist on earth. Inwagen proposes the following story – throughout which there is an implicit assumption that God is all-good (perfectly benevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient) and deserving of all our love. God created humans in his own likeness and fit for His love. In order to enable humans to return this love, He had to give them the ability to freely choose. That is, Inwagen holds that the ability to love implies free will. By giving humans free will, God was taking a risk.

John Hick is a professor of Theology and Philosophy. He talks about the evil that lurks in our world and if God loves and knows all, why does he allows it? “There is the problem of moral weakness or wickedness: Why does an all-good and all-powerful God permit this? (Hick, 22). Hick goes in depth about human

This is the problem of evil. Augustine summed it up most effectively when he said, “Either God cannot abolish evil or he will not. If he cannot then he is not all-powerful. If he will not then he is not all good.” Augustine viewed evil as merely the absence of good just as dark is the absence of light, a non-being “a name for nothing but the want of good”. He looked to the Bible for an explanation for the existence of God and believed that the fall of humanity from grace, as shown in Genesis, showed the origin of evil. He believed that evil came into the world because human beings had deliberately turned away from God and his goodness. This suggests that both moral and natural evil is a result of original human sin.

Everyday it is possible to read a newspaper, or turn on TV or radio news and learn about evil going on in our world. Banks are robbed, cars are stolen, violent murders and rapes are committed. Somewhere in the world the aftershock of an earthquake is being felt. Cancer is killing millions of people each year, while other debilitating conditions continue to affect many with no cure to end their suffering. President Bush said that our country is fighting a war against evil. We all agree that evil is real and cannot be ignored; the problem comes when we try and rationalize the concept of God and evil coexisting.

However, that meant humans had the choice to do good things and evil things and some of chose the latter. So, if God eradicated evil then that, therefore, means that we wouldn't be free. God is simply allowing evil for our

All of the living things have to be set by all of evils thing in the world: sickness, agony, happiness, suffering the live and death. God creates incredible things and leaves all of them for human to freely use as they want. However, the more they have the more temptation they get. That’s why there are a lot of questionable about a creator, God based on all of these kinds of events happened. Is this belief in a benevolent God not at least paradoxical in the face of such events? If God is benevolent, He would surely not want people and other living things to suffer. If God is omniscient, He surely knows when people and other living things are suffering. If God is omnipotent, surely God could prevent any

Theist: God wanted to do what’s best for the world. He wanted us to endure evil so we