and the Logical Problem of Evil How might a theist go about demonstrating that (16) is false? (37) God is not able to make significantly free creatures and to causally determine that they will always choose what is right and avoid what is wrong. People have free will in this world and there is evil and suffering. Jones just allowed someone to inflict unwanted pain upon her child. (And if you think I am referring to the treatment in Sam Harris's. W4 : (a) God creates persons with morally significant free will; (b) God does not causally determine people in every situation to choose what is right and to avoid what is wrong; and (c) There is no evil or suffering. In other words, although Darwinism does not speak to all cases of physical evil - the earthquakes - it does speak to the physical evil that it itself is supposed to bring. 166-167) According to his Free Will Defense, God could not eliminate the possibility of moral evil without at the same time eliminating some greater good.
Mackie have the National Budget and Reducing the Debt argued that an omnipotent God should be able to create a world containing moral good but no moral evil. They could never be praiseworthy. People can freely choose to do what is right only when their actions are not causally determined. Philosophers of religion have called the kind of reason that could morally justify God's allowing evil and suffering a "morally sufficient reason." Consider the following statement. Most of them are pointless, zero-content sludge very snazzy-looking sludge, mind you, but sludge all the same (for more on this see The html Hell Page ). He reasons as follows. (MSR2) represents a common Jewish and Christian response to the challenge posed by natural evil. (Take a moment to appreciate how much that means. (26) God is not able to steal.