Why Does Evil Exist

What is atheism? Why would someone be an atheist? Why do people fear and dislike atheism? Simply stated, atheism is the lack of belief in a god or gods. Granted, atheists are each individuals and undoubtedly each of them prescribe [to] many different philosophies on life, politics and morality as do Christians. However, though atheists may choose to gather collectively for whatever purpose, unlike Christianity, atheism is not a belief system. An individual who identifies himself as an atheist is merely stating that he does not believe in [the existence of] god or gods. Atheism, as indicated by its name, is the opposite of theism which is belief in at least one god; to include polytheism (belief in many or more than one god) and monotheism

The problem of evil cripples reasonable belief in the God of theism and although successful theodicies have been made to subvert the problem of evil, they cannot get rid of the doubt and for some the proof that God does not exist.

In the course of this essay I will argue that evil is not compatible with the existence of god. This means that evil and God cannot coexist because if god were present, the existence of evil would contradict all that god is believed to be. Abrahamic religions insist that God both created the world and that he preserves and maintains it. Christianity claims that God is all knowing and is boundless in his abilities. Religions claim that God is benevolent, and only wants the best for humanity and the universe, as his creations. If all of the above statements be true, then it is hard to understand why god would allow evil to thrive right from the beginning of time.

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.

When we are discussing the problem of evil, we are specifically discussing a God that is omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good. A God that is perfectly good would not allow suffering to exist, and any minute amount of suffering that exists disproves God’s existence. Unless, the suffering is justified with an adequate reason. However, even then there seems to be large amounts of evil in the world that seems unnecessary for any good reason. By evil and suffering I mean death, pain, and disease. I will be using these terms interchangeably. In the problem of evil, many arguments are placed in order to find a justification for the evil that exists. However,

An omniscient God knows that evil does exist because he allows it. First, God created man in his image. God made man with morally good qualities like love, faith, and kindness. Why? It is because of PKG. As Sober states in Core Questions is Philosophy, “If God were to exists, then that being would be-all powerful, all-knowing, and all-good (all PKG, for short)” (p. 119). Second, he balanced out the good in man by also making man evil. To demonstrate, Horne’s Evil acts not evil people: their characteristics and contexts, he states the act of evil results from an individual’s assertion of the ‘naturalness’ of their act corresponding to the ‘unnaturalness’ act of others (2008,

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.

On this very debatable topic the common question that is commonly asked is “How can the two objective claims (1. Evil exists. / 2. God exists.) Both are true in the same universe?” First I’d like to talk to you about a philosopher by the name of Augustine who was born in 354 AD. Augustine offers two solutions to this intriguing question. The two solutions are that there is an all-powerful God and there is such thing as “free will”. Free will is simply just the willingness to make a decision by yourself without help or influence from anyone but your self-using your own logic or self-conscious. Augustine believes that God is all knowing and all powerful and that evil still exists only because

The logical problem of evil is often referred to as the inconsistent triad, this being that the following propositions; God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent and evil exists, are inconsistent. Also known as a reduction ad absurdum argument, whereby all three propositions cannot be true together. Theists, like Swinburne, come to the conclusion that the three propositions are compatible with one another, whereas atheists, like Mackie, believe that they are incompatible and therefore God does not exist. I shall be arguing in line with Swinburne’s view, describing the following defenses, indicating that there is no logical problem of evil.

How could an all powerful, and morally perfect God, allow evil to exist? I argue that from a logical perspective, a PKM God and evil cannot coexist. I will also refute against claims that evil may be present for good intents, as well as giving examples of the harm it causes in real world circumstances, and how a powerful, knowing, and morally perfect God would not allow such evils to exist.

The above argument is valid due to the logic that an all-powerful and all-good God would be able to and should eliminate all the evil in the world. However, since pain and suffering (evil)

In John Hick’s piece “There is a Reason Why God Allows Evil”, he explains his view on the roots of evil. Hick brings up the problem of an all-loving God that allows evil to occur in the world. The conclusion that arises God must not be all loving then. However, Hick explains that humans free will is the problem that leads to evil. A few strengths that Hick has in his argument is the laws of nature, he mentions that they “…would have to be extremely flexible; sometimes gravity would operate, sometimes not; sometimes an object would be hard and solid, sometimes soft. There could be no sciences, for there would be no enduring world structure to investigate” (129). Nothing could hurt anyone or anything, and the world would be some perfect fairytale; “…life would become like a dream in which, delightfully but aimlessly, we would float and drift at ease” (130). Hick goes on to explain that evil allows people to learn what is good, grace and faith. If evil doesn’t exist, then how could one tell the difference from right or wrong? There would be no moral lessons to be taught or learned from since there is no wrong, and wrong an only be done when there is evil. Hick also mentions that bravery, courage and strength would have no point and meaning. Everything that builds character would not exist. The weakness in Hicks argument is that he is blaming free will for the ultimate cause of evil. There are obviously nature disasters that could be considered evil as well. Hick believes that

The second portion asks if he is able but not willing. This would make him malevolent. God is supposed to be omnimalevolent, all loving and all good. A God who is able to stop all evil but doesn’t is clearly not loving then, correct? Christians would respond that this apparent ignorance from God is actually human sin and not God turning his back on us.

There are several explanations that tackle such a concept. St. Thomas Aquinas, the 13th-century Dominican theologian, argued that evil does not exist, but rather what we perceive as evil is actually the absence of good. However, perhaps the most famous theodicy is the free will theodicy. This theodicy claims that because God is good, he provided us with free will which is something that is good. However, due to the acquired free will, God cannot control whether we use our free will for good or evil, otherwise having free will would be counter productive. Gretchen Weirob of John Perry's Dialogue on Good, Evil, and the Existence of God objects to the existence of evil by claiming that God could have created free creatures who always choose the good, however if that were so then those free creatures would not posses free will because the whole concept of free will is based upon allowing the creatures to act freely in whatever manner they choose whether good or evil. Considering how good free will is, it would be better to have free will and sometimes act in an evil manner, than not to have free will at

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