It is crucial for this paper to clearly understand the intended meaning of certain terms. Peter Van Inwagen’s reading, “The Problems of Evil, the Problem of Air, and the Problem of Silence,” defines evil as undeserved pain and suffering to the world’s creatures. God is defined as the being that is omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful), and morally perfect.
The problem of evil states if there were an omniscient, omnipotent, and morally perfect God, there would not be such great amounts of evil in the world; however, since there is an immense amount of evil, there is no God. There are four possible replies to this argument. The first stating that God does not know of the evil, in which case God is not omniscient. The second states that God…show more content… Inwagen stated two main objections for the Freewill Defense. The first objection he stated was that the amount of evil in comparison to the amount of good as a result of freewill does not balance. A reply to this objection assumes that what is good is not the same as what is morally correct. The second objection to the Freewill Defense is that not all evil results from human decisions. There are evils known as natural evils, such as earthquakes and other natural disasters.
As a response to the problem of evil, Inwagen deduces that it is necessary to have the freewill, which allows for the amount of evil that exists in the world, in order for humans to recognize that it would be horrible to be apart from God, and therefore it can be concluded that God's omnipotence (power) and moral perfection do not contradict with the existence of evil in the world.
J. Mackie’s paper “Evil and Omnipotence” (1955) discusses the problem of evil and goes on to discuss two solutions to the problem, adequate solutions and fallacious solutions. Mackie states the problem of evil is