Problem of Evil

So as basic as it gets…here is the the problem of evils (as I understand it)…

  1. If god exists then he is all powerful, all knowing, all good (PKG) being
  2. If evil exists, then there is no PKG being
  3. Evil exists
  4. .:God does not exist

Can anyone explain this to me with the following objection to #2
Evil exists because God chooses to give us free will. Meaning, God could stop evil, He knows that it exists, and He is all good…but because of his goodness he allows us to have free-will to choose weather we want to do evil or not.

Premise 1 is flawed.
If God exists, then God exists and that is all that can be determined from that existence.
Power, Knowledge, and Goodness is not inherent in the state of existence, and is therefore not capable of being attached to “If God exists, then God is (insert anything other than exists)”

God would need to be defined with a wider “IF” statement than “exists” to possibly carry the extra properties of Power, Knowledge, and Goodness.

Premise 2 is flawed.
Evil needs to be shown to actually be the false claim of the existence of God.
It is not inherent that if evil exists that God is not existent.

Premise 3 is flawed.
Evil has not been shown to exist.

Evil is a large term, and in common terms of use against the concept of God, one would be referring to things that are relativist moral concepts such as mass murder.
However, being that God is a divine concept, then evil that is compared against cannot be a human attribute, but also a divine attribute such as the concept of a counter God and counter God power (i.e. Satan, Devil, etc…).

You cannot compare man’s atrocities against the existence of a divine deity as evidence that a divine deity does not exist.

What essentially just happened in this argument was Superman was compared against crime instead of Lex Luther, and someone said that because Crime exists then Superman must not exist.

And indeed, one would still need a better argument for the proper form, which would be that which compared Superman against Lex Luther as a reason why Superman did not exist.

To undermine permise 2, one can propose that evil is a nessisity that an all-good, all-knowing, all-powerful being had to let into the world to accomplish what the divine will seeks to accomplish. An ugly painting in the museum is not a judgement call upon the fault of the artist: some paintings are meant to be ugly. Likewise, an ugly world (and evil is ugly) is not the fault of the one who created it, if one supposes that this is the only way a beautiful, good-willed world could be brought about. A good being could create an evil world for a good end.

Islamic theologians believe God is not subject to ethics and logic. Likewise, Kierkegaard thought that religious faith must supercede the moral, for based on the moral, God is evil. He was wrong based on the above argument.

  1. If God exists then he is an all powerful, all knowing, all good being.

  2. An all knowing all good being would not create evil if he did not have to.

  3. If evil exists, then evil must exist because God with attributes of P1 had no choice but to create an evil world.

  4. Evil exists

  5. .:God’s existence or non-existence cannot be deduced from the above premises.

  6. If G then P and K and V.

  7. If G then E.

  8. If E then M.

  9. E.

  10. .: If E then ~G(???)

Based on (P2.) If G then E. Conclusion is invalid.

(5.) .: If E then G. Valid, but not sound because the presence of evil does not mean god created it.

Now, without P2 and P3, observe.

  1. If G then P and K and V.
  2. E.
  3. .: If E then ~G(???)

So to the OP argument: (V = good E = Evil)

1.If G then P and K and V.
2. If V then ~E. (Arguable)
3. E.
4. .: E means, Either G then P and K and V does not exist, or G then P and K and ~V.

(4.) .: God does not exist or God is all-knowing all-powerful and some/or/all-Evil.

But as I’ve shown, P2 is arguable. An untrue premise.