Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Misotheism is the "hatred of God" or "hatred of the gods" (from the Greek adjective misotheos (μισόθεος) "hating the gods" or "God-hating" – a compound of, μῖσος, "hatred" and, θεός, "god"). A related concept is dystheism (Ancient Greek: δύσ θεός, "bad god"), the belief that a god is not wholly good, and is evil.
John Joseph Haldane's Wittgenstinian-Thomistic account of concept formation [32] and Martin Heidegger's observation of temporality's thrown nature [33] imply that God's act of creation and God's act of judgment are the same act. God's condemnation of evil is subsequently believed to be executed and expressed in his created world; a judgement ...
Damn is nowadays a mildly profane word for some people in English, although God damn (or Goddamn) may be considered blasphemous by the religiously devout, who regard it as a violation of the commandment against taking God's name in vain. Dang (mainly US) or darn are common euphemisms, specifically minced oaths, for damn.
Another definition of theodicy is the vindication of divine goodness and providence in view of the existence of evil. The word theodicy derives from the Greek words Θεός, Theos and δίκη, dikē. Theos is translated "God" and dikē can be translated as either "trial" or "judgement". [5] Thus, 'theodicy' literally means "justifying God". [6]
Dystheism as a concept, although often not labeled as such, has been referred to in many aspects of popular culture.As stated before, related ideas date back many decades, with the Victorian era figure Algernon Charles Swinburne writing in his work Anactoria about the ancient Greek poet Sappho and her lover Anactoria in explicitly dystheistic imagery that includes cannibalism and sadomasochism.
Consequently it is a mortal sin generically, whether it be contrary to the love of God, e.g. blasphemy, perjury, and the like, or against the love of one's neighbour, e.g. murder, adultery, and such like: wherefore such sins are mortal by reason of their genus.
Another variant of the argument is that the evidence for God's love is sufficiently compelling that people can reasonably believe in it, and hence a fortiori believe in God. [14] This approach is criticised by Richard Dawkins who suggests that it is an "Argument from emotional blackmail". [15]
This is partly because Dennett says that the idea that people need God to be morally good is an extremely harmful, yet popular myth. He believes it is a falsehood that persists because churches are currently much better at organizing people to do morally good work. [ 18 ]