Religious Studies

Articles

Replying to the anti-God challenge: a God without moral character acts well

PETER FORRESTa1 c1

a1 School of Humanities, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia

Abstract

Several authors, including Stephen Law in this journal, have argued that the case for an evil God is (about) as strong as for a good God. In this article I take up the challenge on behalf of theists who, like Richard Swinburne, argue for an agent of unrestricted power and knowledge as the ultimate explanation of all contingent truths. I shall argue that an evil God is much less probable than a good one. I do so by (1) distinguishing the analogical predication of ‘good’ or ‘evil’ of God from the literal predication, (2) interpreting ‘acting in a morally good way’ to mean ‘acting like a good consequentialist’, and (3) relying on an axiarchist thesis about agency that is congenial to theists and perhaps even presupposed by theism.

Correspondence:

c1 e-mail: pforrest@une.edu.au