How can an all-good God make evil? Christians say he cannot. They say what evil does not really exist - its just good in the wrong place or a lack of good. Christians say that if evil is a real thing and a power and God makes it then God is at least partly evil.
Even if God and the creation is good their existence is evil. In that case, it is meaningless to try and defend God by saying that when he lets evil happen he is still all good for evil is merely misplaced good.
We will learn that existence is evil so it is totally meaningless to say that there is any point in believing that evil is the mere absence of good.
There should be nothing at all for it is easier for there to be nothing than for anything to exist. Yet against what should be, things exist. It follows then that existence is evil in the sense that it shouldn’t be. If God exists he is evil for he is the reason for his own existence and brings things into existence from nothing. To adore God is really to adore Satan. Philosophers assume that there are entities such as God that necessarily exist - in other words, it was impossible for beings that necessarily exist not to exist. But all that can necessarily exist is nothing. Yet there is something. Everything else including God cannot then necessarily exist. They are not necessary beings, none of them is the ground of all being, the entity that cannot not exist or not have existed
If all things including God came from nothing then nothing is the best thing and nothing should exist but nothing so it is unintelligible to say that God’s existence is good so God is not entitled to be defended. If God existing is bad his making other things to exist is worse.
If evil is just a falling short and not a real thing then God cannot sin because God is perfect and too powerful to miss the mark. It follows then that it is better for God to exist than not to exist for if nothing existed there would not be as much good. But this contradicts the fact that if nothing is so good that a God can come from it then nothing doesn't need to make a God to be so good. The notion that God always existed does not mean he doesn't come from nothing. The doctrine that he is the reason for his own existence means that he does come from nothing. If a stone came from nothing and is now 1000 years old, it is still coming from nothing now. It would be the same if it never had a beginning.

Even if God never had a beginning, he makes himself from nothing just like the Church says he holds himself in existence and makes himself from nothing for to exist a thing must be caused by something else or it causes itself and God is its own cause. If God makes himself from nothing then nothing is what God made himself from. Some in the Church will object that God made himself from nothing but it was his own power that made him out of nothing but that is no reply for nothing gave him that power so he still came out of nothing. Nothing then must have the power to produce God. Nothing must be better than God when it can do that for there is said to be no existing thing greater than he. To say that nothing created God but that he creates himself is to say that nothing is what made God or caused him. If I make a wig from my hair then the hair creates the wig in a sense for it is the existence of the hair that makes the wig. The same thing as with God. To say that God causes his own existence or is the reason for his own existence is to say he is made of "something" and that this "something" is nothing. This nothing is better than God when it can make such a wonderful being and it follows that the inferior, God, is evil.
If you deny that God could be inferior to nothing, that is if you say God is better than what nothing is, then if nothing did not make God, nothing would be falling short of good by not making God. But it is mistaken to say that nothing could fall short of good by not making God for nothing by definition cannot make anything and has nothing to do with it if something appears out of nowhere and if it could make then there was as much a chance of it doing nothing as making God. So nothing’s falling short of good would not make it deliberately evil for it cannot help it. But something doesn't have to do deliberate evil to be evil. If nothing falls short by not making God, if it could have not made him, then clearly the idea of evil being the mere absence of good is wrong for nothing knows nothing about good and evil. Nothing is nothing. Its absolutely nothing.

If you say nothing is evil in the sense that it is good for things to exist, you seem to contradict this by saying that nothing is good for it can produce God. But it may be good for God to exist and it may be good for us to exist. But it is only good for him and us and is not good in itself. It is good in the sense that it is good to feel good after doing something wrong. It is bad good, it is evil. The solution then is that as good as existence may be for us and God it is evil to exist and to maintain that existence. It is evil for the murderer to exist as he commits his crimes though it is good for him personally to exist. Its good one way and bad the other but the good is really bad.
If you say that nothing is the origin of God and nothing is both good for it lets things exist and evil for letting itself be defied then how could it be true to say that God is perfect and has no evil in him at all? His "raw material", nothing, is good and evil so he must be the same. Even if evil is a falling short of good and nothing more, it has no relevance to proving that God could allow evil for his purpose is justifiable. If everything must fall short of good in some aspects then you can only guess what purpose is justifiable and what one is not. And if God has evil in him is he telling the truth when he says he is right to let certain terrible things happen? You would be mad to trust.
Many philosophers say that if God is not perfect, he loses any entitlement to use the excuse that when he makes things less good than they could be he is entitled to do that for he owes nothing to anyone. It would seem he should fix his own imperfection or try to compensate by making creatures that are as perfect as possible. Believers say that God being perfect is entitled to make imperfect things but an imperfect father on earth has no right to deliberately father a sick baby say by passing on a disease to the child for the father is imperfect. But surely if you are imperfect you have more right to pass on imperfection than a perfect being that can stop imperfection but won't does?
If we reason that nothing is bad for making us and bad if it doesn't how do we solve the contradiction? If nothing hadn't made us it wouldn't be doing us any wrong. It has the right to make nothing to use analogical language. You don't owe a being that doesn't exist its existence. So nothing is bad for making us even if we like it being bad for we like existing.
When there is something when there could have been nothing it follows that it would be better if there were nothing for that is simpler. It follows then that if God exists then he is evil. If he is then there is no point in trying to explain away God letting evil happen though he has the power to stop it and not using it and still being good by saying that evil is the mere absence of good.
Is it really good for useless things that do harm to exist? We don't need the AIDS virus for example. The claim that God uses evil for a greater good says it is good for the virus to exist which unmasks the malice in the idea that evil is a mere negation. There is a coldness in its supporters.
The free will defence alleges that God gave us free will so that we could love for love is voluntary and we abused it so evil is our fault not his. God himself falls short of the good that the free will defence says is so valuable. He has not made himself what he is. He didn't choose to be imperfect for he cannot fail for he is all-powerful and all-knowing. The free will defence says he is right to allow evil so that we will make ourselves good of our own efforts. But he cannot change from what he is and has never sacrificed to be good. So God then by definition is evil and evil reigns and the good we see is a form of evil.
Some say that because there should be nothing as there is no need for anything to exist that in this sense existence is evil for it should not be happening. Does this view imply that good is a falling short of evil and that there is no good in anything existing and nothing we do is good? Evil would be more powerful than good for our existence is illogical and should not be. This would automatically destroy the doctrine of a good God at a stroke. If existence is evil then it is more appropriate to describe good as the absence of evil for the evil power of existence reigns supreme.
Is good merely the non-existence of evil or is evil merely the absence of good? Suppose the question makes sense. Then the only hope we would have of knowing which is the real thing and which is the unreal is by working out what is the supreme power. Evil is supreme so good is merely the absence of evil if there is any horse sense in the question. Also good cannot be just the absence of evil and evil cannot just be the absence of good for that would mean they were two absences but then we are saying there is nothing real to either. Evil cannot be the mere absence of good if good is not real so one of them is real and the other is not.
If evil is a falling short of good then that is to say that good is the norm and evil is parasitic on good so evil is abnormal. If evil is merely a falling short of good then it follows that good has to exist before evil can exist. Why? For if good does not exist before evil exists how can evil fall short of it? But suppose there was nothing. Good and evil would still exist. In many ways it is good for there to be nothing at all. In many ways this is bad as well. But how can this evil exist though if there is nothing then good cannot exist before evil? So there is no before for there is just nothing. Good cannot exist before evil for there is nothing and therefore no before. Does this suggest that good and evil are in your imagination? Yes if you believe that evil is not a power but a negative. If so then good and evil are not real. Or there is another suggestion. That is that because good needs to be there for evil to fall short of it, this good that exists when there is absolutely nothing is really evil for it doesn't let that happen. In such a case, evil would be the supreme power with good being the exception meaning that good was a falling short of evil. Evil would not be non-being or a non-power. It would not be mere misplaced good. It would be the standard. If evil is the dominant power then we must judge good people as being really bad people with ulterior motives. Also, our good deeds would ultimately result in evil.
Proves God the Creator of All?
Some make the outrageous claim that there is no problem of evil for evil is just good that is faulty. They say that there is the problem of good and this can only be solved by saying that there is an all-good source of all things: God. The problem is that if there is no all-good creator then we have no explanation for where good came from. If God is really good, then the concept of God implies all that. When you say there is a God you are inferring that all that is true even if you don't realise you are.
The notion that God and goodness are somehow one so that there is no good unless there is a God is nonsense. If there is nothing and no creator it is good that there are no little kittens to suffer and die. Making good things does not mean that good needs to be made. Things are good simply because good does not need to be made. Good just is.
So to believe in God you have to believe in nonsense. That by itself is evil. And if you fail to see that good just is and you feel you need a God to bring goodness as a principle into being then you have something that looks like goodness but which is a fraud. You do not really understand what goodness is. That is evil.
It is not true that you need faith in God to be able to be moral or good. It is true that you need atheism to be good.
Existence is evil for rationally there should be nothing so existence contradicts reason.
If goodness requires the freedom to be bad, then God cannot be good. Evil is strongest perhaps in its subtle form if there is a God. If you want to reinforce morality then drop God.

A HISTORY OF GOD, Karen Armstrong, Mandarin, London, 1994
A HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOL 6, PART II, KANT, Frederick Copleston SJ, Doubleday/Image, New York, 1964
A PATH FROM ROME, Anthony Kenny Sidgwick & Jackson, London, 1985
A SHATTERED VISAGE THE REAL FACE OF ATHEISM, Ravi Zacharias, Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Tennessee, 1990
A SUMMARY OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, Louis Berkhof, The Banner of Truth Trust, London, 1971
AN INTELLIGENT PERSONS GUIDE TO CATHOLICISM, Alban McCoy, Continuum, London and New York, 1997
APOLOGETICS AND CATHOLIC DOCTRINE, Part 1, Most Rev M Sheehan DD, MH Gill, & Son, Dublin, 1954
APOLOGETICS FOR THE PULPIT, Aloysius Roche, Burns Oates & Washbourne LTD, London, 1950
AQUINAS, FC Copleston, Penguin Books, London, 1991
ARGUING WITH GOD, Hugh Sylvester, IVP, London, 1971
ASKING THEM QUESTIONS, Various, Oxford University Press, London, 1936
BELIEVING IN GOD, PJ McGrath, Wolfhound Press, Dublin, 1995
BEYOND GOOD AND EVIL, Friedrich Nietzsche, Penguin, London, 1990
CITY OF GOD, St Augustine, Penguin Books, Middlesex, 1986
CONTROVERSY: THE HUMANIST CHRISTIAN ENCOUNTER, Hector Hawton, Pemberton Books, London, 1971
CRITIQUES OF GOD, Edited by Peter A Angeles, Prometheus Books, New York, 1995
DIALOGUES CONCERNING NATURAL RELIGION, David Hume, William Blackwood and Sons, Edinburgh and London, 1907
DOES GOD EXIST? Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1982
DOES GOD EXIST? Herbert W Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1972
DOING AWAY WITH GOD? Russell Stannard, Marshall Pickering, London, 1993
EVIL AND THE GOD OF LOVE, John Hicks, Fontana, 1977
GOD AND EVIL, Brian Davies OP, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
GOD AND PHILOSOPHY, Antony Flew, Hutchinson, London, 1966
GOD AND THE HUMAN CONDITION, F J Sheed, Sheed & Ward, London 1967
GOD AND THE NEW PHYSICS, Paul Davies, Penguin Books, London, 1990
GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING, Philip St Romain, Liguori Publications, Illinois, 1986
GOD THE PROBLEM, Gordon D Kaufman, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1973
HANDBOOK OF CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS, Peter Kreeft and Ronald Tacelli, Monarch, East Sussex, 1995
HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY, VOL 2, Frederick Copleston SJ Westminster, Maryland, Newman, 1962
HONEST TO GOD, John AT Robinson, SCM Press, London, 1963
HUMAN NATURE DID GOD CREATE IT? Herbert W Armstrong, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1976
IN DEFENCE OF THE FAITH, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene Oregon, 1996
IN SEARCH OF CERTAINTY, John Guest Regal Books, Ventura, California, 1983
JESUS HYPOTHESES, V. Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977
NEW CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA, The Catholic University of America and the McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., Washington, District of Columbia, 1967
OCR Philosophy of Religion for AS and A2, Matthew Taylor, Editor Jon Mayled, Routledge, Oxon, New York, 2007
ON THE TRUTH OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH, BOOK ONE, GOD, St Thomas Aquinas, Image Doubleday and Co, New York, 1961
OXFORD DICTIONARY OF PHILOSOPHY, Simon Blackburn, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1996
Philosophy of Religion for A Level, Anne Jordan, Neil Lockyer and Edwin Tate, Nelson Throne Ltd, Cheltenham, 2004
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 1, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1938
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 2, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1940
RADIO REPLIES, Vol 3, Frs Rumble and Carty, Radio Replies Press, St Paul, Minnesota, 1942
REASON AND RELIGION, Anthony Kenny, Basil Blackwell Ltd, Oxford, 1987
SALVIFICI DOLORIS, Pope John Paul II, Catholic Truth Society, London, 1984
SEX AND MARRIAGE – A CATHOLIC PERSPECTIVE, John M Hamrogue CSSR, Liguori, Illinois, 1987
TAKING LEAVE OF GOD, Don Cupitt, SCM Press, London, 1980
THE CASE AGAINST GOD, Gerald Priestland, Collins, Fount Paperbacks, London, 1984
THE CASE FOR FAITH, Lee Strobel, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 2000
THE CONCEPT OF GOD, Ronald H Nash, Zondervan, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1983
THE HONEST TO GOD DEBATE Edited by David L Edwards, Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1963
THE KINDNESS OF GOD, EJ Cuskelly MSC, Mercier Press, Cork, 1965
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL, CTS EXPLANATIONS, Fr M C D'Arcy SJ, Catholic Truth Society, London, 2008
THE PROBLEM OF PAIN, CS Lewis, Fontana, London, 1972
THE PROBLEM OF SUFFERING, Alan Hayward, Christadelphian ALS, Birmingham, undated
THE PUZZLE OF GOD, Peter Vardy, Collins, London, 1990
THE REALITY OF GOD AND THE PROBLEM OF EVIL, Brian Davies, Continuum, London-New York, 2006
THE RECONSTRUCTION OF BELIEF, Charles Gore DD, John Murray, London, 1930
THE TRUTH OF CHRISTIANITY, WH Turton, Wells Gardner, Darton & Co Ltd, London, 1905
UNBLIND FAITH, Michael J Langford, SCM, London, 1982
WHAT IS FAITH? Anthony Kenny, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1992
WHY DOES GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? LG Sargent, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham, undated
WHY DOES GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? Misc, Worldwide Church of God, Pasadena, California, 1985
WHY DOES GOD? Domenico Grasso, St Paul, Bucks, 1970
WHY WOULD A GOOD GOD ALLOW SUFFERING? Radio Bible Class, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1990