, ,

Some atheists like to accentuate what they perceived to be the problem of evil in society and its relationship to an omnipotent, omniscient and all-good God. To them, there is an incompatibility, even a contradiction. The incompatibility (contradiction) is not obvious to anyone, so the atheist has to make an extended argument on what they think is a contradiction. Wallace Matson did this in his debate with Tom Warren (1978). Matson did not do very well at explaining this perceived incompatibility, and Tom Warren exposed it mercilessly.

The incompatibility goes something like this: if God is all-good and all-powerful, then he will remove evil from existence because an all-good being will not be in the presence of evil, and neither will an all-good being allow evil to exist. If he is all-powerful, then it is within his capability to do so. Yet, evil exist. Thus, it is asserted, God must not be all-powerful or he must not be all-good.

There is no necessary incompatibility in the construct of this atheistic argument – it is merely asserted.

What atheists try to do, then, is form a moral standard of some sort where the formulator of that standard is in position to judge something else. They try to formulate what “good” is and what it does. This is nothing more than an “I think” approach based upon an opinion. One person might argue in “rocket-science” terms that it should be obvious as to why inflicting pain and suffering is wrong. Yet, no atheist can tell us why – they only assert it.

The best an atheist can do is to find some common features or qualities in humanity and then assert them as a collective in a moral code that others should follow. For instance, one atheist said with regard to a law that says it is acceptable to extinguish another human being based solely on their race/religion, “I personally would asses that law to be wrong because it involves pain and suffering.” That’s it? Yes, that is it. It is the only basis on which he can judge, and does judge. No atheist can do better at offering a reason.

Some atheists assert they know what “good” is and how it operates. In this assertion, it is nothing more than an “I think” approach based on subjectivity. There is no “I know” to it because atheists have no objective moral standard by which to judge.