[Laughing Man]

Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to ... If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked ... If, as they say, God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world? -Epicurus, as quoted in 2000 Years of Disbelief

1. God exists. (premise)
2. God is omnipotent. (premise - or true by definition of the word 'God')
3. God is all-benevolent. (premise - or true by definition)
4. All-benevolent beings are opposed to all evil. (premise - or true by definition)
5. All-benevolent beings who can eliminate evil will do so immediately when they become aware of it. (premise)
6. God is opposed to all evil. (conclusion from 3 and 4)
7. God can eliminate evil completely and immediately. (conclusion from 2)
1. Whatever the end result of suffering is, God can bring it about by ways which do not include suffering. (conclusion from 2)
2. God has no reason not to eliminate evil. (conclusion from 7.1)
3. God has no reason not to act immediately. (conclusion from 5)
8. God will eliminate evil completely and immediately. (conclusion from 6, 7.2 and 7.3)
9. Evil exists, has existed, and probably will always exist. (premise)
10. Items 8 and 9 are contradictory; therefore, one or more of the premises is false: either God does not exist, or he is not both omnipotent and all-benevolent or there is a reason why He does not act immediately.

One could argue that:

* Free will requires the potential to do anything one chooses. (premise, or by definition)
* Thus, free will requires the potential to do evil.
* Thus, removing the potential to do evil would remove free will.

However Bodhisttva saying states:

If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why does he order such misfortune
And not create concord?

If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Why prevail deceit, lies and ignorance
And he such inequity and injustice create?

If the creator of the world entire
They call God, of every being be the Lord
Then an evil master is he, (O Aritta)
Knowing what's right did let wrong prevail!

Using Trasncendental Logic we can conlcude:

L1. Logic presupposes that its principles are necessarily true.

L2. According to the brand of Christianity assumed by TAG, God created everything, including logic; or at least everything, including logic, is dependent on God.

L3. If something is created by or is dependent on God, it is not necessary--it is contingent on God.

L4. If principles of logic are contingent on God, they are not logically necessary.

L5. If principles of logic are contingent on God, God could arrange matters so that a proposition and its negation were true at the same time. But this is absurd. How could God arrange matters so that New Zealand is south of China and that New Zealand is not south of it?

L6. Hence logic is not dependent on God, and, insofar as the Christian world view assumes that logic so dependent, it is false.

On science, one argues as follows :

S1. Miracles by definition are violations of laws of nature that can only be explained by God's intervention.

S2. Science assumes that insofar as an event has an explanation at all, it has a scientific explanation - one that does not presuppose God.

S3. Hence doing, science assumes that the Christian world view is false.

On morality, We can argue tha

M1. The type of Christian morality assumed by TAG is some version of the Divine Command Theory, the view that moral obligation is dependent on the will of God.

M2. Such a view is incompatible with objective morality. On the one hand, on this view what is moral is a function of the arbitrary will of God; for instance, if God wills that cruelty for its own sake is good, then it is. On the other hand, determining the will of God is impossible since there are different alleged sources of this will (The Bible, the Koran, The Book of Mormon, etc) and different interpretations of what these sources say; moreover; there is no rational way to reconcile these differences.

M3. Thus, the existence of an objective morality presupposes the falsehood of the Christian world view assumed by TAG.