Twofold Theodicy

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Roberto Di Ceglie
{"title":"Twofold Theodicy","authors":"Roberto Di Ceglie","doi":"10.1111/heyj.14367","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>Abstract:</b> Theodicy is often rejected because a suffering person is hardly interested in abstract arguments—even if these arguments were convincing, they might not change the suffering she is experiencing. I propose a twofold theodicy. First, Christians are invited to promote positive apologetics—they should show the internal consistency of divine revelation, which recommends that they should alleviate suffering and promote flourishing. Second, Christians should develop negative apologetics and show the untenability of objections to the Christian view of evil and suffering, including the seemingly uncontroversial objection that a world without innocent suffering would be better in terms of justice than the one we live in. My argument is that in both positive and negative apologetics believers should be guided by devotion and commitment to God. The more they love and trust God, and consequently believe what God has revealed, the more they are expected to encourage both flourishing and rational confrontation.</p>","PeriodicalId":54105,"journal":{"name":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","volume":"65 6","pages":"695-710"},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HEYTHROP JOURNAL","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/heyj.14367","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Theodicy is often rejected because a suffering person is hardly interested in abstract arguments—even if these arguments were convincing, they might not change the suffering she is experiencing. I propose a twofold theodicy. First, Christians are invited to promote positive apologetics—they should show the internal consistency of divine revelation, which recommends that they should alleviate suffering and promote flourishing. Second, Christians should develop negative apologetics and show the untenability of objections to the Christian view of evil and suffering, including the seemingly uncontroversial objection that a world without innocent suffering would be better in terms of justice than the one we live in. My argument is that in both positive and negative apologetics believers should be guided by devotion and commitment to God. The more they love and trust God, and consequently believe what God has revealed, the more they are expected to encourage both flourishing and rational confrontation.

双重神论
摘要:神论常常遭到拒绝,因为受苦受难的人对抽象的论证几乎不感兴趣--即使这些论证令人信服,也未必能改变她正在经历的苦难。我提出了双重神论。首先,请基督徒推广积极的辩证法--他们应该展示神圣启示的内在一致性,这建议他们减轻痛苦,促进繁荣。其次,基督徒应该发展消极的辩证法,证明对基督教邪恶与苦难观的反对意见是站不住脚的,包括一个看似毫无争议的反对意见,即一个没有无辜苦难的世界在正义方面会比我们生活的世界更好。我的论点是,在积极和消极的辩护中,信徒都应该以对上帝的虔诚和承诺为指导。他们越是爱神、信靠神,从而相信神所启示的,他们就越应该鼓励繁荣和理性的对抗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
HEYTHROP JOURNAL
HEYTHROP JOURNAL Multiple-
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
78
期刊介绍: Founded on the conviction that the disciplines of theology and philosophy have much to gain from their mutual interaction, The Heythrop Journal provides a medium of publication for scholars in each of these fields and encourages interdisciplinary comment and debate. The Heythrop Journal embraces all the disciplines which contribute to theological and philosophical research, notably hermeneutics, exegesis, linguistics, history, religious studies, philosophy of religion, sociology, psychology, ethics and pastoral theology. The Heythrop Journal is invaluable for scholars, teachers, students and general readers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信