Seite - 70 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Band 03/01

70 | Toufic El-Khoury www.jrfm.eu 2017, 3/1, 59–74 accept the idea of an omnipotent God after Auschwitz? this contextualized reconsidering of theodicy’s basic questions had become necessary for Jonas, who, as a Christian, rarely questioned the existence of God but did try to under- stand God’s apparent laisser-faire. in this context, we must start by abandoning the idea of an omnipotent God, for human reason cannot accept that a being capable of stopping the horror of Auschwitz did not do so. however, Jonas’s argumentation is interesting in that he tried to explain the paradox of a power- less God by proposing a personal interpretation, we could say even a rewriting, of the creation myth as, “in the beginning, God, in an unfathomable choice, decided to indulge in chance, risk and in the infinite diversity of fate”.28 then God trembles because, carried by his own impulsion, “the shock of evolution crosses the threshold at which innocence ceases, and new criteria of success or failure appear”.29 Jonas separates the ideas of goodness and omnipotence in God, who abandoned the latter at the world’s creation. Jonas’ efforts to rethink theodicy by relying on myth’s codes have their charm but also their limitations. in the beginning of his essay mentioned above, ricœur expanded on how myth incorporates a fragmentary experience of evil into origin stories with cosmic dimensions, offering initial explanation of the ex- istence of evil. however, myths do not avoid paradoxes and ambiguities while trying to explain the origins of evil: they constitute a partial response, with con- solatory effect, to the questions of where evil comes from, why, and for how long. Myth answers the “why” question, but fails to find a response to “why me?” Metaphysics and then moral philosophy take over.30 ricœur then reviews how Leibniz’s Theodicy places under the same concept, and the same source, disparate terms such as sin (a moral evil seen in the re- sponsible agent that inflicts pain), suffering (seen from the perspective of the victim who receives pain), and death. ricœur rethinks evil, in light of Kant’s reassertions, in its “relational-dialogical structure”,31 with evil inflicted by one echoing in the evil suffered by the other. The synthesis he offers of the many aspects of theodicy reminds us of the need to confront the problem of evil even when God is no longer at the centre of philosophical systems. in the third act of Justice League: Crisis on Two Earths (2010), and while setting his diabolical plan in motion, the Owlman character seems to point a fin- ger at the human’s free will, another controversial subject discussed by Leibniz. having teleported himself onto earth-prime but before he activates his bomb in order to erase every form of existence, he is confronted by Batman, his alter 28 Jonas 1994, 14 (my translation). 29 ibid., 20 (my translation). 30 ricoeur 2010, 27–28. 31 ibid., 24.