You should read Peter van Inwagen one the Problem of Evil.
In Quam Dilecta (here: http://www.people.umass.edu/jaklocks/Phil383/pvi.htm), he says that when he was an atheist (which was for quite some time), he way swayed by the argument from evil. And now, he challenges William Roew's incompatibility-premise, which states that theism is incompatible with ungracious evil. Rowe calls this "revolutionary" (or something like this), but van Inwagen's argument is persuasive.
Daniel Howard-Snyder comments on those arguments against incompatibility here: http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~howardd/istheismcompatible.pdf
He disagrees with Hasker for example (I disagree here, I think Hasker has a good obkection), but agrees with van Inwagen.
Brian Auten is director of Reasonable Faith Belfast and founder of Apologetics 315, a daily online resource helping to equip the next generation of Christian apologists. More...
2 comments :
You should read Peter van Inwagen one the Problem of Evil.
In Quam Dilecta (here: http://www.people.umass.edu/jaklocks/Phil383/pvi.htm), he says that when he was an atheist (which was for quite some time), he way swayed by the argument from evil.
And now, he challenges William Roew's incompatibility-premise, which states that theism is incompatible with ungracious evil. Rowe calls this "revolutionary" (or something like this), but van Inwagen's argument is persuasive.
Daniel Howard-Snyder comments on those arguments against incompatibility here:
http://www.ac.wwu.edu/~howardd/istheismcompatible.pdf
He disagrees with Hasker for example (I disagree here, I think Hasker has a good obkection), but agrees with van Inwagen.
Definitely worth checking out.
Thanks for the recommendations, Matthew.
Post a Comment
Thanks for taking the time to comment. By posting your comment you are agreeing to the comment policy.