The problem of understanding why an all-powerful and wholly good and loving God could permit so much evil to occur has puzzled many Christians as well as skeptics since St. Augustine grappled with the problem in the Fourth Century A.D. Many skeptics have found the evidence of evil sufficient to reject belief in God. The author believes that this book provides a comprehensive, plausible, and satisfying treatment of the problem of evil consistent with the Bible and orthodox Christianity. Traditionally free will and the value of character development have been the primary approaches to explaining evil. Many evils are not adequately explained by either approach. The book offers an approach emphasizing the value of relationships between persons. If relationships are to reach the greatest depth and have the greatest value, then evils are necessary. The environment must provide opportunities to make sacrifices, have risks and dangers, and have poverty and limited resources. One chapter is devoted to analyzing the argument from evil against God’s existence. It shows evidence limited to evil alone is weak evidence. When evidence is expanded to evidence of good as well as evil and evidence for design, the evidence supports theism and weighs against naturalistic views.
As an undergraduate the author was influenced strongly by Bertrand Russell’s rejection of Christianity due to the amount of evil in the world. After years of reading and reflecting on this topic, this book was written in the hope of providing better insight on this issue. The book’s first part offers an analysis of the two primary historical approaches to theodicy—the free-will theodicy originated by Augustine and the “soul-making” or character development theodicy elaborated by John Hick. But the great value of human free will and character development does not seem adequately to justify all the evil we perceive. The second part shows why development of relationships among God and human beings requires considerable evil. Important non-relationship oriented explanations are taken into account. Justifications for permitting horrific evils including holocausts and world wars are given. The final part provides an analysis of the argument from evil including forms of the argument which have appeared in recent years in philosophical journals. Although evidence restricted to some evils or evil alone may have some weight, when good is included as well as evil, theists are justified in claiming the evidence supports their position far better than atheism.
The United States became an economic superpower and leading economy in the world with limited government intervention in its economy. It has maintained the lead during the past century despite significant increased government regulations and intervention, especially through high profits taxes. Profits taxes were raised to very high levels in the 1940's and 1950's. Although reduced since then, manufactiuring corporations still pay over 50 percent of their retained earnings to the government. In States like California and New York, profits taxes are the highest in the world and reduce American competitiveness. The U. S. faces significant problems with funding retirement, health care, and education. With a shrinking workforce, adequate funding of these needs is achievable only through strong economic growth. The Obama Administration believes that it can engage is massive deficit spending, fund universal health care, fund many government projects, borrow vast amounts of investment money available to the private sector, and produce good economic growth. But there are no free lunches in economics. Government is only parasitic on the private economy through tax revenue. Adequate funding for expanded government projects can only come from expanded private sector investment and growth. Massive government spending may encourage some increased consumption and temporary nominal growth, but it will not yield the good real economic growth that matters. Economics like nearly everything is a complicated matter and the simplified solutions of Obama and the left to soak the rich and raise taxes to help the poor always have secondary and tertiary effects which usually do more harm than good. They slow down economic growth and make nearly everyone poorer in the long run. They may equalize incomes at the cost of productivity and innovation without changing inequality patterns in wealth. Wealth in Sweden is more unequally distributed than in the U.S. The simplest and easiest move to help everyone is to eliminate profits taxes. Many politicians think that profits taxes are relatively benign because they can be passed on to consumers. But profits taxes have had many adverse consequence for the U.S. economy during the past 75 years. They have reduced investment, slowed economic growth, and caused considerable misallocation of resources and losses of efficiency. They raise industry barriers to entry and competition. They increase industry concentration and produce corporations that dominate industries. Eliminating these problems and stimulating investment and growth by abolishing profits taxes would be very beneficial. The evidence in economics is very complex and it is difficult to demonstrate that an economic claim or principle holds. Theoretical arguments often must be brought to bear. As Keynes asserted, investment must depend on expectations that returns will exceed interest rates. Better profits provide more money to invest and encourage higher expectations of future returns. The evidence supports a strong correspondence between profits, private investment, and economic growth. Environmentalists argue that the goal of economic growth should be abandoned because burning fossil fuels presumably causes climate change and we are presumably running out of resources. But two chapters are devoted to refuting these claims. Evidence is marshalled to show that profits taxes cause resources to be shifted to inferior uses and cause greater industry concentration and reduced competition. When the effects of the policies supported are considered and not the rhetoric, the Democratic Party is the real party of Big Business. It ensures concentration of power in large corporations just as it promotes increased concentration of power in the Federal Government.
Here is a guidebook on how to prepare students for what is presented on the verbal sections of the SAT. More than 2,000 words and definitions are provided.
Here is a guidebook on how to prepare students for what is presented on the verbal sections of the SAT. More than 2,000 words and definitions are provided.
The United States became an economic superpower and leading economy in the world with limited government intervention in its economy. It has maintained the lead during the past century despite significant increased government regulations and intervention, especially through high profits taxes. Profits taxes were raised to very high levels in the 1940’s and 1950’s. Although reduced since then, manufactiuring corporations still pay over 50 percent of their retained earnings to the government. In States like California and New York, profits taxes are the highest in the world and reduce American competitiveness. The U. S. faces significant problems with funding retirement, health care, and education. With a shrinking workforce, adequate funding of these needs is achievable only through strong economic growth. The Obama Administration believes that it can engage is massive deficit spending, fund universal health care, fund many government projects, borrow vast amounts of investment money available to the private sector, and produce good economic growth. But there are no free lunches in economics. Government is only parasitic on the private economy through tax revenue. Adequate funding for expanded government projects can only come from expanded private sector investment and growth. Massive government spending may encourage some increased consumption and temporary nominal growth, but it will not yield the good real economic growth that matters. Economics like nearly everything is a complicated matter and the simplified solutions of Obama and the left to soak the rich and raise taxes to help the poor always have secondary and tertiary effects which usually do more harm than good. They slow down economic growth and make nearly everyone poorer in the long run. They may equalize incomes at the cost of productivity and innovation without changing inequality patterns in wealth. Wealth in Sweden is more unequally distributed than in the U.S. The simplest and easiest move to help everyone is to eliminate profits taxes. Many politicians think that profits taxes are relatively benign because they can be passed on to consumers. But profits taxes have had many adverse consequence for the U.S. economy during the past 75 years. They have reduced investment, slowed economic growth, and caused considerable misallocation of resources and losses of efficiency. They raise industry barriers to entry and competition. They increase industry concentration and produce corporations that dominate industries. Eliminating these problems and stimulating investment and growth by abolishing profits taxes would be very beneficial. The evidence in economics is very complex and it is difficult to demonstrate that an economic claim or principle holds. Theoretical arguments often must be brought to bear. As Keynes asserted, investment must depend on expectations that returns will exceed interest rates. Better profits provide more money to invest and encourage higher expectations of future returns. The evidence supports a strong correspondence between profits, private investment, and economic growth. Environmentalists argue that the goal of economic growth should be abandoned because burning fossil fuels presumably causes climate change and we are presumably running out of resources. But two chapters are devoted to refuting these claims. Evidence is marshalled to show that profits taxes cause resources to be shifted to inferior uses and cause greater industry concentration and reduced competition. When the effects of the policies supported are considered and not the rhetoric, the Democratic Party is the real party of Big Business. It ensures concentration of power in large corporations just as it promotes increased concentration of power in the Federal Government.
This will help us customize your experience to showcase the most relevant content to your age group
Please select from below
Login
Not registered?
Sign up
Already registered?
Success – Your message will goes here
We'd love to hear from you!
Thank you for visiting our website. Would you like to provide feedback on how we could improve your experience?
This site does not use any third party cookies with one exception — it uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and to analyze traffic.Learn More.