667:, but rather as an absence of good, and thus as something with no nature of its own: according to this definition, an evil God and a good God are not comparable, making the line of argument involved in the challenge meaningless. The comparison between a good God and an evil God according to this definition would be like a comparison between apples and no apples. Andrews further suggests, given this definition of evil, the notion of an all-evil God is incoherent, since such a God would be unable to imagine everything he did was evil. In other words, the evil God challenge, far from being purely atheistic, is premised upon a particular theological or ontological belief about the nature of evil that is not accepted by many theists.
702:
unreasonable, and hence, by the symmetry thesis, belief in a good God is unreasonable. Hendricks challenges Law's assumption that the existence of good renders improbable an evil God: he argues that for the same reason that skeptical theism undermines arguments from evil against a good God, it also undermines arguments from good against an evil God. Hence, belief in an evil God is not unreasonable, at least on account of the existence of good, and the symmetry thesis is irrelevant. So, even if the symmetry thesis is granted, Hendricks claims that the evil God challenge is innocuous. Hendricks also suggests that the advocate of good God theism can make use of
655:, Steve Wykstra, Dan Howard-Snyder, and Mike Rea have all suggested that the evident presence of good in the world makes impossible the notion of an all-evil, omnipotent God. William Lane Craig has suggested that an all-evil God would create a world devoid of any good, owing to his nature of evil, whereas an all-good God would create a world realistically with elements of both good and evil. Stephen Law contends that even if an evil God is logically untenable, if an evil God would nevertheless be ruled out in any case based on observed goods, a good God should be similarly ruled out on the basis of observed evils.
523:
535:
547:
671:
creation with any other comparable spirit) is not, as
Andrews proposes, "maximally selfish", hateful, vengeful, or even hostile, rather best described as intensely pragmatic and thoroughly observant of his needs; promoting, defending, and even admiring life in its struggle to persist and self-adorn. As presented, maximum evil is not, therefore, an
658:
Max
Andrews objects to Law's contention here not by denying the existence of evil, but by denying the existence of evil as Law defines it. In general, Law's challenge is only valid if evil is defined as "equal and opposite" to good: the evil God challenge is premised not upon the existence of evil,
642:
The evil God challenge demands explanations for why belief in an all-powerful all-good God is significantly more reasonable than belief in an all powerful all-evil God. Most of the popular arguments for the existence of God give no clue to his moral character and thus appear, in isolation, to work
670:
Rebutting
Andrews's characterization of evil as presented in his "A Response to the Problem of an 'Evil God' as Raised by Stephen Law", John Zande argued that maximum evil (identified as The Owner of All Infernal Names: a metaphysically necessary, maximally powerful being who does not share his
701:
to undermine the evil God challenge. The evil God challenge relies on what Law calls "the symmetry thesis," which states that if belief in an evil God is unreasonable, then belief in a good God is unreasonable. Law claims that the existence of good in the world renders belief in an evil God
675:
on a colossal scale, hopelessly given over to self-indulgence and destined to defile itself and anything it imagined into being, for a world driven only by impetuous brutality would resemble more a raging, super-heated, short-lived bonfire than a secure, creative, and ultimately profitable
602:
God is more likely than an all-evil God. Those who advance this challenge assert that, unless there is a satisfactory answer to the challenge, there is no reason to accept that God is good or can provide moral guidance.
663:, a belief Law borrows from the religious fundamentalist described in the quotation above. Andrews instead adopts Augustine's definition of evil not as equal and opposite to good, and thus as the presence of some
619:, and Charles B Daniels, explored the notion of an "anti-God"—an omnipotent, omniscient and all evil God. The evil God challenge was developed at length and in several formats by the philosopher
634:, but establishes unignorable theological evidence for the wicked disposition of the Creator. Stephen Law noted this work to be an intriguing development in the theology of the evil God.
630:
creator, in 2015, John Zande published an extended argument for the evil God thesis, arguing that the irresistible, self-complicating nature of this universe not only resolves the
1077:
1159:
1051:
403:
694:
has argued with Law from a similar position. According to these arguments, an evil God, whatever this might be, would simply not be God.
1186:
1085:
577:
74:
911:
The Owner of All
Infernal Names: An Introductory Treatise on the Existence, Nature and Government of Our Omnimalevolent Creator
198:
1108:
991:
148:
935:
918:
1055:
191:
1017:
112:
710:, and historical arguments for Christianity to justify accepting the existence of a good God over an evil God.
127:
570:
550:
396:
159:
51:
41:
1141:
683:
243:
223:
960:
873:
563:
707:
203:
176:
107:
46:
955:
719:
703:
169:
102:
208:
947:
496:
487:
438:
323:
8:
353:
238:
213:
186:
951:
845:
814:
652:
595:
514:
338:
328:
154:
69:
1181:
1127:
2012, "Replying to the Anti-God
Challenge: A God Without Moral Character Acts Well",
914:
728:
538:
534:
373:
264:
969:
965:
841:
698:
526:
478:
431:
424:
417:
363:
308:
97:
740:
631:
616:
599:
410:
333:
293:
278:
233:
228:
218:
181:
780:
651:
Several criticisms and responses to the evil God challenge have been presented.
743: – Reconciling the existence of evil with an all-good and all-powerful God
627:
612:
313:
298:
273:
117:
892:
1175:
749: – The belief that a god, or God is not wholly good and is possibly evil
677:
358:
303:
132:
893:"Stephen Law - Evil God Anti God Evil Creator Hypothesis Reverse Theodicies"
691:
686:
has suggested an evil God is less likely than a good God, because the term
680:
who, above all other things, seeks to maximize his own pleasure over time.
368:
348:
288:
620:
473:
468:
283:
79:
818:
690:
is intrinsically linked to the notion of God in a way that evil is not.
802:
734:
459:
318:
122:
1078:"A Response to the Problem of an 'Evil God' as Raised by Stephen Law"
746:
672:
343:
731: – Ethical problem on the origin of morality posed by Socrates
27:
936:"Manifest complexity: A foundational ethic for astrobiology?"
859:
1997, Daniels, Charles B. (1997). "God, demon, good, evil",
832:
New, Christopher (June 1993). "Antitheism – A Reflection".
722: – Ancient Greek philosopher, founder of Epicureanism
724:
Pages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
643:
just as well in support of an evil God as a good God.
1018:"The "Evil god" Objection | Reasonable Faith"
1046:
1044:
1173:
1160:"Sceptical theism and the evil god challenge",
1041:
803:"God, the Demon, and the Status of Theodicies"
800:
571:
890:
659:but upon a peculiar belief about what evil
646:
578:
564:
992:"Evil God has a theology being developed"
959:
1052:"Responding to the Evil God Challenge -"
626:Supporting the greater likeliness of an
1075:
75:Atheism during the Age of Enlightenment
1174:
1106:
933:
908:
598:. The challenge is to explain why an
904:
902:
989:
831:
546:
13:
846:10.1111/j.1467-9329.1993.tb00051.x
14:
1198:
1187:Thought experiments in philosophy
1109:"The Owner of All Infernal Names"
899:
737: – Hatred of God or the gods
891:Galen Orwell (27 January 2014).
863:, Vol. 31 (2), June, pp.177–181.
807:American Philosophical Quarterly
637:
545:
533:
522:
521:
16:Thought experiment in philosophy
1152:
1134:
1121:
1100:
1069:
1028:
1010:
983:
113:Discrimination against atheists
970:10.1016/j.spacepol.2014.10.004
927:
884:
866:
853:
825:
794:
773:
760:
128:Separation of church and state
1:
753:
397:Atheism: The Case Against God
52:Negative and positive atheism
42:Implicit and explicit atheism
1142:"Law's "evil-god challenge""
990:Law, Stephen (7 July 2015).
861:The Journal of Value Inquiry
785:, first published in Cogito"
7:
1107:Zande, John (8 June 2015).
1076:Andrews, Max (2012-01-20).
713:
10:
1203:
1146:edwardfeser.blogspot.co.uk
244:Theological noncognitivism
878:stephenlaw.blogspot.co.uk
697:Perry Hendricks has used
676:marketplace desired by a
606:
1034:"Evil God Challenge" in
874:"The Evil God Challenge"
647:Criticisms and responses
611:Papers by Stephen Cahn,
1022:www.reasonablefaith.org
781:"1989, Peter Millican,
708:phenomenal conservatism
199:Inconsistent revelation
193:Incompatible properties
108:Demographics of atheism
801:Stein, Edward (1990).
934:Smith, Kelly (2014).
770:, Analysis 37 (1976).
704:reformed epistemology
171:Fate of the unlearned
149:Arguments for atheism
103:Criticism of religion
909:Zande, John (2015).
895:– via YouTube.
783:The Devil's Advocate
766:1976, Stephen Cahn,
497:Criticism of atheism
488:Atheism and religion
439:The System of Nature
324:Christopher Hitchens
1088:on 22 December 2015
952:2014SpPol..30..209S
594:is a philosophical
354:Friedrich Nietzsche
214:Omnipotence paradox
22:Part of a series on
1148:. 19 October 2010.
821:– via JSTOR.
720:Epicurus' trilemma
653:William Lane Craig
596:thought experiment
592:evil God challenge
404:Breaking the Spell
339:Michael Lou Martin
165:Evil God challenge
70:History of atheism
1162:Religious Studies
1129:Religious Studies
1036:Religious Studies
729:Euthyphro dilemma
588:
587:
553:
541:
539:Philosophy portal
529:
517:
504:
503:
381:
380:
374:Victor J. Stenger
265:Lists of atheists
1194:
1166:
1156:
1150:
1149:
1138:
1132:
1125:
1119:
1118:
1116:
1115:
1104:
1098:
1097:
1095:
1093:
1084:. Archived from
1073:
1067:
1066:
1064:
1063:
1054:. Archived from
1048:
1039:
1032:
1026:
1025:
1014:
1008:
1007:
1005:
1003:
987:
981:
980:
978:
976:
963:
931:
925:
924:
906:
897:
896:
888:
882:
881:
870:
864:
857:
851:
849:
829:
823:
822:
798:
792:
791:
789:
777:
771:
764:
725:
699:skeptical theism
615:, Edward Stein,
580:
573:
566:
549:
548:
544:
537:
532:
525:
524:
520:
513:
479:Secular humanism
456:
455:
432:God Is Not Great
425:The God Delusion
418:The End of Faith
364:Bertrand Russell
309:Ludwig Feuerbach
261:
260:
239:Russell's teapot
194:
187:Hitchens's razor
172:
98:Atheist feminism
19:
18:
1202:
1201:
1197:
1196:
1195:
1193:
1192:
1191:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1169:
1164:54 (4): 549-561
1157:
1153:
1140:
1139:
1135:
1131:48 (1):35 - 43.
1126:
1122:
1113:
1111:
1105:
1101:
1091:
1089:
1074:
1070:
1061:
1059:
1050:
1049:
1042:
1033:
1029:
1016:
1015:
1011:
1001:
999:
988:
984:
974:
972:
961:10.1.1.676.4069
932:
928:
921:
913:. Createspace.
907:
900:
889:
885:
872:
871:
867:
858:
854:
830:
826:
799:
795:
787:
779:
778:
774:
765:
761:
756:
741:Problem of evil
723:
716:
649:
640:
632:problem of good
617:Christopher New
609:
584:
506:
505:
453:
452:Related stances
445:
444:
411:De rerum natura
391:
383:
382:
334:Lawrence Krauss
329:Baron d'Holbach
294:Richard Dawkins
279:Mikhail Bakunin
258:
250:
249:
248:
234:Problem of Hell
229:Problem of evil
219:Parody religion
192:
182:God of the gaps
170:
155:Atheist's wager
146:
138:
137:
93:
85:
84:
65:
57:
56:
37:
17:
12:
11:
5:
1200:
1190:
1189:
1184:
1168:
1167:
1151:
1133:
1120:
1099:
1068:
1040:
1027:
1009:
982:
946:(4): 209–214.
926:
920:978-1512263527
919:
898:
883:
865:
852:
824:
813:(2): 163–167.
793:
772:
758:
757:
755:
752:
751:
750:
744:
738:
732:
726:
715:
712:
648:
645:
639:
636:
628:omnimalevolent
613:Peter Millican
608:
605:
586:
585:
583:
582:
575:
568:
560:
557:
556:
555:
554:
542:
530:
518:
508:
507:
502:
501:
500:
499:
491:
490:
484:
483:
482:
481:
476:
471:
463:
462:
454:
451:
450:
447:
446:
443:
442:
435:
428:
421:
414:
407:
400:
392:
389:
388:
385:
384:
379:
378:
377:
376:
371:
366:
361:
356:
351:
346:
341:
336:
331:
326:
321:
316:
314:A. C. Grayling
311:
306:
301:
299:Daniel Dennett
296:
291:
286:
281:
276:
274:Julian Baggini
268:
267:
259:
256:
255:
252:
251:
247:
246:
241:
236:
231:
226:
221:
216:
211:
206:
201:
196:
189:
184:
179:
174:
167:
162:
160:Creator of God
157:
151:
147:
144:
143:
140:
139:
136:
135:
130:
125:
120:
118:Secular ethics
115:
110:
105:
100:
94:
91:
90:
87:
86:
83:
82:
77:
72:
66:
63:
62:
59:
58:
55:
54:
49:
44:
38:
35:
34:
31:
30:
24:
23:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1199:
1188:
1185:
1183:
1180:
1179:
1177:
1165:
1163:
1155:
1147:
1143:
1137:
1130:
1124:
1110:
1103:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1072:
1058:on 2016-10-03
1057:
1053:
1047:
1045:
1037:
1031:
1023:
1019:
1013:
997:
993:
986:
971:
967:
962:
957:
953:
949:
945:
941:
937:
930:
922:
916:
912:
905:
903:
894:
887:
879:
875:
869:
862:
856:
847:
843:
839:
835:
828:
820:
816:
812:
808:
804:
797:
786:
784:
776:
769:
763:
759:
748:
745:
742:
739:
736:
733:
730:
727:
721:
718:
717:
711:
709:
705:
700:
695:
693:
689:
685:
684:Peter Forrest
681:
679:
674:
668:
666:
662:
656:
654:
644:
638:The challenge
635:
633:
629:
624:
622:
618:
614:
604:
601:
597:
593:
581:
576:
574:
569:
567:
562:
561:
559:
558:
552:
543:
540:
536:
531:
528:
519:
516:
512:
511:
510:
509:
498:
495:
494:
493:
492:
489:
486:
485:
480:
477:
475:
472:
470:
467:
466:
465:
464:
461:
458:
457:
449:
448:
441:
440:
436:
434:
433:
429:
427:
426:
422:
420:
419:
415:
413:
412:
408:
406:
405:
401:
399:
398:
394:
393:
387:
386:
375:
372:
370:
367:
365:
362:
360:
359:Michel Onfray
357:
355:
352:
350:
347:
345:
342:
340:
337:
335:
332:
330:
327:
325:
322:
320:
317:
315:
312:
310:
307:
305:
304:Denis Diderot
302:
300:
297:
295:
292:
290:
287:
285:
282:
280:
277:
275:
272:
271:
270:
269:
266:
263:
262:
254:
253:
245:
242:
240:
237:
235:
232:
230:
227:
225:
222:
220:
217:
215:
212:
210:
209:Occam's razor
207:
205:
202:
200:
197:
195:
190:
188:
185:
183:
180:
178:
175:
173:
168:
166:
163:
161:
158:
156:
153:
152:
150:
142:
141:
134:
133:State atheism
131:
129:
126:
124:
121:
119:
116:
114:
111:
109:
106:
104:
101:
99:
96:
95:
89:
88:
81:
78:
76:
73:
71:
68:
67:
61:
60:
53:
50:
48:
45:
43:
40:
39:
33:
32:
29:
26:
25:
21:
20:
1161:
1154:
1145:
1136:
1128:
1123:
1112:. Retrieved
1102:
1090:. Retrieved
1086:the original
1081:
1071:
1060:. Retrieved
1056:the original
1035:
1030:
1021:
1012:
1000:. Retrieved
996:stephenlaw60
995:
985:
973:. Retrieved
943:
940:Space Policy
939:
929:
910:
886:
877:
868:
860:
855:
840:(1): 36–43.
837:
833:
827:
810:
806:
796:
782:
775:
767:
762:
696:
692:Edward Feser
687:
682:
669:
664:
660:
657:
650:
641:
625:
610:
591:
589:
437:
430:
423:
416:
409:
402:
395:
369:Peter Singer
349:Jean Meslier
289:Albert Camus
164:
768:Cacodaemony
621:Stephen Law
551:WikiProject
474:Freethought
469:Agnosticism
284:Mario Bunge
224:Poor design
80:New Atheism
1176:Categories
1114:2015-10-12
1092:12 October
1082:Sententias
1062:2015-06-05
1002:12 October
754:References
735:Misotheism
460:Irreligion
319:Sam Harris
123:Secularism
47:Naturalism
998:. Twitter
956:CiteSeerX
747:Dystheism
673:Ouroboros
344:Karl Marx
204:Nonbelief
177:Free will
145:Arguments
1182:Theodicy
819:20014323
714:See also
600:all-good
527:Category
36:Concepts
1038:, 2009.
948:Bibcode
678:creator
515:Outline
92:Society
64:History
28:Atheism
1158:2018,
975:12 Oct
958:
917:
817:
607:Origin
257:People
834:Ratio
815:JSTOR
788:(PDF)
665:thing
390:Books
1094:2015
1004:2015
977:2015
915:ISBN
688:good
590:The
966:doi
842:doi
1178::
1144:.
1080:.
1043:^
1020:.
994:.
964:.
954:.
944:30
942:.
938:.
901:^
876:.
836:.
811:27
809:.
805:.
706:,
661:is
623:.
1117:.
1096:.
1065:.
1024:.
1006:.
979:.
968::
950::
923:.
880:.
850:.
848:.
844::
838:6
790:.
579:e
572:t
565:v
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.