ABSTRACT
The widespread existence of evil is the greatest challenge to the rationality of belief in the God of traditional theism, who has every perfection to an unlimited extent, among which are being omnipotent (all-powerful), omniscient (all-knowing), omnibenevolent (all-good), and sovereign (all-determining). One form that this challenge takes is an argument that attempts to deduce a contradiction from the existence of both God and evil, but the more popular form is an inductive argument that infers from the known evils of the world that it is improbable that God exists or, more weakly, that the probability of his existence is lowered by these evils. The theist responds to the deductive argument by offering a defense in which it is shown how it is possible for God to have a morally exonerating excuse for permitting or causing these evils. There are two ways in which the theist counters the inductive argument. One is to give a theodicy, which is a defense coupled with some evidence that the possible excusing condition articulated in the defense actually obtains. The other is theistic skepticism, which holds that we humans are incapable of understanding God’s reasons for permitting evil.
