Nonbelief and Evil: Two Arguments for the Nonexistence of God [Englisch] [Gebundene Ausgabe]

Regarding the Devil Defense against The Argument from Evil, if the Devil and his demons are claimed to be the cause of earthquakes, then the Devil Defense competes with the plate tectonics theory of earthquakes, the latter having far greater explanatory power. According to my geology textbook, "About 95 percent of the energy released by earthquakes is concentrated in a few relatively narrow zones that wind around the globe. . . . The greatest energy is released along a path located near the outer edge of the Pacific Ocean known as the circum-Pacific belt. Included in this zone are regions of great seismic activity such as Japan, the Philippines, Chile, and numerous volcanic island chains, as exemplified by the Aleutian Islands. . . . Yet another continuous belt extends for thousands of kilometers through the world's oceans." If the devil is behind earthquakes, then why is he so hostile toward those who live along the circum-Pacific belt? How have they, in particular, earned his wrath? And what does the devil have against the oceans?

As for the Testing Defense against The Argument from Evil, why have millions of people who have never heard the gospel message been tested with diseases and natural calamities? What result was God looking for? Without the benefit of hearing the gospel message and an explanation that there is a purpose for the suffering, the victims simply couldn't respond positively to the God of evangelical Christianity. To interpret such suffering as a test is irrational and cruel. Also, if suffering is a test, then why are animals being tested? They, too, are victims of painful diseases and natural calamities.

I say the book is required reading for Christian apologists because they say rejecting the Christian faith is always a moral, not an intellectual, issue. Well I spent many years trying to intellectually justify my Christian beliefs. I had a bias in favor of the gospel message; I desperately wanted it to be true. Out of despair, and with sadness, I gave up. Drange's Nonbelief & Evil helped me see that my doubts were, and are, well-founded.

One of the primary virtues of this book, in my opinion, is the fair-minded way in which Drange approaches the subject. He is quick to admit ignorance of subjects and concede the (at least initial) plausibility of certain objections to his arguments. So, whether or not you agree with all the arguments and sub-arguments presented, you know exactly where Drange stands and where to begin analyzing the problem.

Finally, in response to the below reviewer who, rather than review the book in question, asks why an atheist would spend so much time refuting something he doesn't believe in: Why do you think John Locke spent the entirety of the First Treatise of Government attacking the divine right of kings, which Locke didn't believe existed? Because the issue is important--it affects a lot of people in dramatic ways. The existence of God is of a comparable importance; it is therefore no mystery as to why atheists like Drange expend resources attacking it.