Hume’s argument for atheism

David Hume proposed the following argument against the existence of God:

Suffering exists in the world.
If God exists then He is both omnipotent and loving.
If God cannot eliminate suffering then He is not omnipotent.
If God will not eliminate suffering then He is not loving.
Hence, God does not exist.

What do you think of Hume’s argument?  Are the inferences Hume makes valid?  (Note that whether or not you agree with the conclusion has no bearing on the validity, or otherwise, of the argument!)

Feel free to share further arguments for or against the existence of God.

One thought on “Hume’s argument for atheism

  1. I gues this argument depends on assuming that love is not compatible with suffering. It also doesn’t really address the free will issue. Not that I’ve pondered this that long, I’m just excited that I’ve worked out how to post!

Leave a Reply