The Problem Of Evil, The Fine Tuning Argument And The Moral Argument

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 problem of evil is often divided between the logical and evidential problems.” At the heart of each problem is the belief that the existence of God and the existence evil are incompatible. They present an “either/or” dilemma: either God

If there is a God, horrendous things wouldn’t happen. According to Inwagen, there is sufficient reason behind why God allows evil or even created it in the first place. This argument provides an anchor to the argument of God’s existence. God has outweighed reasons to allow evil and has a very real logical motivation why it might be. God being the omnipresent prefect being he is wouldn’t want evil. The key word is ‘want’ in this context, because want is a strong desire for something, doesn’t mean obtaining it or getting it are two very different things.

Being all powerful means he can execute and accomplish any given task, meaning God in truth can fix and change anything and everything for the better. And if God is all-knowing, then God should already know the outcome and destination of every single individual in the world. Lastly, if God is all caring then he is looking for our best interest. God wants us to live comfortably among each other. And if we do in truth live comfortably and everyone lives comfortably among one another then. It would enable a world where wars are extinguished, along with crime and poverty. But that is not the case. God willingly watch us live our lives miserably in an even more miserable world. A world where humans, animals are placed in a chain; where our very own survival is based upon fitness. So in actuality this happens to be false, and if this is false then god is not genuinely all-caring. If god is actually all-knowing, all-powerful, all-caring, he would do something about this. He has the power to intervene and change things but for reasons unknown chooses otherwise

Some times the question of “Where is God” surfaces with all the adversities, and I find myself asking “what is God doing for all these people who are suffering?” But however amidst all the issues I know that He is there, and all these problems and conflicts do not change the fact that God exists, and I still have hope for change for these suffering people no matter what the circumstance.

If evil is necessary for good contradicts that God is omnipotent and morally perfect. If he was really all

Omniscient God only have the power, knowledge and control over human; to maintain that superiority God typically responds to human behavior with what they deserve. God blesses the righteous and punishes the evil man to remind their limitation and worship to the God.

On the topic of the existence of God, Ernest Nagel and Richard Swinburne have construct arguments that challenge one another. In Nagel’s article, “Does God Exist?” he argues that if God is all-powerful, omniscient, and benevolent; he would know when evil occurs and has the power to prevent it. Because evil occurs, God does not exist. This is the problem of evil. Challenging Nagel, the article by Swinburne, “Why God Allows Evil,” argues that God has the right to allow moral and natural evils to occur because those evils reap greater goods that make the lives of human-beings meaningful. He extends his argument to the idea that God seeks to provide human beings with goods such as freewill and responsibility of not only ourselves, but of the world and others. While Nagel utilizes the problem of evil as an objection to the existence of God, Swinburne employs it to show that God allows evil to occur to provide human beings with goods that go beyond moments of pleasure and joys of happiness.

If God is both omnipotent and wholly good, then He would make men freely choose good on every occasion.

Most major arguments of God are rooted in the existence, or lack thereof. However there has been a continuous debate regarding the specific characteristics of God. In this debate, Charles Hartshorne, Alfred North Whitehead, and other the processed theologians oppose Anselm, Augustine, and other classic theologians. Although there are many points of disagreement, there are some characteristics for which both sides can agree upon. I will show one strong point of agreement and one strong point of opposition, and allow you the opportunity to decide for yourself how different, or similar, these two camps are.

Stephen Law conducted a thought experiment with a purpose of establishing the existence of an evil God, whereby he challenged those who believed in the presence of a kind and good God, doing nothing evil, and argued that the existent God is wicked indeed. The hypothesis developed into the challenge based on the argument that, if an omnibenevolent God is said to exist, yet there is so much evil in the world, then there is as well a possibility that an evil God exists, yet there is so much good. Law aimed to doubt not the fact of the existence of God, but the generally accepted assumption that the existing God is benevolent. Another researcher, Rowe, refutes this approach, arguing that the existence of a Supreme Being, who created people and hence cares for them, cannot be associated with evil. In fact, the presence of evil is a clear sign of the absence of a God. This paper seeks to take a position opposing to Law’s theory and prove that, despite the presence of evil, an omnibenevolent God still exists.

The problem of evil questions the nature of God and threatens his status as a figure worthy of worship. Surely human beings would not wish to worship a God that is neither all good nor all-powerful? The figure we call God is seen to be entirely perfect and flawless in every way. The problem of evil also questions God’s omniscience, in respects that he is all knowing. If God is omniscient then he must know the harm that evil does and the suffering it will cause. The attributes in question are the essence of the nature of God and without them he becomes more like a human than a God. If any of God’s characteristics are omitted, he

God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent, which makes us wonder what kind of morally sufficient reason justifies God to allow evil. We know that evil exists in our world, but so does God, so would God be the source of evil as well as good? We have established that God is the omnipotent and benevolent free creator of the world, but suffering and evil exist. Is God unable to prevent evil? If so, he would not be omnipotent. Is He able to prevent the evil in our world but unwilling? If this were then case then he wouldn’t be benevolent. A Persian thinker, Mani, suggested that the answer to this question was a kind of duality between the good and evil. This pluralistic view of the good and evil in our world would suggest that God is

Since God is the epitome of good, then his intentions on creating things to be would have to be good. Say a couple of hundred people were taking a flight to Hong Kong; and during this flight, the plane’s engine malfunctions causing it to crash and kill all passengers. To most people, this would be the cause of an accident, but to me, this would be considered purely evil.

God is portrayed to be omniscient and benevolent, but the evil in the world compels a strong argument against god’s existence. Majority of the people believe that if God is all knowing and omnipotent, why can't he prevent devastating tragedies such as 9/11 or the most recent mass shooting in Las Vegas Nevada. God is also characterized as omnibenevolent, so if he knew a tragedy was about to occur, why didn't he save the countless of innocent lives. The existence of God will always be uncertain, and hardships in life will always steer the people who want to believe further away from God.