Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The relationship between faith and belief
Relationship of belief to faith
Relationship of belief to faith
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The relationship between faith and belief
In God, Power, and Evil: A Process Theodicy by Davis Ray Griffin the author attempts to take an unbiased look at this age old question, “Why do bad things happen to good people?” The author explores different theoretical beliefs in an attempt to answer this question. In most of the resources that I examined the base principle is, above all, a person’s personal belief in God, or lack of, will more than likely dictate how one is able to decipher and understand the logic of evil in the world.
Rather than spending time on trying to figure out why God allows evil to exist, the focus should be aimed at what is within our ability to control or to prevent the existence of evil and understand that without evil; good could not exist.
Griffin (2004) states that “the proper way to meet a practical problem is with a practical solution; that is, the question is not how we explain evil – for by definition it is an absurdity and hence inexplicable – but how we overcome it. In fact, preoccupation with theoretical questions only adds to the evil, since it prevents one from exerting all one’s energy to overcoming evil.” (p.15)
The author suggests that an effort in attempting to figure out “why” evil exists will not provide substantial answers, but more focus on understanding the necessity of evil to allow
…show more content…
good to prevail will perhaps provide more moral satisfaction. As stated by Griffin (2004) “for it seems to imply if God wanted to prevent all evil, God could.” (p.18) It would seem that God does want to prevent all evils in the world, but He also knows that it is not all within in His power. It is not our responsibility as Christians to question His logic, but instead stand in our beliefs that good will prevail over evil. God tasks mankind with having unwavering faith that any suffering that is experienced is part of His divine plan and that humans will ultimately be rewarded by our existence in Heaven. We need to trust our beliefs and not question the evils in the world, since we don’t question the good in the world. The focus needs to be on what is within our control. We are as much in control of our destiny as we believe God is. If we live by his teachings and know that we are carrying out his will for us as his individual children. In his writings Boyd (2001) states that “unlike God, who alone possesses goodness as an inherent quality, contingent beings such as angels and humans must bring it “to perfection…through their freedom of choice.”(p. 41) We all have choices to make every day in regards to our salvation. We have the freedom to live our lives off of the basis of promoting “good” and accepting that there will always be evil to contest in the world or we can choose to succumb to the confusion that evil has to be explained and comprehended. Evil is a necessary component in our world. It seems that in order for us to be able to appreciate the “good” in the world, we have to have something tangible to compare it to. Without evil there would not be anything to gauge goodness against. Griffin (2004) writes that “the other key premise is, of course, the doctrine that God is perfectly good. And the “goodness” that is relevant here is moral goodness, which can somewhat adequately be defined as the desire to promote good and prevent evil. Accordingly, if God is perfectly good morally, this seems to imply that God would want to prevent all evil.” (p.18) Finally, I would challenge all of mankind to pay close attention to executing the scripture written in (Matthew 7:12 New International Version) “So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.” This could be the basis for which we can make heartfelt attempts at subjugating the evils in the world.
It would allow us the intimate control of our own salvation rather than trying to understand something that is outside of our control. We will never know the exact “why” in regards to wanting to know why bad things happen to good people. In my opinion, the authors were not able to provide a definitive answer for “why” bad things happen to good people. They tried their best to explain the foundation for how people try and answer this question based on their personal belief system. I feel that the only answer is to trust in God’s will and to live our lives based on His
doctrine.
An Analysis of Peter van Inwagen’s The Magnitude, Duration, and Distribution of Evil: a Theodicy
Claudia Card begins by questioning the difference between wrong and evil. How do we know when something crosses the line between being just wrong, to being an evil act? How does hatred and motive play a part in this? How can people psychologically maintain a sense of who they are when they have been the victims of evil? Card attempts to explain these fundamental questions using her theory of evil; the Atrocity Paradigm (Card, pg.3).
It appears that the problem of evil is a substantial one. While arguments exist that can challenge assumptions of the problem, it sometimes requires some definition contorting and does not answer all the challenges evil presents. The greater good defense presents some key insights into how we must perceive God’s actions but does not completely defend against the presented problems of evil. Therefore, a more plausible defense is needed to eliminate the problems evil creates with the Judeo-Christian concept of God.
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
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.
Suppose he had a reason to permit evil, a reason that was compatible with his never doing wrong and his being perfect in love, what I 'll call a justifying reason. For example, suppose that if he prevented evil completely, then we would miss out on a greater good, a good whose goodness was so great that it far surpassed the badness of evil. In that case, he might not prevent evil as far as he can, for he would have a justifying reason to permit it” (5). Even if God had a reason to allow evil, he who is all loving and powerful would want the least amount of people to suffer and feel pain. Since God knows what is going to happen before it actually happens, would he not be morally obligated to stop people from doing something evil to others, or preventing suffering by those who have been hurt by evil?
The Problem of Evil is the question that asks if God is perfectly benevolent, all-powerful, and all-knowing, then how can he allow evil to exist? Many philosophers have tried to answer this age-old question, often focusing on the intellect and the will. This essay will explore and compare the ways in which Descartes, Leibniz, and Berkeley each attempt to solve this dilemma.
In order to understand The Problem of Evil, we must first understand the concept of God. The God that this problem addresses is what we call a PKM god. This god is accepted in multiple religions, such as Christianity, Islam, and Judaism. Over half of the world population claims to be followers of any of
Anywhere you look, you are staring into the eyes of evil. You might not see evil staring back, but it’s there, trapped behind a wall of morality. It is always scheming, preparing to burst out of its confinement. It may find a hole for some time, but it can never win; good will triumph in the end. Bram Stoker and Robert Louis Stevenson, the authors of Dracula and The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde respectively have this view of the world. Their novels illustrate that good and evil are constantly vying for control both in our lives and in the environment around us.
begin to comprehend this puzzling question by, first, understanding the true meaning of evil and
Tooley, M. (2002). The Problem of Evil. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved (2009, October 16) from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil/
The problem of evil has been a huge debate between atheists and theists. The problem of evil is how can evil occur in the world if God, a perfect being, created the world, and why do bad things happen to good people if God is in charge. Used to critique theism, the problem of evil questions God’s perfection and his existence. It questions God’s perfection by saying, “Whoever does not chose the best is lacking in power, or in knowledge, or in goodness” (Leibniz 89). This means that people do not think that God can be all powerful or perfect because they do not think that this world was the best possible choice. The problem of evil also critiques the question of God’s existence by saying, “If there is more evil than
... the writer of the statement believes that evil exists because of experience and how they are nurtured. What the writer of the statement is basically trying to say is that if it wasn’t for moral codes, experiencing unpleasant things then evil wouldn’t exist in this world.
Evil threatens human reason, it provokes human hope that the wold makes sense. Today evil is. Viewed as a substance of human cruelty. Susan Neiman writes in her novel, Evil in Modern Thought: an alternative history of philosophy, of the characteristics of the twentieth-century philosophy, is "the absence of explicit discussion of the problem of evil" (288). Neiman constructs a compelling case that actually the problem of evil is the central concern in the history of philosophy and is the "guiding force of modern thought" (2-3).
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.