The Problem of Evil Disproves an All-Loving, All-Powerful God

Pro begins by saying that Alvin Pantinga's Free Will defense is flawed for the fact that it leaves out natural suffereing, suffering not due to mans decisions such as earthquakes. My opponent must prove that natural disasters are not a scientifical phenomon but prove that it is a source of evil. Natural Disasters can create new life, take an earthquake for example; Plate tetonics move wihin the earth on fault lines causing the earth to shift forming new natural features such as mountains & new habbitats for life. Who is to say they are evil? A wise saying is beauty is in the eye of the beholder, Humans may consider it a destruction of life, but tiny organisms may thrive. Which in return may cause life to flourish. Pro then argues the fact that free will does not exsist as follows; P1: All chosen actions are determined by their agent's values and preferences P2: Agents do not freely choose their values and preferences P3: If an agent's choices are ultimately determined by factors outside it's control, those choices are not free P4: All choices are determined by factors which are not freely chosen (from 1 & 2) Conclusion: Free will does not exist (from 3 & 4) I will then demonstrate that free will does exsist taking the Compatibilism view towards free will. German philosopher & Compatibilist Arthur Schopenhauer once said "A man is free to do what he wills, but a man can not will what he wills". Compatibilists view of "free will" is one in which the agent had freedom to act. An agent my value integrity, and honesty, but may be forced to steal food for his family. Point 2 then says that agents do not freely choose their own values & preferences. Let us take a child that is abused, He then declares that he will never be like his father. In turn he chose his own values based of his own life expirence. Point 3 states that an agent's choices are ultimately determined by factors outside it's control, those choices are not free. I agree with the fact that choices are a result of what has happened, as known as life expirences. But to say that your choices are not free based on that is to my understanding in accurate. Let us use the example that a woman is born with a large nose. She can not change her genetic makeup but in turn it is her free will to get plastic sygery or not. & Finally point four states All choices are determined by factors which are not freely chosen. A child walks into an icecream store one day by accident. He has never tried icecream or even heard of it. He then chooses chocolate for no reason at all, It in turn was his own free will with out any outside contributing factors. This then brings discredit to Pro's point of view that free will does not exsist. Pro then disputes the overall idea that if god trully exsisted then why doesn't he come to us all and prove his exsistence? God had proved his exsistence through Jesus Crist his one son. In the bible Jesus does remarkable feats from allowing the blind to see, and walking on water, he proves gods exsistence time & time again. It is through a chrisitians faith that he will then be blessed. God has given us all a chance by giving mankind a free will. Satan also commonly known as Lucifer, The Devil, & The Morning Star, was an angel who was much brighter & higher than the rest. His pride would not allow him to bow down to god & wanted to rule heaven for himself so god had sent Satan to hell. Those that believe that they are gods or that Jesus Christ was not gods one and only son will burn in hell. Pro then argues that if some people are born into different cultures and families they are less likely to pass the test. In defense I point out that there are many people that have chosen not to follow what their parents follow. My own parents are catholic & I am leaning towards other christian religions. In todays age it is almost impossible to not know of christianity & all men have the free will to chose to follow Christ. Babys are the exception to this rule which are automatically granted into heaven. The next point that pro disputes is "Why doesn't God create more suffering to achieve more courage/sympathy/love/whatever?" God had increased suffering which can also be read with in the bible, When the Egyptions oppressed the chosen ones god then brought upon them the 10 plagues & the angel of death. Looking at historical referances we go back to the bubonic plague which wiped out a third of Europe in its time. Which is no where near the case now. But as human beings we are uncapable of knowing what is within gods plan for each of us, but it is our choice to follow his teachings & live upon the path of righteousness. Lastly Christianity is not the only religion to believe in Jesus Christ. Muslims believe that Jesus was a great prophet born to a virgin that rose from the dead. Jeudisim see's Jesus as a false messiah, but the one thing they all share in common is the belief that a god does exsist along with the belief that Jesus Christ had walked this earth. Looking at modern times there had been no proof that King Solomn had exsisted, I quote "For example, until 1993 there was no proof of the existence of King David or even of Israel as a nation prior to Solomon. Then in 1993 archeologists found proof of King David's existence outside the Bible. At an ancient mound called Tel Dan, in the north of Israel, words carved into a chunk of basalt were translated as "House of David" and "King of Israel" proving that he was more than just a legend." This brings credit to the bible being used as a historical referance. R.D. Wilson who wrote "A Scientific Investigation of the Old Testament" pointed out that the names of 29 Kings from ten nations (Egypt, Assyria, Babylon and more) are mentioned not only in the Bible but are also found on monuments of their own time. Every single name is transliterated in the Old Testament exactly as it appears on the archaeological artifact – syllable for syllable, consonant for consonant. The chronological order of the kings is correct. And lastly proving Christ had exsisted Roman historian Tacitus writing between 115-117 A.D. had said this; "They got their name from Christ, who was executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. That checked the pernicious superstition for a short time, but it broke out afresh-not only in Judea, where the plague first arose, but in Rome itself, where all the horrible and shameful things in the world collect and find a home." From his Annals, xv. 44. Here is a pagan historian, hostile to Christianity, who had access to records about what happened to Jesus Christ. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Website References: http://agards-bible-timeline.com... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I now await my opponents dispute