Leave a Reply

Prove that you're human * Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.


  1. I think that an intellectual theist might point out that the fault in this logic has to do with the question of will. Let’s say that God is both able and willing to prevent evil; this leaves us with the question “Whence cometh evil?”. Now let’s introduce the idea that God has another volition, the volition to allow humans to do as they wish (free will).

    So now God has these two convictions:
    1] People should be given free reign, for I love them.
    2] Evil should be purged, for I am omnibenevolent.

    Now let’s introduce another proposition:
    1] People are given free will.
    2] Evil is purged where possible.
    3] People create evil.

    So God’s convictions become contradictory and now a decision must be made on which is the most benevolent course of action, that is: to allow people free will and let evil exist, or to deny free will and purge evil. The intellectual theist would argue that the former is the most benevolent. As you can see, God’s convictions force him to partially abandon one of the wills. That is, the willingness to purge evil. But this certainly doesn’t make God malevolent since God chose the most benevolent choice, though it may not be “omnibenevolent” (apparently, a logically impossible state for an omnipotent being).

  2. Nadine

    Good point Anthony, but consider other forms of ‘evil’ that man is not responsible for, such as infant mortality, mental illness, etc.?

  3. kris

    most cases of infant mortality stem from a lack of health care/poverty. Mental illness is not necessarily an evil, but an aspect of the human condition that can be treated in a compassionate manner.

Next ArticleReligious Believers