The big idea: Here is the oldest and hardest challenge to belief in God. It doesn't attack the idea of God — it points at the world.
If God is all-good and would want to stop suffering, and all-powerful and could stop it — then why is there so much of it? Earthquakes, disease, cruelty. Something in that picture seems not to fit.
The problem of evil: The problem of evil sets three claims side by side: God is all-good, God is all-powerful, and terrible suffering exists. The trouble is they seem to pull apart. An all-good God would want to end suffering; an all-powerful God could. Yet suffering is everywhere. So it looks like one of the three has to give: maybe God isn't all-good, or not all-powerful — or maybe such a God doesn't exist. Handled seriously, this is a genuine puzzle that thoughtful believers wrestle with too.
Checkpoint — evil: In one line: an all-good, all-powerful God would both want to and be able to stop suffering — yet suffering is everywhere. Hold that; the main reply is the 'free will / greater good' defence.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it free for 7 days:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Start your 7-day free trial Full access to Aimnova Pro · cancel anytime
The next challenge doesn't look at the world at all — it asks whether 'all-powerful' even makes sense.
The paradox of the stone: The omnipotence paradox is a famous teaser. Ask: can an all-powerful being create a stone so heavy that even it cannot lift it? If God can make such a stone, there's now something God can't do (lift it). If God can't make it, there's already something God can't do (make it). Either way, there's something God cannot do — so it looks like nothing can truly be 'all-powerful'.
Checkpoint — omnipotence: In one line: either God can make the unliftable stone or can't — and either way there's something God can't do. The usual escape: 'all-powerful' means doing all that's genuinely possible.
Feeling unprepared for exams?
Get a clear study plan, practice with real questions, and know exactly where you stand before exam day. No more guessing.
Get Exam Ready Free7-day free trial • No card required
The last challenge steps back from any single God and looks at the sheer variety of what people believe.
The argument from inconsistent revelations: The argument from inconsistent revelations notes a simple fact: the world's religions each claim to reveal the truth about God — yet they describe God in ways that flatly disagree (one God or many, forgiving or strict, this holy book or that one). They can't all be right. And there seems to be no neutral way to tell which revelation, if any, is the true one — people mostly follow the religion they were born into. This doesn't prove no God exists, but it does challenge anyone's confidence that their picture of God is the correct one.
Go further — higher-level insight: Notice these challenges aim at DIFFERENT targets. The problem of evil attacks the classic combination of attributes. The omnipotence paradox attacks one attribute on its own. Inconsistent revelations attacks our knowledge of God, not God's existence. A believer can answer each without touching the others — naming which target each hits is a top-band move.
Checkpoint — the three challenges: (1) Problem of evil: good + powerful God vs suffering. (2) Omnipotence paradox: can 'all-powerful' even hold together? (3) Inconsistent revelations: the religions clash, so which is right? Three different pressures on belief — and each has replies.