He argues that if God is perfectly moral, then he must always act in accordance with the moral law, even if this means causing suffering. However, if God is perfectly loving, then he must always act in the best interests of his creation, even if this means breaking the moral law. Rutledge concludes that we must choose between a God who is perfectly moral and a God who is perfectly loving. Rutledge's argument is thought-provoking and challenging. He raises important questions about the nature of God and the relationship between morality and love.
Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?” In a similar vein: If God exists, he is all-knowing, omnipotent, and ethically flawless. If God were all-knowing, God would know about all the terrible occasions that occur in our reality. If God were omnipotent, God would have the capacity to do something.
In addition, how can humans treat each other as though another human is just a bug that needs to be exterminated? Through the shocking stories, the reader also begins to question where God is; however, there needs to be a separation of blame. Human’s evil actions are not the responsibility of God. It must be recognized that humans have freewill to choose to do good or evil. Evil is of the world, but since God is not of the world, God is not responsible for the evil in the world.
In this book, Hick holds the position that God allows for certain kinds of suffering to allow for the possibility of overcoming for his creation. In other words, God allows for pain and suffering. Furthermore, the allowance of pain, according to Hick, allows for the process of “soul-making”. By the way of an indeterminate future and the possibility of pain, humans are left with the choice as to how much unnecessary suffering they are willing to restrict. By the way of making these allowances, however, Hick’s God seems to have limited Himself to not understanding the world in its entirety and, therefore, engaging with the world in a temporal way that is at least very conceptually similar to that of process
Not all people have the same definition of evil. Evil can be expressed in many ways. Whether that be describing a person or giving a place a scary setting. Most though, think of evil as a person rather than a place. Those true qualities of evil help show if a person is a human monster.
At the beginning of the article, Mackie states that the initial issue with God’s existence is that, “God is omnipotent; God is wholly good; and yet evil exists” (Mackie, Paragraph 3). If god is such a pure and good being, then he should be able to combat all evil. The first statement that showcases that God is omnipotent, God is wholly good, then evil cannot possibly exist. The definition of omnipotent is
However, evil does exist. Therefore, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God does not exist. The evidential problem of evil states that since evil does exists, evidence alone is incompatible with a perfect God, and thus negates the possibility of God 's existence. There exist
In this reading reflection I will be discussing Richard Swinburne’s argument on “Why God Allows Evil” which starts on page 254 in “Exploring Philosophy: An Anthology” by Steven M. Cahn. This was also discussed in class on 9/15/16. In his argument Swinburne states that “An omnipotent God could have prevented this evil, and surely a perfectly good and omnipotent God would have done so. So why is there evil?”(Swinburne, 254).
Through this constant buildup of good deeds and righteousness, he makes himself a worthy candidate for heaven. Or he can choose the latter, simply indulge in the world’s sinful nature and slowly descend into sinfulness himself and be sent to hell. Therefore Hick does not believe that man was originally perfect and that the world was made perfect. The environment in which man would grow in is not for their pleasure but to bring out the necessary qualities God is looking for.
Over the course of human history many philosophers and theologians have grappled with the question of what is evil. One of the most influential of these thinkers was Augustine of Hippo. Augustine, revered as a Saint in the Roman Catholic Church, tackled this question of what is evil as well as a whole multitude of issues that continue to face people and the creation that surrounds them. For Augustine though, this question of evil, what it is, and where it comes from plays an interesting role when he begins to question his own beliefs at that time in his life. This question of evil is one Augustine sought out to answer which in turn provided some grounds for thinkers to come.
The existence of God has been presented by a multitude of philosophers. However, this has led to profound criticism and arguments of God’s inexistence. The strongest argument in contradiction to God’s existence is the Problem of Evil, presented by J.L Mackie. In this paper, I aim to describe the problem of evil, analyse the objection of the Paradox of Omnipotence and provide rebuttals to this objection. Thus, highlighting my support for Mackie’s Problem of evil.
Although God’s existence and the validity of the experiences that may imply God’s existence is still not known, it is enough to say that logically, evil can exist along with God and his properties, even in today’s
EVALUATION ESSAY Which two worldviews you have learned about are most at odds with one another? Why? In my opinion I feel that the two worldviews that I have learned that are most at odds with one another are Christian theism and Naturalism.
On the other hand, theists like Swinburne, believe that evil is necessary for important reasons such as that it helps us grow and improve. In this paper I will argue that the theist is right, because the good of the evil in this specific case on problems beyond one’s control, outweighs the bad that comes from it. I will begin by stating the objection the anti-theodicist gives for why it is wrong that there is a problem of evil. (<--fix) Regarding passive evil not caused by human action, the anti-theodicist claims that there is an issue with a creator, God, allowing a world to exist where evil things happen, which are not caused by human beings (180-181).
If God is all-knowing and all-powerful, why does evil exist in the world? Some argue that evil is necessary for human beings to exercise their free will, make decisions that are customized to the situation at hand, and develop a moral character that is acceptable based on societal culture or accepted practices, while others see it as a result of human transgressions or human limitations and that of the natural world. Despite the challenges, limitations, and controversies that encircle the idea of a humanist whose belief in God, still stands out to be an important topic for discourse for modern students of philosophy to study. This is because it questions the fundamental relationship between religion, philosophy, and humanism.
