|
Explaining the Argument of Justice to Prove the Resurrection and Examining the Problems with It
|
Ruhollah Zeynali   |
| Assistant Professor, Department of Islamic Studies, Hakim Sabzevari University |
|
|
Abstract: (79 Views) |
The argument of justice is one of the rational reasons for proving the resurrection. Shiite theologians have presented four versions of this argument: the necessity of distinguishing between the guilty and the innocent, the impossibility of enforcing justice in the natural world, the necessity of keeping promises, and the necessity of paying compensation for obligations. The present study addresses the issue of what problems these versions face and do these problems invalidate the argument of justice? Through the studies conducted, which were organized in a descriptive and critical manner, seven problems have been introduced: the denial of rational independence and the polemical nature of the argument, the meaninglessness of injustice for God, the validity of good and evil, the possibility of eliminating injustice in the natural world, the lack of necessity of following the rules from corruption and real interests, and the inability to prove the Islamic resurrection. The findings of the study show that none of the problems cause the qualification of this argument as a reason for proving life after death and its unlimitedness alongside other reasons to be lost.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2025/08/26 | Accepted: 2025/09/30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Send email to the article author |
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
