• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The problem of evil; is it evidence for God's nonexistence?

The problem of evil; is it evidence for God's nonexistence?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

firedragon

Veteran Member
The problem of evil is not a new topic. The topic of theodicy has been in existence probably since time immemorial, but the curious fact is that a lot of times it props up without an external objection. That is, from the theists who engage in theodicy. So the external objection I refer to is from atheists.

The reason for this topic is due to a few atheists assessing "the problem of evil" as the best argument atheists posit as evidence for God's nonexistence. Do they really? I know some atheists do make that argument but do they really make it to mean God does not exist? Does that even work?

The usual argument is that a good God (the usually repeated terms like all knowing, omnibenevolent, etc) has allowed evil in this universe thus it's a contradiction. This thread is not meant to discuss this contradiction, but to discuss the topic; "is it evidence for God's nonexistence?".

It is logically absurd to make that argument and it's illogical for a theist to think this is the atheists best argument against the existence of God. First steps first. The maximum it could prove is that God is not good, not so good, not as good as you thought, bad, or evil. It can never be an argument against the existence God, logically speaking.
  • If an atheist is making this argument with that intention, how would it prove God does not exist?
  • If a theist thinks this is the best argument atheists give against the existence of God, on what basis?
What say you?
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
The problem of evil is not a new topic. The topic of theodicy has been in existence probably since time immemorial, but the curious fact is that a lot of times it props up without an external objection. That is, from the theists who engage in theodicy. So the external objection I refer to is from atheists.

The reason for this topic is due to a few atheists assessing "the problem of evil" as the best argument atheists posit as evidence for God's nonexistence. Do they really? I know some atheists do make that argument but do they really make it to mean God does not exist? Does that even work?

The usual argument is that a good God (the usually repeated terms like all knowing, omnibenevolent, etc) has allowed evil in this universe thus it's a contradiction. This thread is not meant to discuss this contradiction, but to discuss the topic; "is it evidence for God's nonexistence?".

It is logically absurd to make that argument and it's illogical for a theist to think this is the atheists best argument against the existence of God. First steps first. The maximum it could prove is that God is not good, not so good, not as good as you thought, bad, or evil. It can never be an argument against the existence God, logically speaking.
  • If an atheist is making this argument with that intention, how would it prove God does not exist?
  • If a theist thinks this is the best argument atheists give against the existence of God, on what basis?
What say you?
The basic problem is defining "God" in the first place. If one defines God as (i) all-powerful and (ii) benevolent, then the existence of evil could be an argument against the existence of a such a God. But obviously it can't be an argument against the existence of a God that is not both of those things.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
The problem of evil is not a new topic. The topic of theodicy has been in existence probably since time immemorial, but the curious fact is that a lot of times it props up without an external objection. That is, from the theists who engage in theodicy. So the external objection I refer to is from atheists.

The reason for this topic is due to a few atheists assessing "the problem of evil" as the best argument atheists posit as evidence for God's nonexistence. Do they really? I know some atheists do make that argument but do they really make it to mean God does not exist? Does that even work?

The usual argument is that a good God (the usually repeated terms like all knowing, omnibenevolent, etc) has allowed evil in this universe thus it's a contradiction. This thread is not meant to discuss this contradiction, but to discuss the topic; "is it evidence for God's nonexistence?".

It is logically absurd to make that argument and it's illogical for a theist to think this is the atheists best argument against the existence of God. First steps first. The maximum it could prove is that God is not good, not so good, not as good as you thought, bad, or evil. It can never be an argument against the existence God, logically speaking.
  • If an atheist is making this argument with that intention, how would it prove God does not exist?
  • If a theist thinks this is the best argument atheists give against the existence of God, on what basis?
What say you?

It doesn't prove existence or non-existence either way. But I agree that it does demonstrate that any further projections or speculation beyond mere "existence" is probably ill-conceived or false.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
There are evil gods as much as good gods.

What makes a god non-existent is the complete inability to appear at all, much less the disposition attributed to it.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
The problem of evil is not a new topic. The topic of theodicy has been in existence probably since time immemorial, but the curious fact is that a lot of times it props up without an external objection. That is, from the theists who engage in theodicy. So the external objection I refer to is from atheists.

The reason for this topic is due to a few atheists assessing "the problem of evil" as the best argument atheists posit as evidence for God's nonexistence. Do they really? I know some atheists do make that argument but do they really make it to mean God does not exist? Does that even work?

The usual argument is that a good God (the usually repeated terms like all knowing, omnibenevolent, etc) has allowed evil in this universe thus it's a contradiction. This thread is not meant to discuss this contradiction, but to discuss the topic; "is it evidence for God's nonexistence?".

It is logically absurd to make that argument and it's illogical for a theist to think this is the atheists best argument against the existence of God. First steps first. The maximum it could prove is that God is not good, not so good, not as good as you thought, bad, or evil. It can never be an argument against the existence God, logically speaking.
  • If an atheist is making this argument with that intention, how would it prove God does not exist?
  • If a theist thinks this is the best argument atheists give against the existence of God, on what basis?
What say you?

It sounds like a pointed argument against the existence of the Biblical God.
And since the Biblical God is the only true God, then it is an argument against the existence of God.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
@exchemist is, of course, correct.

Theodicy can't say anything about god-conceptions in general because those have no common ground whatsoever.

It can however point out direct internal contradictions of certain god-conceptions and the failure to connect to reality of certain others.

It can also warn about the dangers of doctrines that take for granted that their god-conceptions should be valued and given attention to no matter the reality of facts.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
It doesn't prove existence or non-existence either way. But I agree that it does demonstrate that any further projections or speculation beyond mere "existence" is probably ill-conceived or false.

That's irrelevant. Maybe another thread.
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
There are evil gods as much as good gods.

What makes a god non-existent is the complete inability to appear at all, much less the disposition attributed to it.

Irrelevant to the topic. But thanks for giving another topic for the future. If I open a topic on that, I will quote you.
 
Last edited:

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
The fact that on Earth so many people do more good than evil, is sufficient to prove God's existence.
And God is not able to stop evil, as he is not able to stop good.
 

RestlessSoul

Well-Known Member
The problem of evil is generally put forward as a logical refutation not of the existence of God, but of a God who is both omnipotent and benign.

This is one of the philosophical issues John Milton attempted to address in the epic poem Paradise Lost, when be called upon his heavenly muse to help him "Justify the ways of God to men."

Russian author Mikhael Bulgakov also addressed this theme in his extraordinary novel The Master and Margarita.

I'm not sure Milton succeeded in his fantastic ambition, but he gave it a good go. Let Adam have his say, just as he and Eve are ejected from the garden.

"O goodness infinite, goodness immense!
That all this good of evil shall produce,
And evil turn to good; more wonderful
Than that which by creation first brought forth
Light out of darkness!"

In Bulgakov's world, seemingly nothing makes sense, but in the end everything does; darkness is necessary, without it there would be no light. And the righteous get their reward. "Everything will turn out right, Margarita. The world is built on that", says the dark angel to the heroine.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
The heading might give a hint.

If a theist only said "Maybe there is a god that created the universe" and just left it at that, then that would just be a guess (which is really what all religions boil down to anyway). Atheists aren't attempting to show evidence of God's non-existence. They're just responding to theists' claims about God's existence and using the theists' arguments to demonstrate that the theists are only guessing about things they can't possibly know anything about.

The problem of evil is often cited only because there are many theists going around claiming that God is infinitely good and benevolent. If theists instead claimed that God was evil and cruel, the argument would be completely different.

Therefore, by refuting that claim (which is really the easiest to dismiss based on world history), atheists are demonstrating that theists are merely guessing about God's existence and they have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.

Note that it doesn't prove anything about God's existence or non-existence, as that's outside of the parameters of the argument.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
The problem of evil is not a new topic. The topic of theodicy has been in existence probably since time immemorial, but the curious fact is that a lot of times it props up without an external objection. That is, from the theists who engage in theodicy. So the external objection I refer to is from atheists.

The reason for this topic is due to a few atheists assessing "the problem of evil" as the best argument atheists posit as evidence for God's nonexistence. Do they really? I know some atheists do make that argument but do they really make it to mean God does not exist? Does that even work?

The usual argument is that a good God (the usually repeated terms like all knowing, omnibenevolent, etc) has allowed evil in this universe thus it's a contradiction. This thread is not meant to discuss this contradiction, but to discuss the topic; "is it evidence for God's nonexistence?".

It is logically absurd to make that argument and it's illogical for a theist to think this is the atheists best argument against the existence of God. First steps first. The maximum it could prove is that God is not good, not so good, not as good as you thought, bad, or evil. It can never be an argument against the existence God, logically speaking.
  • If an atheist is making this argument with that intention, how would it prove God does not exist?
  • If a theist thinks this is the best argument atheists give against the existence of God, on what basis?
What say you?
The Problem of Evil is evidence for the non-existence of certain versions of God, including the versions of God that many (possibly most) theists believe in.

I don't consider it the best argument against God. For me, the best argument is just empirical induction: whenever we look for evidence for God where it ought to be if he were real, we never find it.

And the Problem of Evil doesn't refute absolutely all god-concepts; it only refuted the most popular monotheistic god-concepts. It's irrelevant to the average polytheistic Pagan, but it attacks some of the most core beliefs of mainstream Christianity and Islam.
 

paradox

(㇏(•̀ᵥᵥ•́)ノ)
The problem of evil is not a new topic. The topic of theodicy has been in existence probably since time immemorial, but the curious fact is that a lot of times it props up without an external objection. That is, from the theists who engage in theodicy. So the external objection I refer to is from atheists.

The reason for this topic is due to a few atheists assessing "the problem of evil" as the best argument atheists posit as evidence for God's nonexistence. Do they really? I know some atheists do make that argument but do they really make it to mean God does not exist? Does that even work?

The usual argument is that a good God (the usually repeated terms like all knowing, omnibenevolent, etc) has allowed evil in this universe thus it's a contradiction. This thread is not meant to discuss this contradiction, but to discuss the topic; "is it evidence for God's nonexistence?".

It is logically absurd to make that argument and it's illogical for a theist to think this is the atheists best argument against the existence of God. First steps first. The maximum it could prove is that God is not good, not so good, not as good as you thought, bad, or evil. It can never be an argument against the existence God, logically speaking.
  • If an atheist is making this argument with that intention, how would it prove God does not exist?
  • If a theist thinks this is the best argument atheists give against the existence of God, on what basis?
What say you?
Evil is evidence of existence of good, since if there is no good it's impossible to define evil.
But if we talk about evil as evil spirits and their manifestation then this proves existence of good spirits and indirectly God since God is a spirit.

I think problem of evil is not an argument useful to argue about existence or non-existence of God, a much better argument would be historical written documents which help in research on how religion developed.
ex. heresies, grimoires, mythologies, ancients writings and similar texts, tell a lot on the nature of religion and how it developed, and this IMO far better argument than problem of evil, what both approaches have in common is that both theists and atheists will blindly dismiss anything that goes against their position, but that's irrelevant to draw conclusion.
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
And the Problem of Evil doesn't refute absolutely all god-concepts; it only refuted the most popular monotheistic god-concepts. It's irrelevant to the average polytheistic Pagan, but it attacks some of the most core beliefs of mainstream Christianity and Islam.
Hindus are generally polytheists and pagans. I have not come across any evil God/Goddess in our mythology. Of course, there are easily angered deities, but they do not harm good people - Bhairava, Rudra, Kali, Alakshmi (the elder sister, therefore termed Jyeshtha, of Lord Vishnu's consort, Lakshmi). We have to be careful with them.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
Note that it doesn't prove anything about God's existence or non-existence, as that's outside of the parameters of the argument.
Is it really outside the parameters of the argument, though?

I mean, historically, it’s been most often used by theists trying to resolve discrepancies between their beliefs and reality, but it can also be reframed as a proof by contradiction:

- define God as having the properties of omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence.
- assume this God exists.
- this God's existence implies there would be no evil in the world.
- but we see that there is evil in the world.
- therefore this God does not exist.

This argument is sound for any God that has the attributes assumed in the argument. The fact that some people believe in gods that don't have those attributes doesn't make the argument wrong; it just means that there are limits to its scope.
 
Top