(Swinburne, pg.84) Theist would disagree. The second piece that counters Swinburne’s argument is by John Hicks and it is called “Evil and The God of Love”. Hicks takes a pro-freewill stance and believes in the “Soul-Making Defense” (Hick, pg.85).
In the rival conceptions of God, Lewis divides humanity into two main groups; those who believe in God or gods and those who do not. Those who believe in God, Lewis divides into two subgroups. The first, Pantheists view God as “beyond good and evil” (Lewis, 1980) as if God and the universe are one. The second, Christians view God as the absolute good Creator, separate from His creation.
Over the years, opinions on God have changed. Some people believed that God is terrifying and vengeful while others disagreed saying that He is loving and accepting of all. Jonathan Edwards was a Calvinist, who argued that unless one never sins, he or she is most likely doomed to hell. Edwards believed that humans are powerless in comparison to the power of God. In “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” by Jonathan Edwards, the author achieves his purpose of arguing that in order to be saved from an afterlife in hell, one must ask for forgiveness and accept Christ, through the uses of intense imagery, a terrifying tone, and understandable metaphors.
Penn Jillette wrote the essay “there is no God”. The essay theme principal is atheism. The author think believing there is no God, make people more kind and thoughtful. He believes no God means people will suffer less in the future. The author thinks when people suffer; they said it is god will and they do nothing about it.
In Richard Connell’s “The Most Dangerous Game” , Rainsford is the positive force in a classic good vs. evil showdown against a psychopathic man-hunter. For example, Rainsford non - evilness is displayed when he declines General Zaroff’s “ We will hunt - you and I,” (10). This is substantial evidence towards Rainsford morals and integrity as a human. Based on the short story, a good and decent person would not want to hunt someone, it is an act of cold blood.
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.
Essay 2 My goal in this paper is to show that Swinburne’s solution to the Problem of Evil is persuasive. I begin with a formulation of Swinburne’s thoughts about the similarity and difference between moral evil and natural evil. I then formulate the connection between evil and free will. Next, I consider the potentiality objection to this argument, and Swinburne’s response to this objection.
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).
Another Milestone that effects the way we define the notion of “Good and Evil” is largely based on our religion. Therefore, the way we see right from wrong, heaven and hell, light and darkness, Good vs. Evil and God and the Devil comes from the moral criterion that we attempt to apply to our worldviews. However, given the conspicuous contrasts amongst religions, ranging from Christianity to Islam to Judaism. Many people believe that due to the simple fact of religious diversity, this provides the basis to discredit any assumption of moral truths. Some religions define evil as “the result of human sin” or that “Evil is the result of a spiritual being who opposes the Lord God”
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).
The question that is asked time and time again is whether or not god exists. It is evident that people hold different beliefs. It is evident that through some of the beliefs of J.L. Mackie that it could be argued that God does not actually exist. I find this argument to be more agreeable. In Mackie’s Evil and Omnipotence, he argues many points to support why it should be believed that god does not exist.
A lot of arguments have been known to prove or disprove the existence of God, and the Problem of Evil is one of them. The Problem of Evil argues that it is impossible to have God and evil existing in the same world. Due to ideal characteristics of God, evil should not have a chance to exist and make human suffer. In this essay, I will examine the argument for the Problem of Evil, a possible theodicy against the argument, and reply to the theodicy. First of all, to be clear, the Problem of Evil is an argument that shows that God cannot be either all- powerful, all-knowing, and/or all good.
The atheistic reading of evolution possesses a great challenge towards human dignity. Darwin expelled the role of God from creation by proposing the mechanistic evolution.
It is first published in 1994, the book received Gold Medallion award in 1994 in the category of doctrine and theology in the same year. The lectures in Harvard and Ohio state universities delivered by the author himself were further developed and published in the form of this book by adding up few more concepts which deal with the questions of reality of God’s existence and its influence on the lives of individuals. The book primarily addresses the despair and hopelessness in human life which the author considers to be a result of anti-theistic thinking, he answers the existential questions through various illustrations from history and his personal experiences. He subtly points at the fallacy of accusing God for the crimes committed by the individuals and institutional
Aikman (2008) refers to Atheism as a cause of uncertainty and violence in the world of faith. It only disturbs the concrete beliefs of Christians to the supremacy of God. With unseen motives, Atheism became a source of development of hesitations that break the connection of God and man. People became more aggressive because they do not worry on the possible consequences of their wrongdoings and the sins they commit. Atheism brings about the existence of evil and suffering.
