INTRODUCT ION
The question of the existence of a good God and evil is by far the most important problem for philosophical, religious, and moral consideration. These two contradicting arguments have been postulated by many philosophers like Richard Dawkins, William Rowe…etc. Though the intrinsic presence of suffering is the most obvious feature that determines the character of the existence or non-existence of God, it is an empirical fact, and the truth or falsity of these facts can only be established by observations and experiments relating to the real world. It would seem that the best arguments against the nonexistence of God is based on the logical argument of evil in the world and the attributes of an all- powerful, all knowing and all good God. Most often this notion …show more content…
2 | Page
Appraisals of premises for the non- existence of God have for a long time been argued that “there is no God “ , a view that is adopted by atheist. I think these views fall prey to fallacies in arguments. For instance there is a poor logic in Dawkin’s argument in the God delusion, it is logically invalid.
Most of these arguments are based on a false premises, for instance, the argument from the “human male nipples” against God as well as the argument from nature’s imperfections. These premises argue that a perfect creator cannot create imperfect things; this is obviously false if we consider that such a supreme being has a free will and have sufficient reasons for creating imperfect things and allows man the luxury of free will to choose between doing evil and doing good.The natural disasters in my opinion are part of God’s creation whose intensity have been magnified my mans activities that depletes nature.
The premises for arguments against the existence of an all- powerful, all knowing and all good God is un-defensible. We simply as humans don’t have the knowledge of such a being
The question of the existence of a good God and evil is by far the most important problem for philosophical, religious, and moral consideration. These two contradicting arguments have been postulated by many philosophers like Richard Dawkins, William Rowe…etc. Though the intrinsic presence of suffering is the most obvious feature that determines the character of the existence or non-existence of God, it is an empirical fact, and the truth or falsity of these facts can only be established by observations and experiments relating to the real world. It would seem that the best arguments against the nonexistence of God is based on the logical argument of evil in the world and the attributes of an all- powerful, all knowing and all good God. Most often this notion …show more content…
2 | Page
Appraisals of premises for the non- existence of God have for a long time been argued that “there is no God “ , a view that is adopted by atheist. I think these views fall prey to fallacies in arguments. For instance there is a poor logic in Dawkin’s argument in the God delusion, it is logically invalid.
Most of these arguments are based on a false premises, for instance, the argument from the “human male nipples” against God as well as the argument from nature’s imperfections. These premises argue that a perfect creator cannot create imperfect things; this is obviously false if we consider that such a supreme being has a free will and have sufficient reasons for creating imperfect things and allows man the luxury of free will to choose between doing evil and doing good.The natural disasters in my opinion are part of God’s creation whose intensity have been magnified my mans activities that depletes nature.
The premises for arguments against the existence of an all- powerful, all knowing and all good God is un-defensible. We simply as humans don’t have the knowledge of such a being