Enter your mobile number below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Getting the download link through email is temporarily not available. Please check back later.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.

The Problem of Evil (Oxford Readings in Philosophy)

4.0 out of 5 stars 5 customer reviews
ISBN-13: 978-0198248675
ISBN-10: 0198248679
Why is ISBN important?
ISBN
This bar-code number lets you verify that you're getting exactly the right version or edition of a book. The 13-digit and 10-digit formats both work.
Scan an ISBN with your phone
Use the Amazon App to scan ISBNs and compare prices.
Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
More Buying Choices
4 Used from $95.00
Free Two-Day Shipping for College Students with Prime Student Free%20Two-Day%20Shipping%20for%20College%20Students%20with%20Amazon%20Student


The Amazon Book Review
The Amazon Book Review
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
click to open popover

Editorial Reviews

Review


"This is an excellent work. The diversity of views represented make it most valuable as a text. I would recommend it highly."--Steve Lemke, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary


"An excellent text, with several of the most important articles."--P.H. Sedgwick


"An excellent selection of key texts on the Problem of Evil and it makes them readily accessible to students. A very good comprehensive introduction."--Peter Davie, Christ Church College, Canterbury


"Those who are seeking, for themselves or their students, a compilation of the best work done on the problem of evil in the analytical tradition over the past three decades could ask for nothing better."--Ethics


--This text refers to the Paperback edition.

About the Author

Marilyn McCord Adams is Regius Professor of Divinity, University of Oxford and Canon of Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford. She has published extensively in academic philosophy and theology.

Adams has served as President of the Society of Christian Philosophers and is a member of the Board of Trustees of Princeton Theological Seminary and of The Charlotte W. Newcombe Foundation. He is Professor of Philosophy at the University of California. --This text refers to the Paperback edition.
NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

New York Times best sellers
Browse the New York Times best sellers in popular categories like Fiction, Nonfiction, Picture Books and more. See more

Product Details

  • Series: Oxford Readings in Philosophy
  • Hardcover: 240 pages
  • Publisher: Oxford University Press (January 10, 1991)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0198248679
  • ISBN-13: 978-0198248675
  • Product Dimensions: 5.5 x 0.8 x 8.3 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 12.8 ounces
  • Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (5 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #9,313,985 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Top Customer Reviews

Format: Paperback
Edited by Marilyn and Robert Adams and published in 1991 by Oxford University Press "The Problem of Evil" is a compilation of essays on the problem of evil. Contributions are from many of the leading theistic and atheistic commentators in the field (Rowe, Mackie, Plantinga etc.)

Within the philosophy of religion the problem of evil is generally recognized to be the strongest argument against theism (belief in an all-powerful, all-knowing and all-good God). It asks the simple but profound question, if God exists why is the world characterized by death, disease, disability and a litany of other ills? There are three broad formulations of the argument from evil; 1) the logical argument - God and evil are incompatible, 2) the evidential argument - God is unlikely given evil; and, 3) the existential argument - the impact of evil on belief. Many of essays in this collection are concerned with the logical argument.

Premise A. An all-powerful, all-knowing God could create a world without evil
Premise B. An all-good God would desire a world without evil
Premise C. Evil exists
Conclusion. An all-good, all-knowing and all-powerful God does not exist

Simply put the logical argument asserts that God and evil cannot co-exist. The logical argument is not contending that evil provides evidence against God, or that God is less likely in a world with evil than in a world without evil, rather, it is making a much bolder claim; the claim that God and evil are mutually exclusive, if one exists then the other cannot. And, since evil appears to exist God does not. While it possesses some prima facie plausibility, the logical argument has proven to be doubly flawed.
Read more ›
Comment 11 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Format: Paperback
This is an absolutely first-rate collection by one of the world's leading scholars in the philosophy of religion. It is used as a standard textbook by professors teaching philosophy of religion in colleges and universities throughout the English-speaking world. The previous reviewer obviously has no philosophical background and did not appreciate that this is a collection of opposing views on a controversial question. The editor herself is a defender of theism, and the fundamentalist reproaches in the previous review should be entirely ignored.
1 Comment 34 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Format: Paperback Verified Purchase
A very engaging anthology!
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Format: Paperback Verified Purchase
This volume offers a splened overview of the problem of evil in Christian theology and secular thinking.
Comment 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Format: Paperback
Pike, Chisholm and Hume all assume that man's definition of "evil" is correct rather than God's definition. They then base their entire logical argument based on this faulty "fact", which they never bother to prove.
Their entire argument crumbles because of this faulty foundation.

To argue using Hume as a logical anchor simply dismisses or hides the fact that Hume was all over the place regarding the existence of God during different phases of his life, which also describes his own confidence of his position.

"Where men are the most sure and arrogant, they are usually the most mistaken." David Hume (1711-1776) (Draper?s Quotations for the Christian World #458)

"God is an ever-present Spirit guiding all that happens to a wise and holy end." David Hume (1711-1776) (Draper?s Quotations for the Christian World #5389)

The "Method of Isolation" is an impossible situation to create in reality, so there is no actual ability to test this
method, and as such is irrelevant. Since this method can not actually be tested because the "world" in which it should be tested doesn't actually exist, the test itself can not exist either. Since this isolated world does not exist it reduces the arguments both for and against this argument, to the level of babbling.

The argument of an organic whole does not explain the weaknesses of the method of isolation.

My wife's labor during labor was the most intensive pain that she had ever felt. Watching her
suffer was the second most painful thing that I have endured. The most painful being a kidney stone. Both of these painful circumstances, viewed through the method of isolation technique would be viewed as intrinsic evils because they both included misery and pain.
Read more ›
32 Comments 6 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse