The Nature of Skeptical Theism: Answering Nonstandard Objections to Skeptical Theism

TLDR: The authors show that the theses that ground skeptical theism are either false or limited in scope, and that the upshot of this is that it is far more difficult to resist.

Abstract: Skeptical theism is a popular response to arguments from evil. Recently, Matthew A. Benton, John Hawthorne, and Yoaav Isaacs have argued that the theses that ground skeptical theism are either false or limited in scope. In this article, I show that their objections rest on dubious assumptions about the nature of skeptical theism. Along the way, I develop and clarify the ambiguous parts of skeptical theism. The upshot of this is that—once the nature of skeptical theism is made clearer—it is far more difficult to resist.