Peter Singer writes on the Guardian's "Comment is Free" blog site that "Religious people are still unable to provide a satisfying answer to the age-old question of why God allows suffering."
When he refers to "religious people", he apparently means "Christians", and not just "Christians", but specifically conservative Christians, since he devotes something like half of his article to refuting the positions advanced by Dinish D'Souza. Singer raises the fairly standard arguments about theodicy--that suffering is incompatible with a supernaturally theistic God who is both all-powerful and all-benevolent. At no point in Singer's article does he ever show any understanding of the fact that it is possible to believe in a God who is doesn't conform to any other definition than the one he assumes, or more specifically that it is possible to conceive of a God who is not omnipotent.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment