Abstract
Based on views she draws from Anselm, Katherin Rogers mounts an extended attack on my account of God's relationship to human sin. Here I argue first that if Anselm's view of the relationship in question is different from my own, then Rogers fails to locate any reason for thinking his account is correct. I argue further that Rogers fails to demonstrate her claim that my account of God's relation to sin makes him a deceiver, that her criticisms of my theodicy of sin are misguided, and that she is mistaken in claiming a world in which God has full sovereignty over human willing is less safe for the repentant than I hold it to be.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
McCann, H. J. (2009). God, sin, and rogers on anselm: A reply. Faith and Philosophy. Philosophy Documentation Center. https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil200926438
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.