The Problem of Evil can be refutted effectivley.

=== PRO "So, people are born as rapists and murderers? How is that so? What evidence do you have to prove that? Maybe the fact that they are rapists and murderers are actually results of a bad upbringing, which is the parents' fault, due to free will, not God's. " === REBUTTAL People are born with mental disorders which predispose them to rape and murder, a lot of the time genuinely unaware that what they've done is wrong. This is an undeniable fact (my opponent asked that no sources be presented, so I won't, but it's clearly true), and this alone ruins my opponent's theodicy. It has nothing to do with nature, free will or upbringing, so everything to do with an omni, omni god, who clearly isn't benevolent. === PRO "Why are there mentally retarded people in our society? The parents of mentally retarded people are to blame here, most of them have free will. Why wasn't he institutionalized or TAUGHT right from wrong (most mentally retarded people can still be taught what is acceptable or not). Even this is the result of wrongdoing on the part of humans. So then, if mentally retarded people are meant to be institutionalized why did God create them? God made these people for the very purpose of soul-making. I know a couple with a down-syndrome child, and they have conceded that it is more of a blessing than a curse. ; most down-syndrome children are very happy children. === REBUTTAL Wow. My opponent's first two sentences here not only make me cringe, they are also an unwilling admission of defeat by my opponent. Not only has he attempted to turn psychology on its head by suggesting that all mental disorders are borne of bad parenting (how can you say that if your friend's child has down syndrome? ), but he also says that "most" parents have free will. My opponent is admitting here that not all people have what we like to call free will, which again contradicts his own theodicy. Also, my opponent's story about the couple is entirely subjective, and I'm sure most people who have a child with the disorder are probably drunks by now. Thanks god! === PRO "Because being able to fly doesn't encourage soul-making on any level. BUT NEITHER DOES RAPE AND TORTURE, my opponent will probably say. Once again, rape and torture are consequences of free will, and therefore human's fault, not God's. " === REBUTTAL First of all, not everything allowed by your god is meant to encourage soul-making. If flying doesn't, why does walking? For that matter, how does the ability to make fart sounds with our mouth "encourage soul-making"? It doesn't, so we can see that what your god has allowed does not necessarily have to encourage soul-making. So I ask again; when your god was making the rules of the Universe, why did he make it impossible to fly (something my free will encourages me to want), but entirely possible to rape babies? This is a point my opponent has completely failed to answer to in this debate. There is absolutely no reason why an omni, omni god couldn't have made baby-rape against "the rules" of the Universe, and still give us complete free will. Theodicy countered! === PRO "Everybody has to die. The slaying of them is, again, the consequence of free will. Secondly, only some adoptive parents are sterile, I know of several who are not and just wish to raise children who wouldn't otherwise have parents. But, for the sake of this debate, let's suppose that this couple is sterile. So, the fact that these people cannot have children of their own INCLINES them to adopt this child, and by adopting this orphaned child, they help her in the long run. " === REBUTTAL How far can we push this thing before it falls over in your eyes, my man? Ok, so the couple was made sterile by your god so that they'd adopt a child. Now we can ask why the child needed adoption in the first place, and we find that the child's parents were killed. Then we find out the reason the parents were killed was because they were drug dealers. We find that they were drug dealers because they'd both lost their jobs and had no other way to eat. We then find that they lost their jobs because they got caught stealing money. We then find that the reason they were stealing money was because their other child was on life support following a terrible earthquake, which killed 500 people. What we have in this entirely realistic scenario is a god who causes 500 deaths and cripples a child, which leaves the child's parents with no other option but to steal money, which loses them a job, which forces them into drug dealing, which gets them killed, which orphans the child. Do you honestly believe all of this was caused by your god (remember, he knew all this was going to happen and could have prevented all of it), just so a sterile person (who, remember, god could have just made potent) could adopt a child? These are NOT the actions of an omnipotent, omniscient, benevolent god. They are the actions of an evil moron who doesn't quite understand the concept of cause and effect. === PRO "My Opponent: "What about the millions starving to death and about whom the fellow "humanoids" don't even know? " Who's fault is it that we don't know about them? I think that it is yours and mine, not God's. " === REBUTTAL Come on man, think for yourself a little here. Think about a few thousand years ago when there was still the same amount of death and suffering in the world, but nobody knew about it because there was no internet or TV or anything. Hence, no "soul-making" for anyone, and a lot of suffering for many. Even now that we do know of the suffering in Africa, not many of us have the means to help even if we wanted to. It's got nothing to do with a soul, it's got more to do with the limited capabilities we've been given as humans. Once again, this is your god's fault and nobody else's. Nobody's soul is tested or strengthened by your god causing millions to suffer to death. Once again, if your god is omni and omni, he is most certainly evil. If he is indeed benevolent, then he's either weaker than humans or absolutely oblivious to what's going on down here. === PRO "Maybe he didn't create them. If their is an all-powerful loving being, who is to say that there isn't an all-powerful evil being (Satan). " === REBUTTAL Pure conjecture. I applaud my opponent for coming up with his own apologies for his god; it shows devotion and an ability to think for one's self about the problem of evil, which is in my mind the most effective refutation of a benevolent god. But I've shown in this debate that there is still A LOT my opponent needs to think about with regards to this theodicy. I refuted every point my opponent made, while many of my arguments (particularly from Round 3) have been left unanswered and presumably conceded. Thanks to my opponent for an excellent debate.