Problem Of Evil Argument Essay

807 Words2 Pages

In this paper, I will argue that it is not necessary that one can accept the Problem of Evil (PoE) as a proof against the existence of a theistic God. In order to support this claim, I will present the PoE. Then, I will identify and explain the most common ways in which the premises are used to support the argument. Finally, I will critique the argument by challenging premises 2 and 5.
The Problem of Evil is as follows:
1. If God exists, then God is omnipotent
2. If God is omnipotent, then God can do anything
3. If God exists, then God can do anything (from 1 and 2)
4. If God exists, then God is omnibenevolent
5. If God is omnibenevolent, then God will eliminate as much evil as God can
6. If God exists, then God will eliminate as much evil as God can (from 4 and 5)
7. If God exists, then evil does not exist (from 3 …show more content…

We have to first ask ourselves if this is true. The premise itself makes you think about the consequences of free will. In general, free will appears to be a great good. Without it, one cannot genuinely love or care for something. But then again also having free will, allows for the possibilities for us to do evil things. Looking at free will alone would count against both parts of this premise. These evils that exist include moral and natural evils that one may not be able to control. Immoral action and natural phenomena have these results. Even these natural evils, are a result from humans. For example, we have global warming. It overall is taking natural effect but it had started because of humans. Another way of looking at this premise would be to argue that God could very well exist with evil and he could use it to achieve a greater good. That is very much a possibility. Who is to say that evil only brings out the bad in things? God could have a reasoning for evil. Bringing the good out of it is his way of showing infinite love. So because of his ways, he is then looked at as the good that is brought out of

Open Document