Summary and Conclusions: The Problem of Evil and Pain
"God and the Problem of Evil will be a helpful volume for those new to the discussion of this problem and looking for a brief overview of the possible arguments and counter-arguments made by Christian philosophers and theologians."
Throughout history man has had to struggle with the problem of evil.
First, there is the problem of ignorance. Some people who live in very remote areas of the planet cannot possibly know anything about the suffering elsewhere in the world. This was certainly the case in the past before the recent invention of telecommunications. It is hard to see why God has chosen to create a world with this ignorance, resulting in fewer humans being able to feel sympathy for those who are great distances away. Moreover, there are countless possibilities open to an all-powerful God for rectifying this situation. These possibilities include humans having empathic abilities that operate over distances in some ways analogous to psychic powers, and humans having the global facts of suffering communicated to them in dreams and through religious experiences.
Leibniz believes, however, that there was overwhelming evidence thatthe conclusion of this argument was false. He therefore must take oneof the two premises in this argument to be false. Given that hehimself is committed to the first premise, he must reject the secondpremise. And this is precisely what he does.
The problem of evil and the problem of God.
Why does God go to such great lengths in the to vindicate his own justice and righteousness in the presence of the severe suffering endured by the Israelites?
Theology and the problem of evil.
Alternatively, as an atheist, we can't accuse the biblical responses to the problem of evil as being ad hoc arguments thrown together by 20th century apologists.
Providence and the problem of evil.
As a Christian, if we believe that God did inspire the writing of the Bible through its various human authors, then that very fact ought to cause us to take the problem of evil seriously.
The problem of evil can be used in either of these two ways.
Phillips and Dostoyevsky’s Ivan Karamazov, I defend several reasons for holding that the way of thinking about God and evil enshrined in theodical discourse can only add to the world’s evils, not remove or illuminate them.
Does hard determinism render the problem of evil even harder?
Rather this is a question which the Bible addresses and runs through its entire plot line: How can evil coexist with a good and loving God and how will God's justice be vindicated?
What if an atheist believes that evil is a non-transcendent property?
Given that on this traditional account, God is intimately intertwinedwith the workings of the cosmos, the holiness problem seemed all themore intractable. In light of the intimate connections between God andthe created world, the problem is not just that God created a worldthat happens to include evil, but that God seems to be causally (andthus morally) implicated in, for example, every particular act ofmurder, every earthquake, and every death caused byplague. Consequently, responses to the holiness problem sought toexplain not only how God could remain holy despitehaving created a world such as ours, but also how he couldremain holy despite conserving the world in existence andcausally cooperating with all the events that occur in it.