Evil and an STN God :: Philosophy of Religion Essays

Evil and an STN theologyThe bother of sliminess makes theists take a reason for an STN immortal to allow nuisance-minded and suffering in the world. The basic setup for the bother of evil is that either a divinity fudge who is all knowing, all powerful, wholly effective, eternal, and creator of this universe but decompose from it (STN) or evil pull throughs. Atheists believe that since evil endures then there is no STN God. Theists branch into devil categories, either believing in God, but non an STN God or believing that God has a reason for allowing evil into the world. The latter type is a narrow theist and they use a theodicy to solve the problem of evil, the best of which is the ontological defense. However, the ontological defense does not solve the problem of evil. The problem of evil stems from the contradicting beliefs that either an STN God exists or evil exists (93).1 The problem of evil can be expanded into two instructions against the existence of an STN God the logical and the evidential arguments (93).1 The argument from the logical problem of evil is simple. The basic form of this argument is that if an STN God exists, then evil cannot exist (93).1 Since there is evidence that evil does exist an STN God cannot exist (93).1 The evidential problem of evil is based more on how whatever greater good can come from the evil (99).1 In the argument from the evidential problem of evil, there are times when an STN God could suck prevented intense suffering without interfering with a greater good (99).1 An STN God would prevent any suffering that would not interfere with a greater good and since suffering has occurred that does not interfere with a greater good an STN God cannot exist (99).1 The problem of evil is solely a problem for theists. In order for a theist to keep their beliefs in an STN God they must find a way to solve the problem of evil by using a theodicy (103).1 Or they can change their beliefs so that they no longer believ e in an STN God, but just a God (108).1 The ontological defense appears to be the most successful theodicy at solving the problem of evil. This defense essentially says that it is impossible for good to exist in the world without evil. The ontological defense is the strongest defense because it merely puts forwards the concept of opposites and does not try to explain any other abstract thought for why evil exists or why God puts evil in the world.