God is not moral and the Problem of Evil logically says he does not exist.

I’ll go ahead and construct some independent arguments. Refutations will come right after.|Constructive|Argument I(A): The two premises do not contradict.Premise 1: God is OmnipotentPremise 2: God is OmniscientPremise 3: God is BeneleventPremise 2: Evil ExistsPlease note that the topic title says he logically does not exist. However I am unclear as to where the two premise contradict with each other. One might say the two statements are improbable (e.g. benelevent), but they do not truly contradict, and therefore God remains possible. There is a case where something is improbable but does supposedly exist as some believe (E.g. Evolution)Argument I(B): There is Scripture evidence that says he does exist in a universe with evil.If we were debating a bare-bones God then this debate would obviously end very quick. However we’re debating a very specific God, the God of Abraham. And this God does make it clear that he does exist in a universe with evil, this is clearly evident to the fact that the Bible does mention the word “evil” almost 500 times. And him constantly punishing people for their wickedness. So the Bible does refute Pro’s position entirely.Argument II(A): There are exceptions to the “rules”."So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets.” --- Jesus ChristYes, you heard of it before, the golden rule.Now I agree with Pro that it’s generally not good to kill people (though I prefer the term murder). But i also think there are places where capitol punishment is good, So what should happen to a person when he murders someone? I say that he should be put to death. For if he did not want to die he should of not of done what he did, he should be the one dead. So there are some cases where i think killing is alright in cases of judgement.Also there does exist some capital punishment in the OT law (e.g. Human Sacrifice, divination, beasiality, etc)Argument II(B): God is the basis for Objective MoralityA question might pop up asking if the definition for morality “is conformity to the rules of right conduct” one might ask; “so where do we get the rules of right conduct?” Well if you notice the rules that Pro brought up (e.g. Thou shalt not kill, do not be quick to anger, etc) is based on the Bible which is based on the Abrahamic God. So he is the moral giver, he is the one that decides what is “moral”. So if He said, thou shalt rape, murder,steal, lie these things would be moral, and those rules of thou shalt not murder, commit adultery, etc… Would be outdated. So in a sense it’s impossible for him not to be moral, because he is the source himself.Therefore his morality is objective, and not subjective to people’s opinions of what is good. In a way of saying, he is morality.Argument III: God does existLet me go ahead and establish the premisesPremise 1: Everyting that exist has an explanation to its existence.there are two kinds of existence, things that can fail to exist and needs an external cause to explain how they exist (We’ll call this contingent existence, its almost everything in the physical universe) and things that exist out of necessity of what they are by nature. (we’ll call existence from necessity. An example might be numbers, as its impossible for them to not to exist out of the nature of what they are.)Premise 2: If the universe has an explanation for its existence, the explanation is God.Seems rational to think that a vastly intelligent engineer built the galaxy, made animals, and people. So the explanation must be God! Because he doesn’t have a cause the explanation to his existence would be from necessity.Premise 3: The universe exists!Conclusion: Therefore God exists.|Rebuttals|I went ahead and organized this into case tags, for some organizastional clarity.Case 1: The Rape story"Do not fear, for am I in the place of God? As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.” --- Joseph In the Bible there is a story about a man named Joseph who was sold into slavery by his brothers, and undergone a great deal of suffering before he became a ruler in egypt. However he had a very interesting statement, the quote above, he told his brothers that while they meant evil against him, God ultimately meant it for a greater good to get him into egypt. So that he can bring about salvation for them.I’m saying there is a bigger picture that we can’t see. I can’t possibly give you an answer for every case of suffering (being beaten & raped, sold into slavery, death, torture, etc) Because I’m not God and do not know all things. However I do think he lets suffering happen to bring on a greater good. Response: ”So how is any god good when they see evil, know of evil, and can end evil, but do not?” “For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live." --- GOD by prophet EzekielGod is not evil nor malevant, I think he is patient with people. He doesn’t take pleasure in killing people, this does include the wicked. However this does not mean that he isn’t going to put an end to evil down the road, so turn from your evil ways and live! For when a wicked man turns to righteousness his life will be saved!CASE 2: God created sin through inactionInaction? No, he did tell them very specifically not to eat the tree, they didn’t listen. So he did take action by telling them. Also, if your story is true about Satan’s origins in that chronology, then Eve’s sin was not the original sin but satan had committed it before this event.And God was not bluffing.CASE 3: Evil Against Sodom & Gomororrah See Gen 19.Earlier you talked about a woman getting raped, and son gettin shot. while we don't know all the evils of Sodom, the case of when the two angels showed is similar to it in the sense that it involves rape, and possible attempt at murder (Lott). But the difference is its in extreme excess, for it was a city wide gay rape on angels. Well in this case, God does do something, he destroys the wicked and saves the day. So why are you fusterated at him over this? You seem to be fusterated with him both ways, when he does something and when he doesn’t.And don’t say they didn’t know that he existed, first of all that claim is completely baseless for does not nature show a designer? Also they could of asked the flood survivors about God (e.g Noah, Shem) and B even if this was true that they didn’t know who he was that is no excuse for their abhor abominations. The text says all the men in the city came for the angels, to have gay sexual intercourse (as if it were required by law for entrance in the city), they deserved what they had coming to them, how could they not know they did wrong? A city this wicked sends an invitation to destruction.CASE 4: Evil against EgyptChildren had nothing to do with the crime? Actually thats not true, do you not know Moses’ origins? The egyptians had a practice of drowning jewish babies in the nile for “population control”. Its about time that they got the receiving end of the stick. For I say this was a show of mercy, for where the egyptians took all the male babies, God only took the firstborn when he could have taken all of them. And of course they heard of the force before, because of Joseph and the jewish slaves, they just didn't fear God enough.As to hardening to Pharaoh’s heart. Tell me, does the potter have no right over the clay? To make of one lump for honorable use, and the other for dishonorable use? Suppose God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, used pharaoh to show the riches of his power to the people that were being saved(Jews)? That they may know that he is the almighty God.CASE 5: Evil Against Ananias & SapphiraWhat they did was lie to God. Learn and be wise, for he who lies to his maker is gravely stupid. For He hates a lying tongue. After all, lies were what screwed up his nigh-perfect creation. If you wish to live long on the earth, even if you have to cut out your own tongue, do not lie to God!