Exam 13: B.C.Johnson: Why Doesnt God Intervene to Prevent Evil

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson concludes that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson suggests that if we want to ensure a sense of moral urgency, then maybe we should abolish fire or police departments.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -According to Johnson, many people claim that God does not intervene to prevent evil (accidents, disasters, pain, etc.) because

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -According to Johnson, if there were no disasters in the world to create moral urgency,

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson admits that evil is a necessary by-product of the laws of nature.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson accepts the existence of a God with limited powers.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson concludes that the problem of evil triumphs over traditional theism.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -According to Johnson, the reason it will not do for the theist to claim that evil exists as a necessary contrast to good so we can have knowledge of good is

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson claims that traditional theism ultimately triumphs over the problem of evil.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson admits that evil actually does not exist.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson says that no one can have justifiable faith in the goodness of God.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson argues that the theist can correctly claim that God may not be all-powerful and thus not able to prevent evil.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -According to Johnson, to the theist's claim that in a world without suffering there would be no opportunities to cultivate virtues such as courage and sympathy, the atheist can reply that

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson says that God's intervention to help mankind would destroy moral urgency.

In this essay Johnson compares God's behavior with that of a morally good person. If you know that a six-month-old baby is in a burning building and you have the opportunity to save it without undue risk to your life, you would no doubt save the baby. Of course, if you could not save the child, you would be excused. The question is, "Why doesn't God intervene to save not just babies who are caught in fires but people everywhere who are suffering and in great need of help?" Johnson considers various "excuses" the theist might claim for God and argues that they all fail. His conclusion is that if there is a God, he or she is probably either evil or both good and evil. -Johnson says that God is like a bystander who refuses to help save a child from the flames even though he has the power to do so.