...an argument against the existence of Christian God. I will show how the Problem of Evil is a big factor when concerning Gods existence. I will explore the ideas of how God’s benevolence is contradictory to how the world is. I will also be presenting arguments for the existence of a God but countering them with my points along with philosopher’s theories. J.L Mackie said “if a good and powerful God exists, he would not allow pointless evil, but because there is much unjustifiable, pointless evil in the world, the traditional and powerful God could not exist.”[1]. When we talk about a benevolent God the problem arises of Evil in the world. It’s a problem because God is attributed as being Omnipotent, Omniscient...
Words: 763 - Pages: 4
...exist pointless evils’. I will contest the arguments against Wykstra’s criticism and give alternative examples. Wykstra’s Argument Wykstra asserts that man’s cognitive limitations cannot be compared with the omnipotent and omniscient nature of God, and it is unsurprising that the evil in the world is inscrutable to us. To illustrate, he utilizes the good parent analogy. We view the relationship between God, a perfectly loving being, and humans as analogous to that of good parents and their children. Loving parents permit the administering of a painful injection for vaccinations to their young child. The child cannot comprehend this suffering, but this does not allow the claim that the medicine (evil) is pointless, nor does it undermine the love of the parents (God). Criticism of Wykstra Wykstra’s response is deemed inadequate as some argue: A) God should comfort humans, just as you would expect loving parents to comfort their child. B) A perfectly good being would reveal his reasons to you for allowing this suffering, just as a parent would to their child. In response to A, we ask the question: Why does a parent comfort their baby? Not because the baby will understand, but partially because they are helpless to do anything else. These acts can be seen as more a form of ‘self comfort’ for a parent. Subsequently, self-comforting acts are not expected of a perfectly loving being. Next, the issue that a perfectly good being would feel obligated to inform you of his actions...
Words: 805 - Pages: 4
...based on duty, proposed by St Thomas Aquinas, which also comes from a teleological worldview based on Aristotle’s idea that the good is defined by the final cause. A key aspect to Aquinas’ natural law is also the idea of the synderesis principle, which states that we “naturally do good to avoid evil”. St Thomas Aquinas’ argument was sought to reconcile Christian thought with the Greek thinking of Aristotle’s work, which could be seen in Islamic libraries in the Fall of Toledo, where Christian armies reconquered Spain. Aquinas sees goodness in the Divine Essence (nature of God), which was his first law. His second law was the idea of ‘eternal law’ which he said was reflected in our own human nature and the ends in which we rationally pursue, which draws parallels to the synderesis principle, which opposes the idea of ‘reformation’ which proposes the idea that “we have all sinned and fall short of Gods glory” as portrayed in Romans 3-23. God’s Divine and eternal Laws are further proposed in the Holy Scriptures, such as the Ten Commandments in Exodus 20. From these observable, rational ends, we get the five primary precepts. The Primary Precepts are “good wills” that we rationally pursue, and are absolute. They consist of preservation of life, order in society, worshipping God, education and finally, reproduction. This reflects the Divine Will, whereby God creates us as rational beings and in His image, which is proven in Genesis 1:26-27. However, due to our society today, there...
Words: 1433 - Pages: 6
...I. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of Situation Ethics. (21) May 2013 Situation Ethics is a teleological theory which takes a relativist approach by doing the most loving thing according to the situation and the predicted consequence regardless of laws and rules. The theory also focuses on which action will be most loving for the most people. Joseph Fletcher introduced this theory in 1966 when he released his book “Situation Ethics: The New Morality.” He expresses that he wanted to create a middle ground between legalism and antinomianism as he felt people were becoming secular. He wanted to bring Christians back to the Church. Situation Ethics (SE) has many strengths, firstly it’s very flexible it allows you to consider the different aspects to the situation unlike many other deontological theories that have a much more legalistic approach. For example, Christians believe that murder is wrong in any context or situation however a SE approach would accept the choice of abortion if the person who is pregnant had been raped as it could be considered as the lesser of two evils as the mother didn’t want a child and may not want to be constantly reminded of the traumatic event. Another strength is it follows the teaching of Jesus in the sense that it’s main focus is agape love which is a core belief in Christianity. It’s important that SE was influenced by Jesus as Fletcher introduced it with intentions to bring Christians back to the Church because people were becoming...
Words: 1537 - Pages: 7
...Outline the main principals of situation ethics Situation ethics is based on the idea that you do the most loving thing in a situation, even if it leads to breaking the law. It is known as a relativistic theory. It has no absolute rules that have to be followed in every circumstance. It is also a consequentialist theory, where the end result is held to be of great importance. Finally it is a teleological theory, claiming the morale truth can be found through nature and purpose. Joseph Fletcher, who focused on situation ethics, came to the conclusion that the most loving thing must always be done, as love overwrites anything else in the world. He described situation ethics as a ethical theory based on the single principal of love and people should enter every situation prepared to act in the most loving way. The right thing to do in any given situation is the mist loving thing to do. Fletcher defined love as always being good, love and justice are the same, for love is justice distributed. He said the end result of love justifies the means and it makes a decision which is unique to each individual situation. Fletcher described loved using the word ‘agape’ which in translation means ‘God’s love of humanity’. His view is strengthened by the Bible as ‘agape’ come from what Jesus taught us, to ‘love thy neighbour’. Situation ethics consists of 4 main principals highlighted by Vardy and Grosch as: pragmatism, relativism, positivism and personalism. Vardy and Grosch first principal...
Words: 625 - Pages: 3
...the prerogative as it’s the only aspect that is intrinsically good. Many debates have been developed around the argument whether ‘Situation Ethics is always practical’. According to Joseph Fletcher, ‘Situation Ethics is always practical’. The philosopher developed the teleological theory of Situation Ethics according to the teachings of Jesus Christ, a being who lived his life according to how God demands mankind to live. Within The New Testament, Jesus implies that we do not have to follow a set of rules and laws, especially when love is demanded. This can be seen within the example Jesus set, when The Son of God defended his friends for working on the Sabbath day. The New Testament highlights, Jesus taught his followers that all Christian actions and decisions should be seen in the light of love. Therefore, this supports Fletcher’s claim that ‘Situation Ethics is always practical’, as he developed a series of rule breaking principles according to Jesus’ teachings, which would bring about the most loving outcome, and serves the majority according to those in loves need. An example of this is Fletcher’s principle that, ‘only one thing is intrinsically good; namely love – nothing else’. This supports the view that ‘Situation Ethics is always practical’, as actions are good if they help human beings, and even if they are immoral actions, but bring about the most loving outcome, they are still considered to be good. Despite Fletcher’s strong argument which is supported...
Words: 883 - Pages: 4
...Willimon’s primary argument is biblical case against the fear of the other. Willimon, in response to the fear mongering prevalent in American culture and politics, seeks to make the case that the Gospel is the drawing close to the other as means of drawing close to God. This short book address the themes of being saved by the other, when the other is an enemy, what Christian fear should look like, loving the other in Church and understanding Jesus as the other. Throughout, Willimon attests that love for the other is the heart of God’s love for us. An evaluation of the sources used for the study Willimon primary source for his argument against the fear of the other is the Bible. Appealing to the authority of the Bible, and in particular the life of Jesus, is at the heart of Willimon’s argument. Considering, that Fear of the Other is first and foremost a biblical case for the end of fearing the other this is a fitting primary source for Willimon’s argument. However, the Bible is not the only source that Willimon engages. There is a small list of secondary sources most important of which are Scott Bader-Saye, David Rock and Miroslav Volf. Both Scott...
Words: 1227 - Pages: 5
...Christianity practices the teachings of Jesus in “turning the other cheek” rather than retaliating against evil attacks like other religions suggest an “eye for an eye.” Jesus was tortured, degraded, judged and ultimately killed because he loved the people of the world, the same people who killed him he gave his life for. Christianity preaches that God wants his followers to be merciful like his son in turning the other cheek and loving his enemies. “We are told that we are not to resist evil but to turn the other cheek. The world assumes that evil must be resisted by every means available. We are told to love our enemies and bless those who curse us. The world assumes that friends are to be loved and enemies hated.”(Smith, p.212) If Jesus had not turned the other cheek and sacrificed himself for all of mans’ sins God would not be loving or forgiving of man and there would be no promise of eternal life which would take away life’s true meaning. The Bible clearly states that we are to love our enemies and be merciful and that doing so will yield a great reward for these holy actions. "But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return. Your reward will be great, and you will be children of the Most High; for he is kind to the ungrateful and the wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful."(Luke 6:35-36). Many followers of the Christian faith may not fully understand why Jesus is asking them to love their enemies. Why should we love those...
Words: 1147 - Pages: 5
...been and is being asked from various religions, cultures, and socioeconomic backgrounds is how can a loving and good God allow evil to come into the world? It is a problem that has come up several times by mostly atheists and non-believers, but few Christians are asking it as well. This paper is going to address the problem of evil, why bad things happen to good people, and state the theodicies that explain and answer the problem. The problem of evil has been brought up and used as an argument by non-believers for a long time. How can a loving and good God allow evil to come into the world? They claim that these two Christian beliefs are self-contradictory and that nothing can make sense of it. They state that Christians believe that God is all-powerful, that God is good and loves His people, and that an all-powerful God is capable of doing anything and everything. They say that This question has been used to unjustifiably contradict the Christian worldview in its attempt to prove that it is flawed. They are biased and desire to convince other people and themselves that their worldview is correct by discrediting the Christian religion and/or the Bible. (Feinberg, 414). The deductive reasoning that atheists have are that if God is all powerful, kind and generous, humans are the cause of evil, an all powerful God is fully capable of doing anything and everything, then God should be able to remove evil and he will. The reason why these are a mistake is that there is not...
Words: 904 - Pages: 4
...meaningful life, some to self-satisfaction, in serving others and one in serving a loving God. However, Atheism holds to a belief that there is no afterlife only an end of all existence. With this in mind and there being various religious aspects we must ponder the question, how can humanity reject or disallow the everlasting father, the one true God? Many are the disputes for and against the existence of a God and many have proven to be confusing and misguided to say the least but do propose strong arguments that should be understood. An article by Australian philosopher H. J. McCloskey titled, “On Being an Atheist” presents a seemingly very compelling pro-atheist argument. McCloskey wastes no time and opens his article by explaining the flawed belief systems of theism. Although there are a other arguments to be considered in formulating a solid perspective McCloskey chooses to remain in the scope of three, the Cosmological, Teleological and the argument of design. Cosmological arguments endeavor to surmise the existence of God through the universe or cosmos and are sometimes referred to as first cause arguments. Beginning with the Cosmological argument he attempts to persuade his readers against this theory stating that it is deficient because it relates to a first cause and theists would have one believe that the first cause is an “all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause”, referring to the self existing God and...
Words: 1594 - Pages: 7
...The Great Desert of Despair and Desolation Today, there are so many people living in the desert of desolation and despair. There, in the desert of their self inflicted loneliness, they seek objects to fill in the emptiness of their hearts. Just as Jesus was tempted by the Evil One for 40 days, they are being tempted, and many are falling and giving into the "Great Lie", and they choose the "Lie", that which is contrary to God's Law and Precepts. But like Adam and Eve they choose the evil. The heat and dryness of the desert enter into their hearts and transforms them into stone. The Light becomes Darkness, Good becomes Evil, and the Evil becomes the Good. They become their own little "gods", thinking they know better than the Creator of all....
Words: 327 - Pages: 2
...It's Not God’s Fault; Blame the Hypocrites! God has been the subject of criticism among the agnostics, atheists, the not-so believing, and the innocent. Whenever natural calamities strike humanity, the enemies of God have a ready target in the person of somebody whom they do not believe to exist — rendering themselves as idiots (Jude 1:10) “But these speak evil of those things which they know not: but what they know naturally, as brute beasts, in those things they corrupt themselves.” If only they are using their power to think, their allegation that, “If there is a God, why is He permitting these things to happen?”, they should have realized the truth that there are things that happen on earth beyond the control of all humanity; proving that somebody more powerful than man is doing such things. Their criticism, if investigated, will compel them to believe in the existence of God. The notion that, “If there is a God these should not happen” gives honor to God whose existence they deny. They are unwittingly proving that God is a God of goodness — who must not permit these things to happen. Let us investigate. Earthquakes (like the very recent one in Haiti), volcanic eruptions, and tidal waves are acts of God. (Job 9:5-6) “Which removeth the mountains, and they know not: which overturneth them in his anger. Which shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble.” (Amos 9:6) “It is he that buildeth his stories in the heaven, and hath founded...
Words: 1548 - Pages: 7
...Everyone believes that God allows evil to happen. Believers and unbelievers struggle with this concept. The problem with evil is that it’s deeply rooted in us because God gave us free will. Without free will, we would be forced into loving God. He, however, wants us to love him because we choose to. Many unbelievers argue that “the existence of such evil cannot be reconciled with, and so disproves, the existence of such a God. (The Philosophy of Religion, 2008).” The theology of Hamartiology explains that evil comes in moral and natural ways. The most common that is rooted in us is the moral way. Moral evil is the willful bad acts or decisions of humans against God, others and even themselves. Every day we experience this as a way of life. An example is what we see in our current news. Isis, a terrorist group, choose to murder people for their faith. Natural evil is the “result of any event perceived to be morally negative and that is not caused by the action or inaction of an agent, such as a person. (Chief of Sinners)” An example of this would be if a person chooses to smoke cigarettes, then it is inevitably going to cause them to get lung cancer along with many other harmful diseases which are forms of natural evil. The question as to why sin exist and bad things happen is often asked, especially by lost souls. If you think about it, if God created a perfect world then none of us would have free will. We would essentially be loving God with no reason other than because...
Words: 467 - Pages: 2
...theologians would argue that Jesus never taught anything that was against the Jewish faith, and was just another new thinking Rabbi. The understand Jesus’ teachings, however, it is fundamental to have a comprehension of the Jewish way of like, and their rules. The Hebrew word for this is Halakah, which translates exactly as ‘the path that one walks...’ Halakah is made up of a series of Mitzvot Aseh (positive commandments ‘to do’) and Mitzvot lo ta’aseh (negative commandments ‘do not’) which are Mitzvot D’oraita (Laws directly from the torah). Then there are Mitzvot D’rabbanan which are Laws instituted by the Rabbis. There are 613 Mitzvot, made up of 248 mitzvot aseh and 365 mitzvot lo ta’aseh, which some of the early Jews claimed to have special meaning because there are 365 days in a year, and 248 bones in the body, but this is actually wrong, and just something said to make the numbers appear to be a sign from God, which they do not appear to be. Also, Manson says that the numbers are not important, merely the content that is of importance. The main teaching of Jesus was Love. He said that love should be the reason for any action. There are 3 types of love mentioned in the bible, Agape which is unconditional love e.g. for one’s family, Phila which is the love for a friend (from Philadelphia, the city of brotherly love) and Eros which is sexual love, all of which Jesus preached about at different occasions. As well as loving the obvious, he says you should also love your enemies, which...
Words: 1794 - Pages: 8
...Reply Paper to H.J. McCloskey’s Essay: On Being An Atheist H.J McCloskey makes many bold statements in opposition to the most common arguments for theism. To say the least, his bias shows through, even to the point of not seeing the deeper picture. He makes claims against the cosmological and teleological arguments. He then makes a point on how evil speaks against the existence of God. He then concludes with a statement that may or may not be supported by these statements (McCloskey, 1968). The Cosmological Argument McCloskey makes some statements about the necessity of a being that created the universe. He also makes some points about how this being cannot be perfect The Necessarily Existent Being It is amazing how people will require one set of standards for themselves, yet another set of standards for others. This is exemplified in the paper that is presented by H.J McCloskey. He States that proof is required for belief in a god (McCloskey, 1968, p. 51). But he also wants to believe in an origin of the universe in which a bunch of something without origin explodes to create hundreds of thousands of galaxies. Mr. McCloskey wishes to say that one must have proof before they believe. What Mr. McCloskey is not saying is that it would take proof to convince him not to believe in the manner he does. Mr. McCloskey has a belief system which serves his purposes. He has chosen a system that does not have enough solid defeaters to pull it apart. This allows Mr. McCloskey to settle...
Words: 2451 - Pages: 10
