[Home]History of The problem of evil

HomePage | Recent Changes | Preferences
Revision 7 . . (edit) October 13, 2001 12:51 pm by BenBaker
Revision 6 . . (edit) October 13, 2001 12:41 pm by BenBaker
Revision 5 . . September 29, 2001 12:31 am by (logged).32.172.xxx [Mentioned that God need not be considered omnipotent]
Revision 4 . . July 23, 2001 4:56 am by Ap
  
Difference (from prior major revision) (minor diff, author diff)

Changed: 5c5
Much ink has been spilled over the questions regarding rationality of theism (see Faith and rationality)--about whether arguments are needed in order to be rational in believing in God, for example. But we could just as well question the TheRationalityOfAtheism.
Much ink has been spilled over the questions regarding rationality of theism (see Faith and rationality)--about whether arguments are needed in order to be rational in believing in God, for example. But we could just as well question The rationality of atheism.

Changed: 23c23
Premise (1) simply states some basic facts about the conception of God under consideration: "If God exists, then God is omniscient, omnipotent, and all-loving." Ordinary Christians, for example, certainly do not want to reject premise (1). Other people might end up rejecting this premise, because they want to believe in a different sort of God.
Premise (1) simply states some basic facts about the conception of God under consideration: "If God exists, then God is omniscient, omnipotent, and all-loving." Ordinary Christians, for example, certainly do not want to reject premise (1). Other people might end up rejecting this premise, because they want to believe in a different sort of God. Process theologians, for example, reject the notion that God is omnipotent, and the Jewish rabbi Harold Kushner has also questioned the doctrine of omnipotence in some of his books, such as When Bad Things Happen to Good People.

Changed: 59c59
If one wanted to, one could bring a lot of objections to this. Surely the absolute horrors that humanity has faced, especially in the twentieth century, are unnecessary to improve our moral mettle. We could insist on such objections at length. But then we are engaging the project of theodicy in detail, a topic for Theology more than for PhilosophyOfReligion.
If one wanted to, one could bring a lot of objections to this. Surely the absolute horrors that humanity has faced, especially in the twentieth century, are unnecessary to improve our moral mettle. We could insist on such objections at length. But then we are engaging the project of theodicy in detail, a topic for Theology more than for Philosophy of religion.
HomePage | Recent Changes | Preferences
Search: