Is the existence of evil compatible with the existence of an omnipotent god with the ability to desire to eliminate evil? That seems unlikely and many antitheological arguments have been based upon just that. A solid argument makes the existence of the traditional God unlikely at best - and belief in it unreasonable.
John at Fake Barn Country offers a reconstruction of such an argument from John Mackie:
(1) A good thing always eliminates evil as far as it can. (Premise)
(2) There is no limit to what an omnipotent thing can do. (Premise)
(3) If there is no limit to what an omnipotent thing can do, then it can eliminate evil completely. (Implicit Premise)
(4) A good omnipotent thing eliminates evil completely. (By 1 - 3)
(5) The existence of a good omnipotent thing is inconsistent with the existence of evil. (By 4)
(6) God is wholly good. (Premise)
(7) God is omnipotent. (Premise)
(8) Therefore, the existence of God is inconsistent with the existence of evil. (By 5 - 7).
As this argument demonstrates, it isn’t enough to simply say that omnipotence and the existence of evil are contradictions. We must add a number of things: that good and evil are opposed to each other, that good eliminates evil whenever possible, and that omnipotence doesn’t allow for any limits. A theist might try to challenge any or all of these premises, but they are completely consistent with the beliefs of traditional theists in the western religions. Thus, this is not only a logically valid argument but also an effective argument against typical forms of theism.
Read More:
There’s a flaw in this argument and it is contained in premise #2. This is like the silly stone argument- Can God make a stone that is too heavy for God to lift?
The answer is, of course not. “too heavy for God to lift” is a reductio ad absurdum. God cannot do anything that cannot be done. Can God cause Himself to cease to exist? Do you regard that as a question that poses a reasonable problem to the existence or omnipotence of God? Judging from some of the sloppy logic employed in these articles, I’m inclined to worry that you do…
In any case, you can more specifically deny this argument by pointing out that a central tenet in most theistic belief systems involves some kind of redemptive plan. Thus God, according to most Theists, DOES plan to eliminate evil, on His own time. You might not like that answer, but it’s consistent and it repudiates the many ridiculous variations of the “Problem of Evil” argument in advance.
Lastly, I find it interesting that you think people are more inclined to give God the benefit for their successes while not blaming Him for their problems…this can’t even be said for more than a few Christians in the real (that is to say, non-Hollywood) world.
As is usually the case with this sort of thing, people will come to it with their minds made up. There are certainly no new or particularly devastating arguments against the existence of God contained here, unless rehashing Richard Dawkins qualifies.
Then you commit yourself to the proposition that evil cannot be eliminated. Feel free to support this.
Feel free to point to evidence of this.
Just wanted to say that Christians normally blame God for the things that go wrong in their lives. An example would be that when ever a christian loses someone close to them the first thing that happens is you ask God why did you take them, and most of the time you feel bitter and angry at God. It might be enough to make you lose your faith or it might strengthen you i find it very unfair that you say we give credit to God for the good yet we give him nothing for the bad.