Abstract

Skeptical theism attempts to undermine arguments from evil by urging skepticism about our ability to predict God’s plans for good and evil. Critics complain that skeptical theism has problematic, wide-ranging skeptical consequences. In this paper, I respond to a version of this objection alleging that the combination of theism and skeptical theism cannot be confirmed or disconfirmed. Drawing on Perrine and Wykstra’s idea of “theory versioning,” I argue that this objection fails: skeptical theism does not render theism immune from confirmation or disconfirmation. Nonetheless, skeptical theism may have a cost in terms of the usefulness of probabilistic modeling.