Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Possibility of Evil" is a 1965 short story by Shirley Jackson. Published on December 18, 1965, in the Saturday Evening Post, [1] a few months after her death, it won the 1966 Edgar Allan Poe Award for best mystery short story. [2] It has since been reprinted in the collections Just an Ordinary Day (1996) and Dark Tales (2016).
The logical argument from evil asserts that a God with the attributes (1–3), must know about all evil, would be capable of preventing it, and as morally perfect would be motivated to do so. [4] The argument from evil concludes that the existence of the orthodox Christian God is, therefore, incompatible with the existence of evil and can be ...
The Catholic Church believes the answer to the problem of evil lies in evil's conqueror, Jesus. [72] Because of this, the church teaches, every aspect of Christian doctrine - the goodness of the Universe, the reign of sin, God's covenants with Israel, the Paschal Mystery, the church itself, the sacraments of healing, etc. - is a part of the ...
Epicurus was not an atheist, although he rejected the idea of a god concerned with human affairs; followers of Epicureanism denied the idea that there was no god. While the conception of a supreme, happy and blessed god was the most popular during his time, Epicurus rejected such a notion, as he considered it too heavy a burden for a god to have to worry about all the problems in the world.
For some thinkers, the existence of evil and hell could mean that God is not perfectly good and powerful or that there is no God at all. [62] Theodicy tries to address this dilemma by reconciling an all-knowing, all-powerful, and omnibenevolent God with the existence of evil and suffering, outlining the possibility that God and evil can coexist.
The absence of good (Latin: privatio boni), also known as the privation theory of evil, [1] is a theological and philosophical doctrine that evil, unlike good, is insubstantial, so that thinking of it as an entity is misleading. Instead, evil is rather the absence, or lack ("privation"), of good.
As defined by Alvin Plantinga, a theodicy is "an answer to the question of why God permits evil". [3] Theodicy is defined as a theological construct that attempts to vindicate God in response to the problem of evil that appears inconsistent with the existence of an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God. [4]
Therefore, from the possibility of God's creating such a stone it cannot be concluded that God is not omnipotent. The objector cannot have it both ways. The conclusion which the objector wishes to draw from an affirmative answer to the original question is itself the required proof that the descriptive phrase which appears there is self ...