Re: problem of evil - to clear things up

"Damien Stanton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> The only plausible defence to the problem of evil is the 'free will
> defence', ie. that the good of having free will outweighs any evil in the
> world.  This is difficult to argue against since it seem like a matter of
> opinion:  does the gift of free will outweigh evil?   Then, the one possible
> answer to the free will defence is the suggestion that God should segregate
> evil people into a secluded region for themselves, thereby protecting
> non-evil people.  Again, this is going to be a matter of opinion.  In one
> sense, this will be constraint on free will:  what if I want to go to this
> secluded place for fun?  But maybe it is a necessary contraint in order to
> minimize evil.  Who knows?  This is where the debate stalemates.
> 
> So there you have it:  problem of evil -> free will defence.   There isn't
> much else to it folks...

The only way to argue against "the problem of evil" is to deny one or 
more of the premises. Either deny that evil exists, deny that God is all 
powerful, and/or deny that God is benevolent.

It sounds like you are denying that God is all powerful, implying that 
there is something (free will) that God cannot control. Or are you 
denying that evil exists, saying instead that this "free will" thing is 
the best possible good?