In, “The Problem of Evil,” Eleonore Stump argues that the existence of evil in our world does not mean God cannot exist. Stump gives the claim, the good produced by free will overwrites the subsequent evil, making Union with God possible. In this paper I hope to show that God can exist alongside evil, but my belief is that human free will is limited.
There are three claims that the majority of intelligent people are committed to and agree upon if God exists; God is omnipotent, God is omniscient, and God is perfectly good. These claims may be considered universally true, but a point brought up to contradict these claims is, there is evil in the world. Stump points out that looking at just those four claims there are illogical consistencies.
…show more content…
The three claims are; Adam fell, natural evil entered the world as a result of Adam's fall, and after death, either human beings go to Heaven or they go to Hell. Although these claims are controversial, Stump believes they are not demonstrably false and can be used to support her overall conclusion. According to these three Christian beliefs all human beings since Adam's fall have been defective in their free wills, leading them to make selfish and personal choices without considering moral obligations which leads to the un-absorbable evil in our world. It is not possible for human beings to be in complete Union with God and go to heaven due to this defect. Stump claims that this defect can be fixed, she thinks the correct view requires both God and man to cooperate together to fix it. Due to the fact that man cannot fix the defect on his own and although God has the power to remove it miraculously, but He cannot because it would take away man’s free will. Man must will to live morally, this would lead man to be saved by God and in complete Union with Him.
It is shown in the paper that, evil exists because our free will is defective, but through evil, self-realization and good can come from it. Both moral and natural evil can humble us and show us that we need God’s help. Although this is not a guarantee to come from evil, it is what leads most down the righteous path. The fixing
“God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks to us in our conscience, but shouts in our pains: It is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world” (Lewis, 1994, p. 91). Throughout history man has had to struggle with the problem of evil. It is one of the greatest problems of the world. Unquestionably, there is no greater challenge to man’s faith then the existence of evil and a suffering world. The problem can be stated simply: If God is an all-knowing and all-loving God, how can He allow evil? If God is so good, how can He allow such bad things to happen?Why does He allow bad things to happen to good people? These are fundamental questions that many Christians and non-Christians set out to answer.
The problem of evil is a difficult objection to contend with for theists. Indeed, major crises of faith can occur after observing or experiencing the wide variety and depths of suffering in the world. It also stands that these “evils” of suffering call into question the existence of an omnibenevolent and omnipotent God of the Judeo-Christian tradition. The “greater good defense” tries to account for some of the issues presented, but still has flaws of its own.
Throughout the world, most people believe in some type of god or gods, and the majority of them understand God as all-good, all-knowing (omniscient), and all-powerful (omnipotent). However, there is a major objection to the latter belief: the “problem of evil” (P.O.E.) argument. According to this theory, God’s existence is unlikely, if not illogical, because a good, omniscient, and omnipotent being would not allow unnecessary suffering, of which there are enormous amounts.
The problem of evil is inescapable in this fallen world. From worldwide terror like the Holocaust to individual evils like abuse, evil touches every life. However, evil is not a creation of God, nor was it in His perfect will. As Aleksandr
This essay features the discussion of the problem of evil in relation to the existence of god. Specifically outlining two sections where the problem of evil is discussed from atheist and theistic viewpoint.
In, “The Problem of Evil,” Eleonore Stump holds the belief that the existence of evil in our world does not automatically disprove God’s existence. The belief that God cannot live alongside evil is considered to be the Evidential Problem of evil and this is what Stump is arguing against in her paper. Stump argues, the ability to fix our defective free will makes Union with God possible, which overwrites all the un-absorbable evils in the world, showing both God and un-absorbable evils can coexist. In this paper I hope to show that God can exist, but also show that human free will is limited.
...onditions: Since God is all-knowing, the multiverse can exist within God’s omniscience. God is not all-controlling, this allows mankind to have free will. The multiverse exist though human choices. My initial proposal to the argument of free will and omniscient was relied on necessary true, and this coincided with Nelson Pike’s explanation. This eventually leads to a fatalistic view that concludes no human actions are voluntary if one is believing in God. Although, my second proposition is not supported Pike’s essay, but it is inspired by Boethius’ theory of human free will, which based on the condition necessity. Combine with the idea of the multiverse, this allows human to have free while still within the boundary of God’s omniscience. We are living in an age of constant changes, and new hypothesis will develop as we gain more knowledge on the ultimate reality.
Davis, Stephen T., and John B. Cobb. "Free Will and Evil." Encountering Evil: Live Options in Theodicy. Atlanta: J. Knox, 1981. 74-89. Print.
Hick suggests that we shouldn’t view evil as an obstacle; instead evil should be viewed as a tool to achieve moral perfection. In other words, God uses the harshness of life to give us a robust character that wouldn’t be possible to achieve without an imperfect world for good and morally superior actions are only considered “good” in the light of challenges and hardships. While both the above theodicies succeed at explaining why evil exists, both of them fail at explaining why evil is very
In the construction of the Large Hardon Collider, physicists seek and hope to unlock the mysteries of the universe by analyzing the attributes of the most miniscule particles known to man. In the same way, theologians have argued back and forth over the course of human history with regards to the divine attributes of God, seeking and hoping to unlock the mysteries of the metaphysical universe. Although these many attributes, for example omnipresence, could be debated and dissected ad nauseum, it is within the scope of this research paper to focus but on one of them. Of these many divine attributes of God, nothing strikes me as more intriguing than that of God’s omnipotence. It is intriguing to me because the exploration of this subject not only promises an exhilarating exercise in the human faculties of logic, it also offers an explanation into the practical, such as that of the existence of evil, which we live amidst every day. So with both of these elements in hand, I am going to take on the task of digging deeper into the divine attribute of omnipotence in hopes of revealing more of the glory of God, and simultaneously bringing greater humility to the human thinker. In order to gain a better understanding on the subject of divine omnipotence, I am going to analyze four aspects of it. First, I am going to build a working definition of what we mean when we say that God is omnipotent. Second, I am going to discuss the relationship between divine omnipotence and logic. Third, I am going to discuss the relationship between God’s omnipotence and God’s timelessness. Last, I am going to analyze God’s omnipotence in relation to the existence of evil in the world. Through the analysis of these four topics in relation to om...
Both Augustine and Boethius agree that evil could not, by definition, come from God. Augustine abolishes this problem by declaring evil nonexistent while Boethius agrees and expands the idea so that the ability to sin is a weakness. Humans remain responsible amidst God's Providence due to the free will bestowed on Adam in the beginning. Although a difficulty to early Christian thinkers, the problem of sin does have answers consistent with Christianity's fundamental belief in a sovereign, perfect, and lovingly-good God.
If evil cannot be accounted for, then belief in the traditional Western concept of God is absurd” (Weisberger 166). At the end of the day, everyone can come up with all these numerous counter arguments and responses to the Problem of Evil but no one can be entirely responsible or accountable for the evil and suffering in a world where there is the existence of a “omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God.” Does the argument of the Problem of Evil or even the counter arguments help the evil and suffering of innocent human beings across this world? No. However, the Problem of Evil is most successful in recognizing the evil and suffering of the world but not presenting a God that is said to be wholly good and perfect to be blamed and as a valid excuse for the deaths and evil wrongdoings of this world.
In his work, Evil and Omnipotence, J. L. Mackie attempts to point out the faults in the belief of an existence of God. His arguments are primarily centered around the idea of how evil existing within this world contradicts the theist belief that God is all powerful. Mackie argues off the basic premises surrounding the theist’s idea of God’s omnipotence, benevolence, as well as the evil existing. He also himself adds two additional premises one that good is opposed to evil and that omnipotent beings have unlimited power. Mackie argues that if God is omnipotent than he should have been able to create humans free and unerring, eliminating evil from the world. I believe that this can be argued otherwise due to the fact that God could indeed be omnipotent while still allowing evil to exist. I will argue that alternative arguments given by the theist, that God can have humans who are free and erring while
This essay provides a conclusive look at the problems and contradictions underlying a belief in God and the observable traits of the world, specifically the Problem of Evil. The analysis will address the nature of God and the existence of evil in the world, as well as objections such as the "sorting" into heaven and hell objection, God's "mysterious ways" objection, the inscrutability of God objection, values presupposing pain objection, inherent contradictions in "God's freewill," and non-human objections. omnipotent. 2) Evil exists. 3)
The purpose of this essay will be to discuss whether human nature is good, or evil, or both good and evil, or neither good nor evil. To facilitate the following discussion, human nature here would be defined as the distinguishing characteristics we born with, that we tend to have naturally without the influence of external factors. The definition agrees to Xunzi’s, that nature is what is given by Heaven: one cannot learn it; one cannot acquire it by effort. This essay will explain that the deepest essence of human nature is self-preservation and reproduction, which cannot be truly classified into good or evil. It is followed by how we are diverged to behave goodly or badly, argument against the “good nature theory” and different between self-preservation with greed and aggression.