چکیده:
In this essay، we have addressed the question، "Is it possible that God could not affected by all of beings، particularly human beings through evils in the world?" It seems that the Positive answer to this question involves a conflict between the moral integrity and absolute knowledge of God with his ineffectiveness. In such cases، the knowledge of God interprets as understanding of human beings' states namely suffering by evils. Therefore how it is possible that God who does not affected by suffers apprehends human being's suffering at the same time? In one hand the moral perfection of God implied love to his creatures and lovemaking requires harmonious relations between the lover and the beloved leads. So how can we accept that her lover، the man is in pain but I love the pain، no sorrow to not start? But those who believe that God does not affected by any things posed some drawbacks on the basis of supposition of God's effectiveness including the effectiveness of God encounters with two problems: first effectiveness is incompatible with non-changeability، second reduced God's happiness. In response to first drawbacks we can appeal to prior knowledge of God، to second we need to propose an explanation according to which the object of divine happiness is to God's Essence is along with all its perfections. In other words there is no imperfection in Divine Essence caused by another one's sorrow. All in all there is no reducing in God's happiness.
خلاصه ماشینی:
It seems that a positive answer to this question implies an incompatibility between God’s moral perfection and absolute knowledge with His impassibility, because knowledge in such cases means understanding the states of individuals, which here is the suffering of humanity from evil.
” In other words, our main question is “Is the assumption that God Almighty is impassible compatible with His other attributes and other realities that occur in the world, such as evil and the suffering resulting from it?”; and more specifically, “Is it possible for God not to be saddened by the suffering and pain of beings, especially humans, due to evil in the world?” For this purpose, the main focus of this article is on the traditional concept of God in the Abrahamic religions (Islam, Christianity, and Judaism), and in the first part, an analysis of the doctrine of divine impassibility and three other important claims, namely the concept of God, the acceptance of evil, and the compatibility of accepting evil with accepting the existence of God, will be investigated and explained.
In the minimalist statement, which is known as the evidential problem of evil2, the claim of logical inconsistency between `Kh and `Sh is accepted, but it is believed that `Sh is evidence3 against the truth of `Kh. In other words, by considering `Sh to be true, the truth of `Kh is unlikely or improbable4 (Patterson, 1992: 5) because the amount of moral evil is so great that it makes the assumption of God’s existence improbable.
(
, 
, 
)
