Final answer:
J.L. Mackie's position is that the traditional defenses for the problem of evil, including the free will defense, are not adequate, thus the statement provided is false. The problem of evil challenges the existence of an all-good, omniscient, and omnipotent deity in the presence of evil and suffering.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement that J.L. Mackie provides an adequate solution to the problem of evil that believers should make is False. Mackie argues against the traditional justifications for the existence of evil in a world created by an all-good, omniscient, and omnipotent deity. In particular, he challenges the free will defense, which suggests that permitting evil is a necessary consequence of granting free will, by claiming that it does not resolve the issue since the deity is still partly responsible for the existence of evil.
The problem of evil poses significant philosophical challenges to the belief in an all-perfect deity by questioning how such a being could coexist with the presence of moral evil. It has been a critical element of philosophical discourse, with figures like David Hume and J.L. Mackie providing notable critiques of the traditional theistic responses, while philosophers like Augustine and Aquinas have sought to use reason to defend the coexistence of God and evil, often citing the greater good argument or the notion of 'felix culpa'.
Atheists approach the problem of evil differently, often asserting that the absence of compelling evidence and logical justification for the existence of deities leads to the conclusion of atheism, where the problem of evil does not arise since there is no all-perfect deity to reconcile with.