Introduction:
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.
Statement:
The problem of evil features an argument questioning the existence of god in relation to evil, attributing both atheistic and theistic replies.
First reply to problem of evil: (atheist).
If god was all good, all powerful and all knowing, he would not allow the existence of evil.
3.1 First reply to the first reply:
There is a lot of evil in the world, and much of it happens unexplainably. In the history of life on Earth bad things have happened and evil has caused problems. In relation to some world
…show more content…
God allows evil to exist because evil is absorbed by greater good. (John Mackie). Specifically, if free will exists then people have the choice to either choose good or evil. The benefit of having free will outweighs the disadvantage of the possibility of the evil option being chosen, and thus allows for the existence of evil, supporting the reality of god. If we are free to choose, even though we may choose evil, the evil is absorbed by the benefit of free will. John Mackie presented the absorption argument, which was used to argue for the theist reply to the problem of evil.
4.1 First reply to the second reply:
Out of all the different choices human’s have to make not all of them are made using freewill, for example someone’s choice may me chosen by something or someone else and thus any evil that is caused from that choice was not chosen via freewill. If evil is created this way then it is not supporting the existence of god. There are many examples of this like how suffering (evil) may be created from a natural disaster, which was not an option someone had chosen via freewill, this creates a problem for the free will defence. Not all evil is due to choices human’s have made. In response to this problem for the free will defence, if god was all good, powerful and knowing then he would have been able to prevent and stop natural disasters as the evil they create is not due to freewill. However, this is evidently not true as natural disasters have
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.
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
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.
The Evidential Problem of Evil was first raised by the contemporary American philosopher William Leonard Rowe. Unlike the Logical Problem of Evil, the argument claims that it’s not the mere existence of evil that is problematic to the theistic world but it is the amount of pointless and useless evil that poses a threat to God’s existence. Before delving into Rowe’s argument, it is necessary to clarify some of the terms used. The term “God” refers to a divine entity that is all-good, all-knowing, all-powerful while a “theist” is a person that believes in such a God and an “atheist” is a person that rejects the existence of such a God (355). So with the terms clarified, Rowe presents his argument as follows: i. “There exist instances of intense
If God is both omnipotent and wholly good, then He would make men freely choose good on every occasion.
Following this line of thought, the next logical step for our human minds to pursue would seem to be that in order for God to experience Himself as the all-consuming good, there had to be something called the all-consuming evil. This is a flawed argument for there is only one deity we recognize as God. God is all there was, all there is, and all there ever will be. The existence of evil cannot be used as a pathetic excuse for God to be able to justify His existence.
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 theological problem of evil is a problem that many philosophers have tried to solve. The problem is stated as, "if one believes that god is omnipotent and wholly good, why does evil still exist?" In this writing I will discuss the solutions/propositions of John L. Mackie in his work, "Evil and Omnipotence." I will do this in order to illustrate the concept of free will for understanding or resolving the problem, and to reveal how and why Mackie arrives at his conclusions.
Instead, the evil we know is merely the product of a limited, human perspective on “the true character of God’s creative bounty” (Cahn, 252). In this theory, there is only one element: God’s benevolence. The “evil” that humans perceive is not the opposite of God’s will, but simply the absence of his will. This theory is similar to the idea that “darkness is only the absence of light,” or “badness is only the absence of goodness.” If this reasoning is correct, then God could not have created evil because evil does not actually exist.
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.
Throughout the years as human beings keep learning about the world we are finding out that we are living in a world where evil surrounds us. This belief conflicts with the beliefs of theism, one who believes in a God or Gods, especially a personal God who’s in control of the world. If there was an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good God, then he should have the knowledge that there’s evil in the world, he should have the benevolence to want to stop the evil, and he should have the ability to make the evil vanish. We can know that the problem of evil exists in the world by having to experience it only a few times and the suffering caused by this evil is something no human would want happening to them. The
When philosophers of religion and theologians address the issue of evil, they mostly look into the relation between the existence of evil and God as a creator.
I want to start off by presenting the arguments of theodicy and what they have to say as to why evil exists. Theodicy is “the attempt to reconcile the existence of evil in the world with the idea that God exists and is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good” (Sober). Arguments regarding theodicy try to refute the second premise (2).