Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-q6k6v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-12T19:55:23.204Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CONSIDERING WHERE IS GOD IN A CORONAVIRUS WORLD? AN EXERCISE IN CRITICAL THINKING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2021

Peter Worley
Get access

Abstract

This article is a critical response to a short book by John C. Lennox entitled Where is God in a Coronavirus World? in which he rejects atheism as a world-view equipped to deal with an event such as the coronavirus crisis and makes a case for the Christian outlook as the best way to meet such a crisis. The aim of this article is not to affirm or deny theism, but to examine critically the key arguments put forward for Christianity and against atheism by Lennox. Because of the centrality of the appeal to free will by Lennox in his article, some time is spent considering the free will response to the problem of evil, in which some close examination of the Bible is undertaken. The article finishes by outlining a personal, humanistic, secular response to the coronavirus crisis, and addresses solace and hope, two things Lennox denies atheism can provide.

Type
Research Article
Information
Think , Volume 20 , Issue 57 , Spring 2021 , pp. 135 - 151
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy, 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1 Lennox, J. C., Where is God in a Coronavirus World? (Epsom: The Goodbook Company, 2020)Google Scholar.

2 Dawkins, R., River Out of Eden (New York: Basic Books, 1992), 133Google Scholar.

3 I include a note made by Stephen Law, the editor of this piece: ‘Worse still – there is a false dilemma involved as theism and naturalism are not the only alternatives. According to a PhilPapers survey only 50% of professional philosophers lean towards naturalism, while fewer than 15% lean towards theism. Even if naturalism were refuted, that wouldn't yet make much of a case for theism.’

4 Thanks to Emma Worley for noticing this entailment from my analysis.

5 I write this while suffering from persistent breathing problems as a result of having contracted coronavirus.