Horrendous Evil and the Loving God: A Reply to Joshua Thurow

Andrew Gleeson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Marilyn McCord Adams has defended theodicy by appeal to the idea of post-mortem compensation for the victims of horrendous evil. I have argued that this overlooks the dissociation of theodicy from moral reality that she concedes in her response to criticism of theodicy by D Z Phillips. Joshua Thurow has recently defended Adams against my argument. Here I defend and strengthen that argument against Thurow.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)419-428
Number of pages10
JournalSophia: International Journal For Philosophy of Religion, Metaphysical Theology and Ethics
Issue number2
Early online date4 Nov 2021
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2022


  • Theodicy
  • Horrendous evils
  • Greater goods
  • Adams
  • Thurow
  • Compensation


Dive into the research topics of 'Horrendous Evil and the Loving God: A Reply to Joshua Thurow'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this