Descartes

The problem of evil challenges the popular idea that God is all- powerful and all- good and yet still logically co-exists with evil. An all-good God would not create a world with evil because it would contradict his or her position of goodness to create a world where evil exists. In addition, if he or she had desired to create a world all good and failed the idea of his or her omnipotence or supreme power would be destroyed. The problem then is how can the world be controlled by an all-good, supreme God if it seems evil is either out of his or her control or created by him or her. Critics most commonly offer the free-

. . .
If one agrees with the paradox then one is agreeing that he or she cannot create rules or objects outside of his or her control, and therefore there must be limits upon their omnipotence. Mackie concludes that if God was all good then he or she would not allow evil to occur unless freedom is a third order good, or one more important than any other goods. Yet if character does not determine one’s actions then our actions are determined by a matter of randomness or chance and do not follow the definition of free will. This argument eludes Mackie’s third criticism of the third solution, as God does not have control over the existence of second order evil.

Theologians offer criticisms to the Paradox of Omnipotence and the other criticisms of Mackie that God is not a continuing being and is outside of time. The fourth and most substantial solution states that evil is due to human free will. The third solution that Mackie presents problems to is the argument that the universe is better with some evil in it than it would be if there was no evil. Mackie offers other objections then the two stated previously (natural evil and the responsibility of evil) when he challenges the relationship between the benevolence and omnipotence of God. According to the solution God is interested in promoting second order good, and therefore second order evil must be decreasing. If God was allowing evil only to maintain free will, he or she would not allow evil that does not pertain to free will to exist, as it serves no purpose. Mackie argues that either a positive or negative response to the paradox yields the same conclusion that God is not omnipotent. To explain the problem he had with the solution Mackie separated evil and good into two main categories: first order evil and good, and second order evil and good. His most influential arguments, which he discusses when referring to the argument of free will, involve the Paradox of Omnipotence and the relationship between the omnipotence and benevolence of God. If he or she is only interested in increasing the good, then he or she could not be classified as benevolent or sympathetic, as he or she is not trying to eliminate the pain of evil.

Common topics in this essay:
Paradox Omnipotence, Evil Omnipotence, God God, Mackie God, , Furthermore God, JL Mackie, god create, free argument, God Theologians, god evil, paradox omnipotence, evil occur, evil applies, all-good god, evil evil, omnipotent all-good, evil omnipotence, omnipotent all-good god, omnipotence unlimited power, all-good omnipotent god, create world evil, wrong free act,

Approximate Word count = 2024
Approximate Pages = 8 (250 words per page double spaced)

Already a member? Click here