Mackie's Argument Analysis

1663 Words7 Pages
According to the logical problem of evil, God is an omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent being. Yet, evil exist all around us. Since Mackie is an atheist, this is a contradiction he debates. How can a perfect God allow evil in the world? And how does free will influence evil? This essay will explain Mackie’s argument against the theist’s three premises. It will also cover Plantinga’s argument of free will and transworld depravity. Lastly, it will discuss Walsch’s free will theodicy and how it reflects on evil.
The argument states the existence of evil is impossible under the attributes of God. It is evident evil exists but it is not clear whether God exists. The purpose of Mackie’s and Plantinga’s argument is to prove whether or not God exist based on the existence of evil. Mackie does not agree on the existence of God and uses philosophy to prove it. He believes that there is no rational evidence that
…show more content…
Walsch clarifies we must practice extreme judgment in order to determine right from wrong. God explains he would not keep an individual from creating, experiencing and knowing the truth. He explains that he does not implement rules for his follows to obey because that would place a limitation. If Walsch’s free will theodicy was not valid, there would be rules and consequences for how we live our lives. He heavily relies on the idea of self. In other words, our experience would reflect of our own morals. Also, the results of our experience and our judgment are supposed to help us differentiate right and wrong.
An argument used to justify evil is co-creating. Walsch’s theodicy addresses an answer to natural evils. He states, “All of the world, co-creating together, produces these experiences” (Walsch, pg. 40). Therefore, the responsibility and consequence is all shared collectively. To extend the explanation, we are responsible for the choices we make and the results reflect on our
Open Document