The Problem Of Evil Argument Analysis

The Problem of Evil argument focuses on the fact the existence of evil in the universe contradicts with God’s existence. I challenge the soundness of the argument, especially two particular premises which deal with omnipotence and omnibenevolence.
The argument is largely considered a valid or logical argument. To examine the validity of the argument, it is necessary, first, to define the term “God” in the argument. “God” is defined here as omnipotent and omnibenevolent. This is the definition of God that theists tend to use. The first premise of the Problem of Evil argument is that if God does exist, then God is omnipotent. This premise is just stating the theistic definition of God. The second premise of the argument is that if God is omnipotent, …show more content…
The third premise states if God exists, then God can do anything. This premise is from premises one and two. The fourth premise is that if God exists, then God is omnibenevolent. This premise is also just stating the theistic definition of God. The fifth premise states that if God is omnibenevolent, then God will eliminate as much evil as God can. It logically follows that if a being is all-good, or omnibenevolent, then that being will want to eliminate as much badness, or evil, possible. The sixth premise is that if God exists, then God will eliminate as much evil as God can. This premise is just a follow of premises four and five. The seventh premise states that if God exists, then evil does not exist. This premise is reliant on premises three and six. It logically follows that if God can do anything and tries to eliminate as much evil as possible, then God would eliminate all evil and evil does not exist. The eighth premise is that evil does exist. This is very hard to dispute because of the fact that examples of evil can be seen everywhere everyday and everyone is capable of evil. The ninth premise is that God does not exist. This premise follows from the previous …show more content…
I will now discuss the soundness. There are two premises which I would like dispute the soundness of. These premises are the second and fifth premises. To remind you, the second premise states that if God is omnipotent, then God can do anything. The key term in this premise is “anything.” What does “God can do anything” mean? Does it mean that God can break the most logical rules of the universe? Can God make two plus one equal four? Can God make a person be physically awake and asleep at the same time? According to logic, this is impossible. Therefore, due to the unbreakable rules of logic, it is impossible for God to be able to do anything. However, there can be the rebuttal that the definition of “anything” to humans and God is different. As humans, we cannot imagine things beyond our sense of logic. We cannot imagine two plus one equaling four. However, what if God can imagine and even accomplish things beyond the human 's sense of logic? Then God would be able to do anything. It would just be beyond our scope of comprehension. The fifth premise touches on God’s omnibenevolence. It states that if God is omnibenevolent, then God will eliminate as much evil as God can. On the surface, this premise seems to be sound. It is reasonable that if a being is all-powerful and all-good, then it has the power and willingness to eliminate as much evil as it could. However, if we look deeper into the