One of the most classic arguments against the existence of God is the so-called problem of evil. The rationale put forth by the Greek philosopher, Epicurus, follows:
“Is [God] willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”
To sum up his thought would be as follows:
-
If God is good, He would not allow evil.
-
If God is all-powerful, He would prevent evil.
-
But evil exists.
-
Therefore, God does not exist because He is not good and all-powerful.
Proponents of this argument fail to realize that the entire argument presupposes the existence of God. Let me explain: the so-called problem of evil presupposes an objectively good standard by which evil violates. So while the atheist kicks God out the front door of the house, he immediately runs back to the kitchen and lets God back in through the back door of the house. The atheist borrows from the Christian worldview and makes their argument utterly inconsistent. The so-called problem of evil that tries to debunk the existence of God can be refuted in this way:
-
If evil exists, absolute, objectively good standards must exist in order for evil to violate them and be called “evil.”
-
Only God can create objectively good standards that transcend personal opinion and subjectivism.
-
If God does not exist, objectively good standards cannot exist.
-
Objectively good standards do exist.
-
Therefore, God exists.
Dostoevsky concluded, “If God doesn’t exist, everything is permissible.”
In the next post, I am going to focus on morality, relativism, and the so-called problem of evil asked in the question, “Why do bad things happen to good people?”
