Argument from Evil tagged posts

CORNEA and the Evidential Problem of Evil

The evidential argument from evil contends that the facts about evil provide us with a good defense for the conclusion that belief in God is unjustified or false. Some instances of evil appear so intense and unnecessary that they raise a challenge to the existence of an all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing being, such as God is traditionally conceived to be. Unlike the logical argument from evil, this argument does not attempt to demonstrate a logical inconsistency on the part of theists, but instead pursues the more moderate aim of disputing the plausibility of theistic belief...
Read More
Why atheism?

Why Atheism?

The Big Questions, as their name implies, are questions about who we are, about the universe we live in, about our place in the universe, and more along these lines. Theistic religions, especially those that proselytize, have constructed cases for their beliefs that tend to pay a great deal of attention to these Big Questions. Sometimes widespread and culturally dominant religions even succeed in defining the terms of the questions, so as to give themselves greater assurance of their influence on the lives of their adherents and the societies in which they thrive. So far, we have considered w...

Read More

Walter Sinnott-Armstrong v. William Lane Craig

This debate took place on April 1, 2000 at Wooddale Church in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. Atheist philosopher Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, professor at Duke University and author of numerous books on ethics and morality,1 argues in the affirmative on the question, “Does evil and suffering disprove God?” William Lane Craig, a well-known Christian philosopher and apologist who also has a lengthy list of books in his name,2 argues the negative...

Read More