CreateDebate


Debate Info

44
38
Yes. No.
Debate Score:82
Arguments:47
Total Votes:106
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes. (22)
 
 No. (25)

Debate Creator

Assface(406) pic



Is the Problem of Evil a coherent argument against the existence of God(s)?

In the philosophy of religion, the problem of evil is the question of how to explain evil if there exists a deity that is omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient (see theism).[1][2] Some philosophers have claimed that the existence of such a God and of evil are logically incompatible or unlikely. Attempts to resolve the question under these contexts have historically been one of the prime concerns of theodicy.

Some responses include the arguments that true free will cannot exist without the possibility of evil, that humans cannot understand God, that suffering is necessary for spiritual growth or evil is the consequence of a fallen world.

There are also many discussions of "evil" and associated "problems" in other philosophical fields, such as secular ethics,[3][4][5] and scientific disciplines such as evolutionary ethics.[6][7] But as usually understood, the "problem of evil" is posed in a theological context.[1][2]

Yes.

Side Score: 44
VS.

No.

Side Score: 38
6 points

This is known as the riddle of Epicurus and it addresses the problem of evil (natural disasters) for the existence of god. God has the character trait of being loving and caring for his creation, by refuting this trait of his character we refute his credibility of existence.

Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?

Then he is not omnipotent.

Is he able, but not willing?

Then he is malevolent.

Is he both able and willing?

Then whence cometh evil?

Is he neither able nor willing?

Then why call him God?

Side: Yes.
Assface(406) Disputed
2 points

I'm familiar with it, as I would imagine anyone who'd discuss this topic is.

Is he able, but not willing?

Then he is malevolent.

So?

Side: No.
Nautilus(628) Disputed
5 points

So malevolence discredits the claim that god is loving and kind. Most Christians would hold to the idea that god is loving and kind, and if your god allows evil to happen and does nothing to stop it he is as bad as the evil he is supposed to oppose. Therefore a kind and loving god would not exist based on this malevolence. It's like if I claimed that I had psychic powers and could predict the lottery, yet i never won the lottery when I tried. The results contradict my claim, so you can conclude my claim was false.

Side: Yes.
Flute222(11) Disputed
1 point

Ok so here are the thoughts that ran through my head as I read this.

1)Why would God prevent evil if evil is how we learn?

2)God is not willing but not malevolent because evil is a nessisary part of life.

3)He isn't willing,see statement #2.

4)He is able but not willing,once again, see statement #2.

We have to remember we cannot put God in a box, he does not think like we do, his thoughts are not our thoughts. We do not have all the information of the world and the hearts of every man on earth like he does. We do not comprehend everthing he understands, that is why he is God.Evil is part of our lives,without it we would not know good. Without evil we couldn't know what good is because it would not be there. It is similar to the phrase, without trial,heartache and unhappiness there would not be happiness. We would never learn and grow if everything in this world was good. Think about the Revelutionary War, without that the United States of America would never have been created. Our forefathers would never have steeped themselves so fully in the study of what freedom is and we would be under the rule of Great Britan. Without evil or bad there is no good. God would never take that knowledge that he gave to Adam and Eve away from us.

Side: No.
Nautilus(628) Disputed
1 point

Okay so you are saying evil is necessary for us to learn and grow, and that is all fine and good in moderation, I will give you that, evil is necessary for us to distinguish good. But what do you have to say to little Timmy who got cancer and will die at 5 years of age, or 4 year old Juan who was killed in an earthquake. What did they learn from their experience, how did they grow? No other person did this to them, it just happened, and why them? you could say bad luck or coincidence but you religious folk aren't too fond of coincidences now are you. So why would an all powerful and loving god allow this 5 year old, innocent child to die? And these circumstances are by no means isolated incidents, this type of tragic death happens on a daily basis around the world. Now it seems like you are just making excuses for this god of yours. It sounds like a battered wife trying to defend her abusive husband. "Oh he didn't mean to hit me offica, it was ma fault, I just din't have dinner on the table at 6:30 like he likes it, he's warned me several times offica." Either own up and admit your husband is a dick or the much more realistic situation, your husband doesn't exist and terrible things happen in the world because "evil" as we perceive it to be, is natural in the world.

And please stop with the "oh well god is out of our understanding and knows and created everything so his reasoning is exempt from our scorn" crap. If i made the claim to you that I was my own father, and you pointed out that it was biologically and physically impossible for that to happen, I could just say that "us self fathering people are outside of physics and genetics as YOU understand it, but we live by a different set of rules." I would mocked into obscurity and i would deserve it, you cannot exclude god from these arguments simply by retreating to the substance less backup of a lack of "well he is god so he MUST have logic we cannot comprehend."

Side: Yes.
2 points

It is an argument against the existence of any major world religion's God. But not against the Good spirit in people and life that is manifest only when allowed to be. If not allowed, then evil comes forth.

Side: Yes.
1 point

Verily, the problem of whether a Creator (which may be inherently worthy of being called 'God') exists has become too tied up in specific theological formulations importing characteristics unnecessary to explain anything about such a Creator. But if 'God' is defined by characteristics including 'goodness' and 'active intervention' then this disqualifies the concept of 'God.'

Side: Yes.
1 point

It works against personal God outlook (to a degree) but not towards God as a concept.

Side: Yes.
4 points

In a purely logical debate, it's rubbish to try to say "why would God allow evil to happen?"

First of all, ya morons, if we were debating on God's existence, we would have to accept that if he did exist, we would NOT understand his true intentions. We're human beings that are limited by the physical realm. God is supposed to be supernatural and powerful and shit. So saying "if God does exist, he's an asshole for letting evil happen" is admitting that you're an ignorant fool who isn't serious about reasoning.

The same goes for "what created God" arguments.

I hate stupid debate tactics by the people who are supposed to be the smarter ones.

Side: No.
Peekaboo(704) Disputed
3 points

You can certainly take the stance that the limited human mind cannot possibly comprehend the mind of an unlimited being. It's a very rational stance. But this if we're to have any serious discussions about God at all, we'll need to hide this idea in one corner of our minds, and just reason about God as best we can.

I'll make an example. Take the theory of skepticism, which states that we know nothing about this world for certain. You might think you know what you look like, where you live, etc, but there's a possibility that you could be deluded. This is a pretty rational stance to take.

But does this mean that it's pointless for us to attempt to gain knowledge? Should we just close down all our schools and universities, because everything that is being taught and discovered may well be false? Should we stop making any kind of decisions, because decisions are based upon beliefs, and any or all of these beliefs we hold may be false?

No. While we should keep a healthy dose of skepticism in our minds, in everyday life we need to act as if we can know what is real and what is not, or else society simply won't be able to function.

The same applies to religious considerations, where the "we can't know anything about God" is something like a localised version of the skepticism argument. Sure, it's good to have that thought somewhere in your mind; it keeps you humble and open-minded. But for practical purposes, when you're debating whether or not God exists, or just discussing or expounding the tenets of any religion that includes belief in an unlimited God, you need to act as if you can attempt to find out at least some things about God.

Otherwise, the philosophers and scientists will have nothing to say about God except "we don't know", the Pope, priests, and pastors will have nothing to say except "we don't know", and the Bible will be replaced by a single line saying: "Your puny mind can't truly know anything about God or what he wants you to do, so there's no point trying to find out. Just sit back and hope that you go to heaven. Good luck."

Side: Yes.
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
3 points

To me, it would be a good thing if religions admitted that they have no idea on what God is thinking.

That is not the case, however. In pure logic, the assumption that God exists would be followed by the fact that "if God exists, we have no idea on what he's thinking".

The religious make their own rules, and if we're debating religion itself it would apply more to the tactics of God.

But to say "God doesn't exist because evil things happen" or "Even if God does exist, he doesn't care about us because evil things happen" is like saying "I know what God's intentions would be if he existed".

It's intellectually dishonest.

There are more logical reasons for not believing in God. Because bad things happen to good people is not one of them.

Side: No.
aveskde(1935) Disputed
2 points

First of all, ya morons, if we were debating on God's existence, we would have to accept that if he did exist, we would NOT understand his true intentions. We're human beings that are limited by the physical realm. God is supposed to be supernatural and powerful and shit. So saying "if God does exist, he's an asshole for letting evil happen" is admitting that you're an ignorant fool who isn't serious about reasoning.

You missed the underlying point. If a god is omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient, then evil cannot exist. It's a matter of logic. The converse is true: if evil exist, said god could not exist.

Side: Yes.
ThePyg(6737) Disputed
2 points

The question is "Is the problem of Evil a coherent argument against the existence of God(s)".

This does not say anything about a merciful or caring God. Merely the existence of a deity.

Side: No.
rob0915(59) Disputed
0 points

God is omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient. God created the world, therefore the world is perfect.

- This is a logical fallacy. Just because evil exists does not mean God is not omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient.

Side: No.
rob0915(59) Disputed
0 points

You seem to have omitted a number of concepts in your argument:

1. If a god is omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient, then evil cannot exist.

On the contrary, evil can exist. I fail to recall at any place in the bible where it says God is the Universe's police officer. He is the judge, when the evil doers have passed on, God will judge those individuals and punish them. He will not stop them, nor does it say anywhere in the bible that he will.

2. If evil exists, said god could not exist.

If evil exists, it is the product of the free will endowed on humanity, not by "choice" of God. God gave humanity free will and the ability to choose; if humans decide to choose evil, (hypothetically) God will not stop them, he will simply punish them once they have passed on.

Side: No.
1 point

Omnibenevolence is not a necessary quality of an omniscient, omnipotent entity. Y'all niggas is crazy.

Side: No.
Peekaboo(704) Disputed
2 points

Indeed it is not, and a God who isn't omnibenevolent would not fall prey to the argument from evil.

But the argument from evil doesn't attempt to show that God must be omnibenevolent. Rather, omnibenevolence is one of the assumptions that is made of God, along with the other omnis. And this is a pretty reasonable assumption to make, since adherents of the big three monotheistic religions generally do consider their God to be omnibenevolent.

Side: Yes.

Most religions, mine included, subscribe to the belief that God gave mankind free will. WE choose evil. God does not condone it, but he does forgive it.

Side: No.
Nautilus(628) Disputed
2 points

Then god still created humans capable of free will and choosing evil. If our biology is at fault for our flaws, and god is at fault for our biology, then god would be responsible for our actions since he gave us the ability to choose evil.

Side: Yes.
Flute222(11) Disputed
0 points

That does not even make sense...We are not perfect beings,we will not be perfect until we are take into God's arms once more. God made us imprefect because he sent us here to learn. If we were perfect then there would be no need for learning or to be here.

Side: No.
1 point

I agree whole heartedly with this comment. God gave us the amazing gift of acency, to do with our lives as we wish to. That does not mean he is ok with the bad choices we make, but he does understand that we are human and make mistakes, through his son we can be forgiven again.

Side: No.
1 point

it is because we have many gods that we bow to that have one origin,and that is Satan. Those gods give us fear,and that fear causes us to amass armies to try, and pummel whoever we think is a threat or any reason we can think of. That fear incarcerates humans putting them in bondage. That fear persecutes humans who are different too. Those are gods giving fear so we think we have to verbally, and physically strike out at the sexualities.That striking out makes humans think a human sacrifice is necessary,but the God of all that Man did not make gives good gifts,and love,and this planet,and eternity is against that sort of thing. That is not Christian at all. This means evil is confusing us with many gods,and the USA flag a false god - idol too. Two flags have no blood on them. They are the gay,and zoosexual flags. No flag should be bowed down to or sung to.We should give all Glory to the one who made the food for us on our table,and the beauty before your eyes,and the love that is bestowed on you in loving humans,and the gift of Jesus to save you loving all to explore the universe like humans have alway dreamt of being able to do,and literally having star trek come alive. imagine that. That loving God of love that we cannot comprehend is who we should worship,and shine it to whoever no matter what,and save the soul whenever the body that dies. Christs return will be far greater than anything you can even imagine, How could anyone throw that away?

Side: No.