{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02525523911875336, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0021493820526598604, 'mean_word_length': 4.746913580246914, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Facing Omnipotence and Shaping the Sceptical Topos

In this paper, I would like to analyse the metamorphosis of narrative traditions.1 The core of my examination will be the transformation of a notion that is concealed beneath the narrative. The story to be considered deals with a problem which is usually a subject of contemplation for sceptical theists, a branch of philosophy which accepts that God exists and that we can know general truths about Him, but denies that we can know the reason for God’s decision to act in a particular way in any given case. The argument to which sceptical theism primarily responds is the ever-present problem of evil, whose argument against the existence of God runs as follows: if God exists, then there should be no undeserved evil. However, it is well known that cases of undeserved evil do exist. Therefore, a sceptic would or might assert that an omniscient, omnibenevolent, and omnipotent God does not exist. However, the sceptical theist would respond that based on our limited knowledge of the reasons for God’s actions, we cannot know that the second premise is correct.2 In other words: “If, after thinking hard, we cannot think of any God-justifying reason for permitting some horrific evil, then it is likely that there is no such reason.”3 The sceptical theist will maintain his belief in God, but will deny God’s involvement in the politics of evil. However, the rabbinic narrator’s approach is more that of a sceptical pantheist, if such a term is possible. God is involved in the world; He is aware of the existence of evil; however, despite being omniscient, omnibenevolent, and omnipotent, He has decided not to change anything in the world.4 In a manner of speaking, the rabbinic narrator accepts the teaching of the Book of Job, with which the stories to be considered have an intertextual relationship,