Stand to Reason Weekly Podcast Why an Emotivist Can’t Use Suffering to Argue Against the Existence of God
Oct 3, 2025
Greg examines Alex O’Connor’s argument that suffering contradicts the existence of God, introducing emotivism and its limitations. He discusses how pain can serve as a necessary design feature and how sin's consequences explain global suffering. A poignant caller inquiry about autism leads to insights on divine intent and the idea that suffering can foster virtues. Greg highlights that moral outrage over suffering actually supports theism, and offers hope for those grappling with psychological differences in their faith.
AI Snips
Chapters
Books
Transcript
Episode notes
How One Decision Can Harm Many
- Koukl uses Pearl Harbor and Hitler's declaration of war to show one decision can harm many innocents.
- He compares historical consequences to the theological claim that Adam and Eve's sin affected all humanity.
Ask What Comfort Atheism Provides
- When confronted by emotivist atheists, ask what practical comfort they offer suffering people.
- Emphasize that the Christian worldview offers hope and a future fix even if it doesn't remove present pain.
Suffering Can Produce Moral Growth
- Koukl presents a soul-making theodicy: God can use suffering to produce virtues like patience and forgiveness.
- He sees soul-making as a partial explanation for why God might allow moral and natural evil.
