Mill would say that if God is omniscient then surely he is aware of our suffering and would therefore intervene in the evil as he loves us all. Yet God still allows our suffering to continue which suggests that God is not powerful (omnipotent) at all and cannot stop us or save us from this evil. Mill also believes that the natural disasters and natural problems within the human body such as curable or incurable cancers and diseases such as motor-neurone disease (causes of the body to shut down slowly) for example show faults in the design. These disaster show poor design but how can an all knowing
This essay concerns itself with proving that God does not exist, however my personal belief is that God does exist. The argument against the existence of God based on the existence of evil is outlined as: 1. If God were to exist, then that being would be an omnipotent, omniscient, and Omni-benevolent. 2. If an all-PKG being existed, then there would be no evil.
Boethius used this theory to illustrate how God is not able to relate to humans as he is not in time with them, nor one of them. This means that he can also not interact them including punishing and rewarding humans. Boethius explains that if God were to interact, punishing and rewarding, it would mean he would be experiencing time as one and so undermining Boethius’ theory of god being eternal. This idea is more consistent with the idea that God is immutable and is not contingent. On the other hand, Boethius also states that humans do not have free will.
b. Dostoyevsky points out the terrible suffering and cruelty there is in the world. How might that undermine Pascal’s argument? “The Wager” by Pascal is a reading about the risk of choosing between the existence of God and the nonexistence of God. Pascal argues that people will have everything to gain if they choose to believe in the existence of God but they will lose nothing if they do believe and are wrong. I disagree with Pascal’s argument and I do not think it is a good one.
Recognising this reaffirms that God is more than we can ever imagine – he is ineffable, can never be described so we cannot say what they are not. Strengths of via negativa are that it allows things to be said about God without implying that the finite (humans) can grasp the infinite (God), it also asserts the claims of revelation, that God is good and then recognises goodness to be a human word and so must be negated by saying too that God is not good to
Yet to this day, no one seems any closer to an answer than when they first started. In consequence, when trying to compare two works with very different views of life and death, like Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God by Jonathan Edwards and Thanatopsis by William Cullen Bryant, one can find many differences, but also a few key similarities. To be specific, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God shows that Jonathan Edwards believes that the sinful way man lives his life brings wrath from a god that they should fear, while Thanatopsis portrays a worldview in which death is welcomed and god is not considered. In his work Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, Edwards uses fear to manipulate his audience into repenting and turn to Christ. His puritan worldview led him to believe that “God has laid himself under no obligation, by any promise to keep any natural man out of hell” (Edwards 175).
This means that the only thing that makes and act morally wrong is that God either commands or prohibits it. Whether he will support or be against them, it is entirely up to him. This theory shows that actions can either be accepted or denied based solely upon God’s judgment and whether he agrees or disagrees with what is at hand. If God agrees with certain actions or circumstances, then it is right just because God says that it is right. But on the other hand, if God does not agree with certain actions or circumstances, then it is wrong because God says that it is wrong.
Can one be moral and not believe in God? Have you ever judged or been judged unfairly? How about thinking someone’s a bad person because they don’t believe in God? In the world today we are beginning to see an ethical system being built based on tolerance and enlightenment; apart from God. A person undoubtedly can ne moral without believing in God.
Dante's Inferno Dante's Inferno stirs up much conflict concerning the Divine Justice, Grace, and Love of God. With all the cruel punishment being received by sinners all though out hell, many question the mercy of God that is being preached. But those skeptics refuse to accept that every human was warned of the consequences that would result from their actions before they ever even thought about committing that sin. Not only that, but they are also given a chance to repent and find their way back to the right path, but they refused to. Therefore as they step out of this world, which many claim as cruel, they enter into a true living hell in which they are doomed for eternity.
If God is all powerful and in complete control why does he allow such evil things to take place? In order to answer such questions we must first take a look at why we as people are in this predicament. Evil exists not because God is not in control or due to his incompetence as our Father. Evil entered the world through our own disobedience and failure to trust God in his perfection. “The woman was convinced.