Why bad things happen to good people from a philosophical and theological point of view

Seat Belt Summons Dismissed. But At What Price???

Why bad things happen to good people from a philosophical and theological point of view

Introducing the Problem Journalist and best-selling author Lee Strobel commissioned George Barna, the public-opinion pollster, to conduct a nationwide survey. The survey included the question "If you could ask God only one question and you knew he would give you an answer, what would you ask? If God is all-powerful, all-knowing and perfectly good, why does he let so many bad things happen?

This question raises what philosophers call "the problem of evil. As it is, however, thousands of good-hearted, innocent people experience the ravages of violent crime, terminal disease, and other evils.

Michael Petersonp. An earthquake kills hundreds in Peru. A pancreatic cancer patient suffers prolonged, excruciating pain and dies. A pit bull attacks a two-year-old child, angrily ripping his flesh and killing him. Countless multitudes suffer the ravages of war in Somalia. A crazed cult leader pushes eighty-five people to their deaths in Waco, Texas.

Millions starve and die in North Korea as famine ravages the land. Horrible things of all kinds happen in our world—and that has been the story since the dawn of civilization. They claim that, since there is something morally problematic about a morally perfect God allowing all of the evil and suffering we see, there must not be a morally perfect God after all.

Mackie and McCloskey can be understood as claiming that it is impossible for all of the following statements to be true at the same time: Any two or three of them might be true at the same time; but there is no way that all of them could be true.

In other words, 1 through 4 form a logically inconsistent set. What does it mean to say that something is logically inconsistent? None of the statements in 1 through 4 directly contradicts any other, so if the set is logically inconsistent, it must be because we can deduce a contradiction from it.

This is precisely what atheologians claim to be able to do.

Why Would a Loving God Allow Pain and Suffering?

Atheologians claim that a contradiction can easily be deduced from 1 through 4 once we think through the implications of the divine attributes cited in 1 through 3.

They reason as follows: Statements 6 through 8 jointly imply that if the perfect God of theism really existed, there would not be any evil or suffering. However, as we all know, our world is filled with a staggering amount of evil and suffering. Atheologians claim that, if we reflect upon 6 through 8 in light of the fact of evil and suffering in our world, we should be led to the following conclusions: From 9 through 11 we can infer: Since evil and suffering obviously do exist, we get: Putting the point more bluntly, this line of argument suggests that—in light of the evil and suffering we find in our world—if God exists, he is either impotent, ignorant or wicked.

Logical Problem of Evil | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

It should be obvious that 13 conflicts with 1 through 3 above. To make the conflict more clear, we can combine 12 and 3 into the following single statement.

There is no way that 13 and 14 could both be true at the same time. These statements are logically inconsistent or contradictory.

Why bad things happen to good people from a philosophical and theological point of view

Statement 14 is simply the conjunction of 1 through 3 and expresses the central belief of classical theism. However, atheologians claim that statement 13 can also be derived from 1 through 3. Because a contradiction can be deduced from statements 1 through 4 and because all theists believe 1 through 4atheologians claim that theists have logically inconsistent beliefs.

They note that philosophers have always believed it is never rational to believe something contradictory.The second point is a commonplace of ancient Greek philosophy, derived from the Principle of Sufficient Reason (the principle that for everything which occurs there is a reason or explanation for why it occurs, and why this way rather than that).

Is an individual's existence best understood scientifically — more particularly, in biological terms? The purpose of biological life, in strictly scientific terms, might be reduced to survival and passing along genes — to propagate, for continuation of the familial line and (largely unconsciously) the species.

It is easy to see how the acceptance of ideas and the interpretation of personal experiences without taking due heed for the way our brains can trick us, is a combination that can lead communities down paths away from normal society.

This time he tries to make the case that in the Bible God orders bad things to happen to people who do things He does not approve of (Exodus You must do your work in . Br. Aurelius Moner is a Catholic monk who was has left the "nice" philosophy of Liberalism behind, having come to understand that the judgment, authority and strength of the Patriarchy is necessary to save civilization from "nice" people.

Why are we here? What are we here for? What is the origin of life? What is the nature of life? What is the nature of reality? What is the purpose of life? Between the “ten things true” and “ten things wrong” regarding Jehovah’s witnesses, I am choosing Jehovah’s point of view but I cannot expand here this teme, it is more than I can do in english. Time. Time is what a clock is used to measure. Information about time tells the durations of events, and when they occur, and which events happen before which others, so time has a very significant role in the universe's organization.

Between the “ten things true” and “ten things wrong” regarding Jehovah’s witnesses, I am choosing Jehovah’s point of view but I cannot expand here this teme, it is more than I can do in english.

My Theological Pigeonhole