Is Theism Incompatible with the Pauline Principle?
This paper criticises James Sterba’s use of the Pauline principle to formulate a logical version of the problem of evil. Sterba’s argument contains a crucial premise: If human agents are always prohibited from doing some action, God is also prohibited from doing that action. This implies that the Pa...
Auteur principal: | |
---|---|
Type de support: | Électronique Article |
Langue: | Anglais |
Vérifier la disponibilité: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Publié: |
MDPI
2022
|
Dans: |
Religions
Année: 2022, Volume: 13, Numéro: 11 |
Sujets non-standardisés: | B
sterba
B Divine Command Theory B Evil B pauline principle B mackie B God B plantinga |
Accès en ligne: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
Résumé: | This paper criticises James Sterba’s use of the Pauline principle to formulate a logical version of the problem of evil. Sterba’s argument contains a crucial premise: If human agents are always prohibited from doing some action, God is also prohibited from doing that action. This implies that the Pauline principle applies to both Divine and human agents. I argue that any Theist who affirms a divine command theory of ethics can consistently and coherently deny this premise and its implication. If a divine command theory is coherent, a theist can affirm that the Pauline principle governs human agents’ actions but not God’s actions. I will also criticise Sterba’s criticisms of a divine command theory and argue that they fail. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2077-1444 |
Contient: | Enthalten in: Religions
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.3390/rel13111050 |