...that knowledge as we humans become more intellectual and gain depth into the fields we study. Should we look at this as a gift or a curse? The authors Ehrman and Stackhouse, authors with great resumes in the faith and in scholarly subjects of religion, tackle the subject of an all-powerful and good God with depth. The way they deal with this controversial question is through the concept of suffering and how they can use suffering to explain this question. Not only do they ask questions that common people don’t ask, but they also answer these question through the lens of many types of religion and explanation. They have their opinion and also arguments to both sides of the points they illustrate. They were concerned more with opening every door available and letting the reader decide which path they would like to take as far as investigation or their opinions with the topic. Besides that, it was clear that Ehrman was not in favor of an all-powerful and good God and that suffering proves that while Stackhouse was. Ehrman, a man who previously served the lord but changed his ways, makes the case through suffering that a good, powerful God does not exist. He starts off by saying that God brought Jesus to our world in a point of darkness or sin. (7) Why doesn’t God come into our world again? There had been many tragedies after Christ and we can sure use guidance to help with the new sufferings. Using the fact that God hasn’t visited us again, Ehrman asks if God wants people to...
Words: 1977 - Pages: 8
...evil states that if God exists and he is omnibenevolent and omnipotent, he would eliminate all evil from the world. However, since evil obviously exists, as we see people suffering and bad things happening everyday, if God existed, and he was all-knowing and all-powerful there would be no evil in the world (Robbins, 2012). Mackie presents several solutions to the problem of evil that he deems fallacious. I will argue that "Good cannot exist without evil" and "Evil is due to human free will" are in fact adequate solutions to the problem of evil. Mackie (1955), defines God as an omnipotent and omnibenevolent being, meaning God is all-knowing and all-good, and should be able to eliminate all evil from the world, and yet evil exists all around us. Mackie (1955), defines evil as needless suffering. There is human evil, something done by people, to people and natural evil, like natural disasters. The first fallacious solution Mackie (1955), presents is "Good cannot exist without evil." 1. If God is omnipotent, he would be powerful enough to stop all evil. 2. Evil exists. Therefore, God is not omnipotent, or there are limits on God's omnipotence. The first premise states that if God were in fact omnipotent or all-powerful, then he should RESPONSE TO FALLACIOUS SOLUTIONS 2 be able to eliminate any evil in the world without any problem. The second premise simply states that evil exists, which we can clearly see in the...
Words: 1223 - Pages: 5
...evil states that if God exists and he is omnibenevolent and omnipotent, he would eliminate all evil from the world. However, since evil obviously exists, as we see people suffering and bad things happening everyday, if God existed, and he was all-knowing and all-powerful there would be no evil in the world (Robbins, 2012). Mackie presents several solutions to the problem of evil that he deems fallacious. I will argue that "Good cannot exist without evil" and "Evil is due to human free will" are in fact adequate solutions to the problem of evil. Mackie (1955), defines God as an omnipotent and omnibenevolent being, meaning God is all-knowing and all-good, and should be able to eliminate all evil from the world, and yet evil exists all around us. Mackie (1955), defines evil as needless suffering. There is human evil, something done by people, to people and natural evil, like natural disasters. The first fallacious solution Mackie (1955), presents is "Good cannot exist without evil." 1. If God is omnipotent, he would be powerful enough to stop all evil. 2. Evil exists. Therefore, God is not omnipotent, or there are limits on God's omnipotence. The first premise states that if God were in fact omnipotent or all-powerful, then he should RESPONSE TO FALLACIOUS SOLUTIONS 2 be able to eliminate any evil in the world without any problem. The second premise simply states that evil exists, which we can clearly see in the...
Words: 1223 - Pages: 5
...to Atheism In reading McCloskey’s article it’s obvious he is searching for definitive proof that God exists. He is unable to find proof and therefore comes to the conclusion that God must not exist. He believes that the existence of evil discredits arguments made in support of believing in God. There is not one single thing in this world that we can know definitively without looking at the evidence. You have to look at the whole picture. Just like in a criminal investigation, the crime scene investigators gather evidence they are not looking for just the bullets or just the body. They look and gather all the data before coming to any conclusions. We will discuss each of the arguments and some additional reasons McCloskey gives as reasons not to believe that God exists. Cosmological Argument When we examine the cosmological argument we find that for something to exist there has to be a cause for its existence. The universe exists and was necessary for human beings to exist. We are contingent beings; our existence relies on the existence of the universe. We exist, and therefore so does the universe exist and there must be an ultimate cause of that existence. McCloskey makes a good point when he says the cosmological argument does not prove there is an all powerful, perfect uncaused cause but it provides strong evidence that there is some necessary cause to the world we live in and instead of being dismissed it should move us to investigate that “necessary cause” in...
Words: 1573 - Pages: 7
...C. S. Lewis once said, “God is not the sort of thing that one can be moderately interested in.” This implies that if God exists humanity ought to find the best way to relate with Him and if God does not exist then there is no need to be interested in God at all. Most theist and atheist philosopher like Camus and Sartre agree that the answer to the question of whether God exists makes a huge difference for man. For example, if there is no God then life ends in death, and therefore our existence is inconsequential. On the other hand, if there is a God, then there a chance/possibility of knowing and relating with Him as part of His creation. This paper therefore seeks to provide reasons that assert the claim that God exists in addition to responding to the popular atheistic theory of theodicy which claims that the problem of evil proves that God does not exist and if He does then He is not good and omnipotent. One of the arguments that theists use to prove the existence of God is the one of the origin of the universe. It relies on the widely popular assertion that the there was a time when the earth was not there. For centuries, human beings have seen themselves faced with the question of why we have everything instead of nothing. Atheists claim that the universe we live in is eternal with no beginning or end and that is all. Surely, that claim is not reasonable. If there is beginning point for the universe then the actual number of events that occurred in the past is infinite...
Words: 1709 - Pages: 7
...existence of God has been a controversial topic discussed by philosophers over many centuries. One of the arguments for God’s existence comes from the belief that the type of God that would exist is an all just and all-knowing supernatural being that has laid down objective moral laws for humans to follow. This is called the moral argument. In this paper I argue that the moral arguments does not stand against objections when trying to prove God’s existence. This paper has five parts beginning with a thorough outline and explanation of the moral argument (1). Next I will present four objections and the theists reply to them. First is that morality doesn’t depend on God’s existence only the belief in God (2). Second, that one cannot be truly...
Words: 1547 - Pages: 7
...the physical world is a pale imitation of the world of the forms The allegory of the cave The prisoners- normal people of society The prisoner who escapes- philosophers, people that thirst to know the real truth The people casting the shadows- the leaders of society- shaping the world without knowing the truth The shadows/statues- what people believe is reality, what they are told to believe, things people deem to be important The cave- a world without knowledge, the physical world/the body The fire- controlled, dim light- limited knowledge. An imitation of the form of the good The journey outside- a difficult journey, acquisition of knowledge The sun- illuminates the true world- form of the good The journey back into the cave- the desire to educate and inform others of the truth The world of the Forms Forms Plato uses the word ‘form’ to describe the true essence of material objects in the world This idea of the ‘form’ exists in a non physical (yet more real) realm that can only be understood by the mind. This is called the world of the forms Plato believed that the forms were interrelated and hierarchical The highest form The ultimate principle is the form of the good The world of the forms Perfect, eternal, real, a’priori, transcendent, immutable, real The world of the forms is the philosopher’s world. The ordinary person struggles to see past the illusion of this world because they are confined by their senses. Only the person who investigates and questions...
Words: 5746 - Pages: 23
...contingently. This is based on the idea of the Principle of Sufficient Reason that states that every truth is either necessary or contingent, but the principle it follows is neither. The idea is that God is the only being that necessarily exists. (26) Sophie stated it the best by saying “A necessary truth couldn’t conceivably be false. It is, in that sense, self-evident.” (27) There must be a reason for the truth of every fact. It is either based on the idea of the facts it lies upon itself or based on some other true facts. Oscar did not buy into any of this. He felt as though everything seemed to good to be true. How can all these facts just depend on each other but do not explain anything? David added that either God exists or the universe is inexplicable (28), which Oscar then agreed upon. However if the universe is not inexplicable, then God exists. Therefore, is the universe explicable? David made a good point by saying, “The belief in God is irrational, but now it looks as if the universe itself is irrational if God doesn’t exist.” Sophie consulted and realized that there is no definite answer to this question. If God does not exist then the universe is indifferent to our sense of order and intelligence. If the Principle of Sufficient Reason is true, then God exists. Sophie concluded and said, “The Greeks gave us the idea of cosmos, which things happen for a reason...
Words: 1517 - Pages: 7
...against or for each one of these opponents’ arguments highlight, especially, the differences in the conception of man’s free will. Luther and his supporters view free will as an imaginary or impossible and dangerous thing to have; Erasmus and his supporters defend that the existence of man’s free will is irrefutable for it is in human nature itself as the Bible says it. In spite of some of Luther’s good ideas that prove man’s absence of free will and Erasmus’ excellent interpretation of the Bible, neither of them fully responds to the human yearning of knowing the concept of free will. After a thorough and wise analysis of the defense and abnegation of man’s free will of these authors, I find it impossible to fully deny or prove the existence of man’s free will. It is important to take into account Luther’s argument and Erasmus’ before making a decision about the concept of free will. First of all, we are going to analyze the debate between Luther and Erasmus. In this debate, we will also consider other writers’ opinions on the debate on free will. In the end we will, before introducing a new concept of free will, explain why standing on one side (Luther’s or Erasmus’)...
Words: 3561 - Pages: 15
...Christian faith, especially those with very strong beliefs. We as Christians believe that God is almighty and there is really no need to believe in any other being or even question that he exists. In this article from McCloskey, he talks about God’s existence and if there truly is a God, then why is there evil in world? This essay will have my findings on the questions we were asked as class about McCloskey’s thoughts and the thoughts from the book, Philosophy of Religion. When believing in anything, people like to have proof as to why something exists. Christians might show proof in God’s existence or Atheists might show proof in that there is no God. We all have reasons as to why we believe in certain things and sometimes its can be hard to prove. McCloskey talks about proofs in his article, saying that there are proofs to the non-existence of God. In a presentation titled “Approaching the Question of God’s Existence”, the author is quite the opposite of McCloskey. He doesn’t believe that we should try proving anything; it is a word to steer away from. We shouldn’t try to find proof that God exists, but find a best explanation to why he exists. McCloskey says that proofs cannot actually make a case that there is a God. In the presentation, though, it is explained that we can make our best case for why he exists. The author says, “There are certain things we see within the universe, the best explanation is God.” (Approaching the Questions of God’s Existence) So in conclusion...
Words: 1416 - Pages: 6
...happens in the prayer life of people that they can feel that the Lord has abandoned them. Frustration and discouragement strike them in such moments. They don’t find any meaning in the perseverance....
Words: 1100 - Pages: 5
...PHL 101 11 March 2012 A Summary of the problem of evil and a critical evaluation of how it is said to undermine the traditional characteristics of God. This paper will attempt to review the philosophical quandary of the existence of evil and if evil exists can God exist and if so can this God still be declared perfect? The epistemological issue that arises is One’s knowledge of God and the validity of God’s existence. What is good and what is evil? The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines evil as: 1. a : morally reprehensible : sinful, wicked <an evil impulse> b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct <a person of evil reputation> 2 a: archaic : inferior b : causing discomfort or repulsion : offensive <an evil odor> c : disagreeable <woke late and in an evil temper> 3 a : causing harm : pernicious <the evil institution of slavery> b : marked by misfortune : unlucky For the purpose of this paper, we will use the first definition. Evil is a trait that we as human beings possess. Whether we choose to use it is up to the individual. But what is evil? Do we as humans consciously choose to be good or evil? What plays a role in bringing out that evil? We next need to look at what is God and does he exist? God as defined by Merriam-Webster is: 1. capitalized : the supreme or ultimate reality: as a : the Being perfect in power, wisdom, and goodness who is worshipped as creator...
Words: 1259 - Pages: 6
...a place where we can go, when our weary hearts need rest. We can lay our burdens at the feet of the One who loves us most. He is Jesus. In order to succeed you must fail, in order to love you must love yourself and in order to live your life must shed all negative aspects of your life."~ ♥ * One of the greatest blessings in the world is to be able to be happy even when things in life are not going the way we planned. Sometimes the road you travel doesn't lead to the destination you had hoped for. But if you can look back on the trip and still smile...then it was worth it. PUT YOUR FAITH, TRUST AND EXPECTATIONS IN THE LORD! GOD BLESS. Sometimes you have to accept that things won't ever change, no matter how much time, effort and thought you put into it. Life's not about all the steps you've taken, or all the places you have been ~ but the footprints you've left behind. If life is a waste of time and time is a waste of life, then let’s get wasted and have the time of our lives. ~"Everyone wants happiness, and nobody wants pain. But how can you make a rainbow, without any rain?."~ We don't always know what God plans for us. We must know that His Ways are not our ways, but His ways are always the best. Be Grateful each & everyday with your life that you have because there's somebody out there that would love to switch places with you in a heartbeat "Things happen because we choose to. There may be regrets but blaming is not an option. We get happy, get...
Words: 3782 - Pages: 16
...Can we be good without God? There is no doubt that some valuable moral insights have been spread by religion. Religion seems to be a good place to start thinking of morality, but we cannot rely on God to tell us what is right morally and what is wrong. We should recognize that morality is based on human needs and interests, and not on God’s commands because they cannot be regarded as imposing moral obligations unless we already possess a sense of right and wrong independent of his commands. The claim that we need God to provide morality does not withstand analysis because it is the circumstances under which we live that influence the content of our norms, not divine commands. Morality is a human institution serving human needs, and the norms of the common morality will persist as long as there are humans around. (Lindsay.) God’s moral nature is expressed to us in the form of divine commands which compose our moral duties or obligations and holds all persons morally accountable for their actions .But on the atheistic view there is no divine lawgiver. But...
Words: 598 - Pages: 3
...is deceptively simple: do good and avoid evil. • Jesus states his version of this adage which is found in the Sermon on the Mount. It is known as the Golden Rule – “Treat others the way you would have them treat you: this sums up the law and the prophets.” (Mt 7:12) • This is message is concerned with action, with positive effort on behalf of others. Contrast this with the teaching of a famous Jewish rabbi of Jesus’ day. When asked to sum up the teaching of the law and the prophets, the rabbi responded: “Avoid doing to others what you do not wish them to do to you.” Whereas the message of Jesus is to get involved as the Father has gotten involved with humanity, the rabbi cautions a more conservative approach. The rabbi wants us merely to keep from harming others. Jesus wants us to act, not just react. • Jesus further puts his own special seal on this maxim by stating the two greatest commandments: love God and love one another. To love someone is to seek to do good to them, and certainly, at the very least, to avoid doing them evil. • What is Christian Moral Life? • Misconceptions 1. Reduced to avoidance of sin 2. Reduced to a series of don’ts and dire punishment if we fail • What is Christian Moral Life? • Positive and Fuller Meaning 1. Moral theology should start with God and God’s love - JP II (Veritatis Splendor) : The moral life is a response to the many gratuitous initiatives taken by God out of God’s love - God always acts first: the moral...
Words: 1729 - Pages: 7
