Genesis 3 and Romans 5: In it the snake convinces the woman to eat the forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The woman picks the fruit, and passes some to Adam. Because of their disobedience God has them evicted from the garden.
Either the universe had a beginning or it did not. If it did, either that beginning was caused or it was not caused. If it was caused, either the cause was personal or it was impersonal.
Based on these dilemmas, the argument can be put in the following logical form: Whatever begins to exist has a cause of its existence. The universe began to exist. Therefore, the universe has some kind of cause of its existence.
The cause of the universe is either an impersonal cause or a personal one. The cause of the universe is not impersonal. Therefore, the cause of the universe is a personal one, which we call God. This version of the cosmological argument was bolstered by work in astrophysics and cosmology in the late twentieth century.
On one interpretation of the standard Big Bang cosmological model, the time-space universe sprang into existence ex nihilo approximately Such a beginning is best explained, argue kalam defenders, by a non-temporal, non-spatial, personal, transcendent cause—namely God.
The claim that the universe began to exist is also argued philosophically in at least two ways. First, it is argued that an actual infinite set of events cannot exist, for actual infinities lead to metaphysical absurdities. Since an infinite temporal regress of events is an actual infinite set of events, such a regress is metaphysically impossible.
So the past cannot be infinite; the universe must have had a temporal beginning. A second approach begins by arguing that an infinite series of events cannot be formed by successive addition one member being added to another.
The reason why is that, when adding finite numbers one after the other, the set of numbers will always be finite. The addition of yet another finite number, ad infinitum, will never lead to an actual infinite.
Since the past is a series of temporal events formed by successive addition, the past could not be actually infinite in duration. Nor will the future be so. The universe must have had a beginning. Many objections have been raised against the kalam argument, both scientific and philosophical, including that there are other cosmological models of the universe besides the Big Bang in which the universe is understood to be eternal, such as various multi-verse theories.
Philosophical rebuttals marshaled against the kalam argument include the utilization of set theory and mathematical systems which employ actual infinite sets. Teleological Arguments Teleological arguments in the East go back as far as C. In the West, Plato, Aristotle, and the Stoics offered arguments for a directing intelligence of the world given the order found within it.
There is an assortment of teleological arguments, but a common theme among them is the claim that certain characteristics of the natural world reflect design, purpose, and intelligence.
These features of the natural world are then used as evidence for an intelligent, intentional designer of the world. The teleological argument has been articulated and defended at various times and places throughout history, but its zenith was in the early nineteenth century with perhaps its most ardent defender: In his book, Natural Theology, Paley offers an argument from analogy: Artifacts such as a watchwith their means to ends configurations, are the products of human design.
The works of nature, such as the human hand, resemble artifacts. Thus the works of nature are probably the products of design. Furthermore, the works of nature are much more in number and far greater in complexity.The Evidential Problem of Evil.
The evidential problem of evil is the problem of determining whether and, if so, to what extent the existence of evil (or certain instances, kinds, quantities, or distributions of evil) constitutes evidence against the existence of God, that is to say, a being perfect in power, knowledge and r-bridal.comtial arguments from evil attempt to show that, once we.
1. The Problem of Evil. #determinism #evil #god #life #philosophy #religion #suffering #theodicy #theology. If God is all-powerful and all-good, it would have created a universe in the same way it created heaven: with free will for all, no suffering and no evil. Find helpful customer reviews and review ratings for God Is Impassible and Impassioned: Toward a Theology of Divine Emotion at r-bridal.com Read honest and unbiased product reviews from our users.
irenaen theodicy (soul-making theodicy) Like Augustine, Irenaeus argued that evil is the consequence of human free will and disobedience.
However, unlike Augustine Irenaeus believed that God was partly responsible for evil and suffering. Previous Index Next The Theodicy of Augustine of Hippo Augustine of Hippo () based his theodicy on his reading of key Biblical passages: Genesis 3 and Romans Genesis 3 is the story of Adam and Eve and their ‘Fall’ in the Garden of Eden.
St Augustine is often blamed for bringing the problems of evil and suffering to the forefront in Christianity.
Certainly, responding to the problems was a major theme in his writings – as well they might be given his own experiences of persecution.