HQ

Can You Believe It's True? Christian Apologetics in a Modern and Postmodern Era is really a book about truth: "even though this is a book is usable as a general text in apologetics, the greatest burden and passion of the book is to defend the notions that there is truth, humans can find it, and we can "know that we know" what is true" (p.11). Feinberg's interlocutors for his discussion are skeptics, those who resist Christian claims to truth. In our contemporary setting, such skeptics come in two flavors - modern and postmodern. Modern skeptics regard the claims of the Christian to be unsupported by the evidence. Postmodern skeptics, on the other hand, are suspicious of human claims to know any objective truth.

The challenge for any theistic system, according to the logical problem of moral evil, is how one can account for the apparent contradiction produced by three propositions: God is omnipotent. God is benevolent. There is moral evil in the world. If we accept those propositions then we might be forced to say that if God could remove evil, but does not, then he cannot be good. Alternatively, we might conclude that if God is good, but does not remove evil, then he cannot be omnipotent. A logical contradiction is produced when we compare these two statements: God is either not omnipotent or not omnibenevolent.  God is omnipotent and omnibenevolent  Christian theists, when challenged with incoherence, are charged to produce a possible way to solve the contradiction and dismiss the charge. For the following discussion it is important to note what is meant by the above terms within the theological system that is being defended. God is a maximally great being who has the maxim...