Animal pain and suffering in the domain of nature are undeniable facts, which give rise to the problem of incompatibility of such facts with divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and absolute benevolence of God in Abrahamic faiths. Theologians have endeavored to More
Animal pain and suffering in the domain of nature are undeniable facts, which give rise to the problem of incompatibility of such facts with divine attributes of omniscience, omnipotence and absolute benevolence of God in Abrahamic faiths. Theologians have endeavored to meet this challenge by both explaining the compatibility and persevering their traditional faith in divine attributes. Mark Maller, however, attempted to solve the problem by reinterpretation of divine attributes and abandoning the orthodox beliefs. The problem with Maller and his like Christian theologians was to rely on nonreligious presumptions rather than on theistic foundations in finding a solution for the problem. The critique of their stance is that one cannot formulate a logical consistent argument by adopting some premises from religious fources and other premises from nonreligious ones. It seems that a holistic view and looking into scriptural thrives can provide a better and more coherent solution for animal suffering.
Manuscript profile
