The argument against "evil", theists please come to the defense.

[Ravenshire]

I wanted to bump this, because, this is the best form of the argument of evil I can come up with.

Yet I can explain how this is an argument from ignorance like all other versions of the problem of evil.

And if we get passed that perhaps, I will give a response to the question, which I posed many years ago.

---

Actually, I can rephrase the argument in OP:


God would not create suffering without any benefit in some way or another, to the over all system or particular person, that cannot be achieved except with this suffering.
If God exists, then God did create suffering without any benefit but rather harmed more so than it benefited, and the benefit could have been created through a different means.
Therefore God can't exist.



I can rebute this very easily:

God gave us a perfect system without suffering.
Consequences when we disobeyed God and the perfect system and balance are for our own benefit only when we are rebellious and disobey.
God didn't create suffering, rather, it's a consequence of sin, and is to negate a greater suffering.

Counter argument:

The consequences could have been done in a way that they weren't necessarily the degree of suffering or type of suffering they bring to bring about the good.


Counter to counter argument:


The consequence naturally must be distasteful and evil, and something humans want to get rid of.  The degree of suffering must cause us pain to achieve the result.

Without the degree and various type of suffering, humans who oppress others, would feel more arrogant, the oppressed more complicit to their oppression, and the fear of death and tribulations that keep us on edge from sinning would have been diminished.

Consequently, there must be a door to stop all suffering, and that is through come to the door and leader of God and the holy book that through he recites God's signs and proves the proper wisdom. 



Counter argument to above:

He could force humans to guidance and make the issue of guidance clear so no one denies.

Counter argument:


....etc, etc....

As you see this gone and on and on. 

But it's the thinking and reflecting that solves the issue.

Good to see you can argue with yourself and strawman others at the same time.

Of course, your argument still boils down to the ends justifying the means no matter how horrific the means become. That's still bullshit no matter how you dress it up