Alvin Plantinga. University of Notre Dame. Follow. Abstract. This book discusses and exemplifies the philosophy of religion, or philosophical reflection on central. God, Freedom, And Evil – Alvin Plantinga – Free download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online for free. PAGE 18 IS MISSING. HERE IS THE MISSING. Alvin Plantinga is held by many to be the greatest living Christian philosopher, and has made immense contributions to various areas of.
|Published (Last):||23 July 2016|
|PDF File Size:||5.3 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||1.48 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
It is, therefore, difficult to see why Plantinga’s Free Will Defense should be found wanting if that defense is seen as a response to the freedmo problem of evil.
They strike me as both vague and, even if unpacked, would require too much time etc. The responses of both Hick and Stump are intended to cover not only the logical problem of evil but also any other formulation of the problem as well. Do people really need to die from heart disease and flash floods in order for us to have morally significant free will?
In the description of the sixth day of creation God says to Adam and Eve. Furthermore, Plantinga’s Ontological Argument for the existence of God using modal logic made me seriously reconsider my atheism.
He writes, A world containing creatures who are sometimes significantly free and freely perform more good than evil actions is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all.
Furthermore, if God were morally perfect, then surely God would want to do something about it. The essential point of the Free Will Defense is that the creation of a world containing moral good is a cooperative venture; it requires the uncoerced concurrence of significantly free creatures.
That is, that person would not be able to choose any bad option even if they wanted to. Regardless of its flaws, God, Freedom, and Evil is a gpd work in the philosophy of religion. If you could point to an actual instance of the type of situation in question, that palntinga certainly prove that 40 is false.
Neal Judisch – – Religious Studies 44 2: He asked Plantinga ‘Well, what about heaven? God, it seems, is incapable of doing anything wrong. Worship and Liturgy Sacraments and Rites. Trivia About God, Freedom, and Clearly, his failure to avail himself of this possibility is inconsistent with his being both omnipotent and perfectly good.
The claim 41 Situation x is possible is the contradictory of He might say, “Of course he hasn’t done that.
Accessible to serious general readers. If there is no logical impossibility in a man’s choosing pllantinga good on one, or on several occasions, there cannot be a logical impossibility in his freely choosing the good on every occasion. Given this definition, God ought to hate evil and possess the power to eradicate it from the universe. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account. Anyways, this is a good book! Hans Urs von Bal Put differently, any world we imagine might be made better by adding more people, or more planets, or….
Whether or not they should do so is arguable. The Problem of Evil is an insurmountable one for Christians and all other theists who believe in a perfectly loving, all-powerful and all-knowing god. Selected pages Title Page. On a personal note, I would have liked if he had referenced more books, but I understand the analytic nature of this work. This is gov short read and a great analytic look at some common atheistic arguments and theistic arguments with logical premises used as either evidence for or against the claims presented.
The implausibility of MSR2 is taken by some to be a serious defect. By his own admission at the end of the book, nothing in these arguments prove that god exists. Unlike Plantinga’s response to the logical problem of evil, which is merely a “defense” that is, a negative attempt to undermine a certain atheological argument without offering a positive account of why God allows evil and sufferingHick’s response avin a “theodicy” that is, a more comprehensive attempt to account for why God is justified in allowing evil and suffering.
Book Review: God, Freedom, and Evil by Alvin Plantinga | Apologetics
Faced with great personal suffering or misfortune, fvil may be tempted to rebel against God, to shake his fist in God’s face, or even to give up belief in God altogether. This was a good short-yet-complex philosophical work to read through over a weekend.
In fact, on the assumption that God exists, it seems to describe the actual world. No trivia or quizzes yet.
Logical Problem of Evil
Though I am an atheist, Plantinga has convinced me that belief in God can be, at the very least, considered rational. But let’s try changing premise  to say He would say, I think, that this is not a case-closer, but a door-opener, in that it removes claims of intellectual objections feredom which atheists may have tried to “barricade the door” against God, and reveals them to be simply willful rejection rather than carefully reasoned objections as they claim.
Countless multitudes suffer the frreedom of war in Somalia. Thursday, March 08, The book itself is almost 40 years old. Since the logical problem of evil claims that it is logically impossible for God and evil to co-exist, all that Plantinga or any other theist needs to do to combat this claim is to describe a possible situation in which Rreedom and evil co-exist.
Plantinga shows that wlvin is logically possible that the only world a good and omnipotent God could have created would contain evil. An Introduction to the Issues. W 2then, is also possible.
In response to this charge, Plantinga maintains that there are some worlds God cannot create. In the last section we noted that many people will find MSR2 ‘s explanation of natural evil extremely difficult to believe because it assumes the literal existence of Adam and Eve and the literal occurrence of the Fall.
Having read through Saint Thomas work on creation, and on God some of the material was repetitive but the book is only pages it well worth the read, for anyone interested in philosophy of religion, or anyone who likes to think hard!!!!
Each of these things seems to be absolutely, positively impossible. So, if it is plausible to think that Plantinga’s Free Will Defense solves the logical problem of evil as it pertains to moral evil, the current suggestion is that it is plausible also greedom think that it solves the logical problem of evil as it pertains to natural evil because gor of the worlds evils have their source in moral evil.
If that freedom were to be taken away, we might very well cease to be the creatures we are.