A Modified Free-Will Defense: A Structural and Theistic Free-Will Defense as a Response to James Sterba

5Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In his book Is a Good God Logically Possible?, James Sterba argues that the Plantingian free-will defense, which reconciles the existence of a good and omnipotent God with the existence of evil, is a failed argument when it comes to the terrible evils in the world. This study discusses that Sterba’s claim is invalid when Plantinga’s free-will defense is modified with a structural perspective. In order to reconcile the structural and inevitable possibility of evil with God’s moral imperatives, a structural free-will defense was complemented by an Islamic moral theology that Mu’tazila and its great scholar Qādi Abd al-Jabbar advanced. Such a modified free-will defense can show that the existence of all evil, including terrible ones, is still compatible with a good and omnipotent God.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Balci, E. N. (2022). A Modified Free-Will Defense: A Structural and Theistic Free-Will Defense as a Response to James Sterba. Religions, 13(8). https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13080700

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free