Philosophical Arguments Against Theism: The Problem of Evil and the Incoherence of God’s Attributes – Lecture
(Slide 1: Title Slide with a slightly bewildered-looking angel scratching its head)
Title: Philosophical Arguments Against Theism: The Problem of Evil and the Incoherence of God’s Attributes
Image: A cartoon angel looking confused.
Introduction:
Alright, settle down, settle down! Welcome, seekers of truth, doubters of dogma, and anyone who accidentally wandered in looking for the free coffee! Today, we’re diving headfirst into some of the stickiest, thorniest, and downright frustrating problems facing theistic belief. We’re going to wrestle with the Problem of Evil and poke some serious holes in the Incoherence of God’s Attributes.
(Slide 2: A cartoon devil grinning mischievously)
Prepare to question everything! We’re not here to tell you what to believe (or not believe). We’re here to equip you with the philosophical tools to think critically and explore these complex issues for yourself. Think of me as your friendly neighborhood intellectual demolition expert, ready to dismantle some deeply ingrained assumptions. 😈 (Don’t worry, the coffee’s still free…probably.)
(Slide 3: Outline of the Lecture)
Outline:
I. Theism 101: A Quick Recap (Just in case you forgot what we’re arguing against)
II. The Problem of Evil: Why Bad Things Happen to Good People (and Squirrels)
- A. Defining Evil: Moral and Natural
- B. Logical Problem of Evil: An Impossible Triangle?
- C. Evidential Problem of Evil: A Universe of Suffering?
- D. Theodicies: Attempts to Justify God in the Face of Evil (Spoiler: They often fail spectacularly)
III. Incoherence of God’s Attributes: Can God Be All Things to All People? (Spoiler: Maybe not.) - A. Omnipotence: Can God Create a Rock He Can’t Lift? (The age-old paradox!)
- B. Omniscience: Does God Know the Future? (And if so, do we have free will?)
- C. Omnibenevolence: Is God Really That Nice? (Given all the suffering, that is…)
- D. Simplicity vs. Complexity: Can an Infinitely Simple Being Have Infinitely Complex Attributes?
IV. Conclusion: What Does It All Mean? (Probably not what you think!)
(Slide 4: Theism 101: A Quick Recap)
I. Theism 101: A Quick Recap
Before we start dismantling things, let’s make sure we’re all on the same page. Theism, in its simplest form, is the belief in the existence of one or more gods. For our purposes today, we’re primarily focusing on monotheism, specifically the kind of God you find in the Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Judaism, Islam). This God is typically defined by a few key attributes:
- Omnipotence: All-powerful 💪
- Omniscience: All-knowing 🧠
- Omnibenevolence: All-good 😇
- Omnipresence: Everywhere at once (like a particularly annoying mosquito in summer) 🦟
These attributes are crucial because they form the basis for many theistic arguments and are the very things we’re going to challenge.
(Slide 5: The Problem of Evil: Why Bad Things Happen to Good People (and Squirrels))
II. The Problem of Evil: Why Bad Things Happen to Good People (and Squirrels)
Now, let’s get to the juicy stuff. The Problem of Evil is arguably the most compelling and emotionally resonant argument against the existence of a traditional theistic God. It boils down to this: If God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good, why does evil exist?
(Slide 6: Defining Evil: Moral and Natural)
A. Defining Evil: Moral and Natural
First, we need to clarify what we mean by "evil." Philosophers typically distinguish between two types:
- Moral Evil: Suffering caused by the intentional actions (or inactions) of moral agents (humans, demons, etc.). Think murder, theft, lying, oppression, and generally being a jerk.
- Natural Evil: Suffering caused by natural events, independent of human agency. Think earthquakes, floods, diseases, famines, and those surprise taxes you didn’t budget for.
(Table: Moral vs. Natural Evil)
| Type of Evil | Cause | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Moral | Actions of moral agents | War, theft, slander |
| Natural | Natural events | Earthquakes, hurricanes, cancer |
(Slide 7: Logical Problem of Evil: An Impossible Triangle?)
B. Logical Problem of Evil: An Impossible Triangle?
The logical problem of evil argues that the existence of evil is logically incompatible with the existence of a God possessing the traditional attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence.
The argument goes something like this:
- If God is all-powerful, He can prevent all evil.
- If God is all-knowing, He knows about all evil.
- If God is all-good, He would want to prevent all evil.
- Evil exists.
- Therefore, an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good God does not exist.
Think of it as an impossible triangle. You can’t have all three corners (omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence) and the existence of evil all at the same time. One has to give.
(Image: A Venn diagram with three overlapping circles labeled "Omnipotence," "Omniscience," and "Omnibenevolence." In the center, where all three overlap, is a big red "X".)
(Slide 8: Evidential Problem of Evil: A Universe of Suffering?)
C. Evidential Problem of Evil: A Universe of Suffering?
The evidential problem of evil takes a slightly different approach. It doesn’t claim that evil proves God doesn’t exist, but rather that the sheer amount and gratuitous nature of evil in the world provide strong evidence against God’s existence.
Think about it: Do we really need toddlers getting cancer? Do we need entire ecosystems wiped out by natural disasters? Do we need the Holocaust? Seems a bit excessive, doesn’t it?
The argument suggests that if God did exist, and was truly all-good and all-powerful, He would have created a world with less suffering. The fact that the world is filled with so much seemingly pointless suffering makes the existence of such a God less probable.
(Image: A world map with pins stuck in it, representing various disasters and atrocities.)
(Slide 9: Theodicies: Attempts to Justify God in the Face of Evil)
D. Theodicies: Attempts to Justify God in the Face of Evil (Spoiler: They often fail spectacularly)
Theodicies are attempts to justify God’s existence in the face of evil. They try to explain why God allows evil to exist, even though He has the power to prevent it. Let’s look at some common theodicies and see how they hold up:
(Table: Common Theodicies and Their Problems)
| Theodicy | Explanation | Problem(s) |
|---|---|---|
| Free Will Defense | God gave us free will, and evil is the result of our choices. | 1. Doesn’t explain natural evil. 2. God could have given us free will but made us less inclined to choose evil. 3. Why allow atrocities like the Holocaust? |
| Soul-Making Theodicy | Suffering allows us to develop virtues like compassion, courage, and resilience. | 1. Requires an immense amount of suffering. 2. Doesn’t explain why some people suffer far more than others. 3. Some suffering simply breaks people, rather than building them up. |
| Greater Good Theodicy | Evil is necessary for a greater good that we can’t understand. | 1. Seems to justify any amount of suffering, no matter how horrific. 2. Unfalsifiable: How do we know what the "greater good" is? 3. Is torturing babies really necessary for some cosmic good? |
| Punishment for Sin Theodicy | Evil is a punishment for our sins. | 1. Doesn’t explain the suffering of innocent children or animals. 2. Seems unjust to punish people for the sins of their ancestors. 3. Suggests God is a vengeful tyrant. |
| Ignorance Theodicy | We simply can’t understand God’s reasons for allowing evil. | 1. A cop-out. 2. Makes God arbitrary and unknowable. 3. Undermines the idea of a loving and just God. |
As you can see, each of these theodicies has significant problems. They often rely on questionable assumptions, fail to explain all types of evil, or simply seem morally repugnant.
(Slide 10: Incoherence of God’s Attributes: Can God Be All Things to All People?)
III. Incoherence of God’s Attributes: Can God Be All Things to All People? (Spoiler: Maybe not.)
Now, let’s turn our attention to another set of problems: the potential incoherence of God’s attributes. Can God really be all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good, and all of the other things theologians claim He is? Let’s investigate.
(Slide 11: Omnipotence: Can God Create a Rock He Can’t Lift?)
A. Omnipotence: Can God Create a Rock He Can’t Lift? (The age-old paradox!)
Omnipotence, or all-powerfulness, seems straightforward enough. But when you start thinking about it, things get weird. The classic paradox is: Can God create a rock so heavy that He cannot lift it?
- If He can create such a rock, then He is not omnipotent, because there is something He cannot do (lift the rock).
- If He cannot create such a rock, then He is not omnipotent, because there is something He cannot do (create the rock).
This paradox highlights a fundamental problem with the concept of omnipotence: It seems to lead to logical contradictions.
Some theologians try to get around this by saying that God can do anything that is logically possible. So, God can’t make a square circle or make 2+2=5. But this raises the question: Is God’s power limited by logic? If so, is He really all-powerful?
(Image: A cartoon God struggling to lift a gigantic rock with a sweatdrop on his forehead.)
(Slide 12: Omniscience: Does God Know the Future? (And if so, do we have free will?)
B. Omniscience: Does God Know the Future? (And if so, do we have free will?)
Omniscience, or all-knowingness, also presents some problems. If God knows everything, including the future, then does free will even exist?
If God knows that you will choose to eat pizza for dinner tomorrow, then it seems like you have no real choice in the matter. You have to eat pizza, because God already knows that you will. But if you have to eat pizza, then you’re not really freely choosing to eat pizza. Your actions are predetermined.
This leads to the problem of determinism: If God knows everything, then everything is predetermined, and we have no free will. But without free will, we can’t be held morally responsible for our actions. And if we can’t be held morally responsible, then concepts like sin, punishment, and reward become meaningless.
(Image: A cartoon fortune teller peering into a crystal ball, with a very worried-looking stick figure in the reflection.)
(Slide 13: Omnibenevolence: Is God Really That Nice?)
C. Omnibenevolence: Is God Really That Nice? (Given all the suffering, that is…)
We’ve already touched on this in the discussion of the Problem of Evil, but it’s worth revisiting. If God is all-good, why does He allow so much suffering in the world? The existence of widespread and seemingly pointless suffering casts serious doubt on the claim that God is perfectly benevolent.
Even if we accept some of the theodicies (which we shouldn’t, remember!), they still struggle to explain the sheer scale and intensity of suffering in the world. Is all that suffering really necessary for some greater good? Or is it just evidence that God is not as nice as we’re told?
(Image: A sad-looking emoji with tears streaming down its face.) 😢
(Slide 14: Simplicity vs. Complexity: Can an Infinitely Simple Being Have Infinitely Complex Attributes?)
D. Simplicity vs. Complexity: Can an Infinitely Simple Being Have Infinitely Complex Attributes?
Finally, let’s consider the concept of divine simplicity. Many theologians argue that God is perfectly simple, meaning He has no parts or composition. He is just one, unified being.
However, if God is perfectly simple, how can He have infinitely complex attributes like omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence? These attributes seem to require a certain degree of complexity. How can a simple being know everything? How can a simple being be perfectly good in all possible situations?
The idea of a simple God with complex attributes seems paradoxical. It’s like trying to fit an entire encyclopedia into a tiny, featureless box.
(Image: A tiny, plain box labeled "God" with a bunch of messy wires and circuits sticking out of it.)
(Slide 15: Conclusion: What Does It All Mean?)
IV. Conclusion: What Does It All Mean? (Probably not what you think!)
So, what have we learned today? We’ve explored some of the most challenging philosophical arguments against theism: the Problem of Evil and the Incoherence of God’s Attributes.
We’ve seen that the existence of evil poses a serious challenge to the idea of an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good God. We’ve also seen that the very attributes that are supposed to define God may be logically incoherent.
Does this mean that God doesn’t exist? Not necessarily. But it does mean that the traditional theistic conception of God is problematic and may be untenable.
Ultimately, the question of God’s existence is a matter of personal belief and philosophical inquiry. There are no easy answers, and it’s up to each individual to grapple with these complex issues and come to their own conclusions.
(Slide 16: Thank You! & Questions?)
Thank you! & Questions?
Thank you for your attention! Now, who has questions? Don’t be shy! (But please, no theological debates that will last until the heat death of the universe. I have dinner plans.) 🍕 😉
