Essay about The Problem of God in Devils and The Brothers Karamazov

Dostoevsky litters the novel with the biblical allusion of Lazarus. Sonia disseminates the legend to the largely agnostic Raskolnikov: “ ‘And when he thus spoken, he cried with a loud voice, Lazarus, come forth’” (Dostoevsky 328). This reference to Lazarus serves to foreshadow Raskolnikov’s own redemption. In fact, Raskolnikov

By not following the rules established by Christianity, Raskolnikov is essentially making himself God, which is an internal struggle throughout the novel because Raskolnikov feels guilty about it. Although he commits murder, which is impermissible in a religious and societal context, Raskolnikov actually saw some value in religion. It is for

Dostoyevsky was a Russian novelist that wrote on a fictional Russia that turned to atheism to solve its problems.

Dostoevsky did not specifically express belief nor disbelief in God. According to Philosophy in Russia, “Dostoevsky has been represented as a firm believer in God, whereas in a letter he said plainly that the existence of God was the principal question or problem which had tormented him throughout his life” (Copleston 163). Dostoevsky’s hesitant viewpoint also became present in his novel through his characters. For example, he characterized Raskolnikov with a similar unestablished faith, claiming on page 271 that “Perhaps God does not exist.” Raskolnikov struggles internally with guilt and shame that he questions his own beliefs. He speaks with Sonya shortly later, and confesses his belief to her that ‘Lord, I believe that thou art the Son of God, which should come into the world.” (Dostoevsky 276). Raskolnikov begins to have a change of heart about his faith once he is able to confess to another person and trust Sonya. Dostoevsky also incorporated his ideas of philosophy with the ideas of theology. He believed that people should be allowed to choose their religious preferences and faith. On the other hand, Dunya was presented as very devoted to a specific belief in God. She trusted God and used her faith as a form of reassurance when she stated “It was God himself who sent that man to us, although he comes straight from some drinking bout. I am sure we can rely on him” (Dostoevsky 172). Although she knows Raskolnikov is unreliable and irresponsible, she uses God as her source of certainty. Dostoevsky gives his characters the freedom to establish their own outlooks while expressing his belief in existentialism. Some of his characters are heavily devoted, while others are erratic with their position, reflecting Dostoevsky's beliefs in character

Throughout the novel, he questions faith and hints that he is atheist. When accused of not “believ[ing] in God” (538) by his fellow inmates, Raskolnikov makes no comment. He takes these insults silently, without making an attempt to deny them. To emphasize religious uncertainty even further, Dostoevsky makes Rodya blatantly suggest that “perhaps, there is no God at all” (320). His words do not match up with his actions since he desperately asks, “Where is the raising of Lazarus?”

The existence of god is a question explored in the novel The Brothers Karamazov by three brothers. Alyosha, a young, devoutly faithful man believes that God exists, and believes deeply in salvation through the forgiveness of sins. Alyosha is almost innocent in his faith, as demonstrated when an elder mentor becomes old and frail. Alyosha observes his lifelong mentor’s body falling apart, and he genuinely believes that a miracle will heal his mentor’s body for being a faithful man. Alyosha becomes extremely emotional when he observes that a miracle is not likely to happen, and claims that though his faith was shaken by this event, he was still certain of God’s existence. However, he does add that although he knows God exists, that he does not accept the world God created in which a miracle is not performed on his mentor.

In its historical context Notes from the Underground was written at a time when Russian writers were attempting to revive opposition to Reformation. These writers emphasized the ills of “separation, egotism and autonomy” that permeated much of 19th century Russia (Golstein 1998, p. 194). Russian writers were expressing the opinion that humanity was lacking in meaningful direction. In this regard, Dostoevsky’s Notes from the Underground is a representation of the hero who embodied separation but invariably fails, thus embodying the concept of anti-heroism (Golstein 1998, p. 194).

Imperial Russian society during the time of serfdom was characterized by constantly changing social order. The society experienced a complex social change at the threshold to emancipation. It was undergoing many changes with increasing westernization and serfdom culture that gave rise to formation of new classes (raznochintsy) during the nineteenth century. Many authors have reflected and emphasized this component of change in the structure of pre-emancipation Russian society. This paper will examine how two writers: Nikolai Gogol and Ivan Turgenev, in their novels, Dead Souls and Fathers and Sons depict the society’s constantly changing nature through the relationships between their characters and the development in their beliefs and ideas. Although both the novels explore societal change during the pre-emancipation of serfs, the emphasis of change is different in both the novels. In Fathers and Sons, Turgenev oversees shifting values prevalent in the society. He explores the shift in generational values by depicting the difference in beliefs of characters like Bazarov and Nikolai. On the other hand, in Dead Souls Gogol focuses on issues of morality in society. He depicts a struggle for morality and portrays a corrupt society through the landowners and the protagonist, Chichikov, in his book.

The problem of evil has been around since the beginning. How could God allow such suffering of his “chosen people”? God is supposedly all loving (omni-benevolent) and all powerful (omnipotent) and yet He allows His creations to live in a world of danger and pain. Two philosophers this class has discussed pertaining to this problem is B.C. Johnson and John Hick. Johnson provides the theists’ defense of God and he argues them. These include free will, moral urgency, the laws of nature, and God’s “higher morality”. Hick examines two types of theodicies – the Augustinian position and the Irenaeus position. These positions also deal with free will, virtue (or moral urgency), and the laws of nature. Johnson

Not only does Dostoevsky utilize tactical light and dark imagery to convey his persuasive belief in God’s undeniable influence on one’s fate, but he also included the aforementioned biblical story of Lazarus throughout the novel to aid in establishing this overall message. Essentially, the story of Lazarus and his own resurrection accurately parallels that of Rasky’s, as Dostoevsky alluded to this specific allegory in multiple, prominent locations. One of the most significant scenes in the novel emerged when Raskolnikov desperately demanded Sonya to read to him the particular gospel of Lazarus from the bible she received from Lizaveta. Sonya, finally complying, fevently read out loud: “he, he who is also blinded and unbelieving, he, too, will

Dostoyevsky most likely modeled Crime and Punishment after his own experiences. Since the two men's lives had striking similarities, many people believed that was evidence to prove their thinking. As Raskolnikov was overcome with tremendous suffering, sent to Siberia, and fell madly in love with a beautiful woman; so did Dostoyevsky within his lifetime. "I do believe that the character (Raskolnikov) was the epitome of Dostoyevsky's life." (Timoney)

     Friedrich Nietzsche once said, “Dostoevsky, the only one who has taught me anything about psychology.” The two writers share many similarities and differences. Dostoevsky clearly had an effect on the thinking of Nietzsche. The two would be considered both philosophers and psychologists. Both writers became prominent in the late 19th century in Germany and Russia respectively. Dostoevsky was noted for his Russian literary classics and would be responsible for a flowering of late 19th century Russian literary culture. His Russian contemporaries include Leo Tostoy and Anton Chekov. Dostoevsky’s most famous works include The Brothers Karamozov, The Idiot, and Crime and Punishment.

Through Raskolnikov’s exemplification of the impracticality of this principle\, Dostoevsky makes his greatest point in Crime and Punishment. His commentary on the subject seeks to discredit the theory in the circumstance of an individual “superman” by displaying Raskolnikov as a character who is difficult for readers to identify with because of his inanity. Even Raskolnikov’s name is a symbol of nihilistic ideas, the word “raskol” meaning schism in Russian, illustrating the shift from an older school of thought (social utopianism) to a darker philosophy: nihilism and utilitarianism. Raskolnikov seems to fluctuate back and forth between the two philosophies, acting on one and then mentally chastising himself for it, immediately and almost erratically changing his mind. This symbolizes the more human side of him struggling

If I could meet Dostoevsky I would ask him what his inspiration for Crime and Punishment was. Sometimes I wonder if the novel was written to give us insight to how Dostoevsky felt about the world. Maybe he is using the character Raskolnikov to portray a part of him who feels alienated from the world, and is torn apart

The author showed his opinion on the structure of the society, social norms and beliefs. He expressed his disagreement with “The Extraordinary Man Theory”. He told the audience that all people have feelings and emotions and cannot rely only on logic and calculations. People cannot hurt others and go unpunished. The ending of the novel helped to strengthen his ideas and convictions. In the end, everyone in the novel received the deserved punishment assigned either by the law or by fate. Raskolnikov and Svidrigailov realized that their actions were wrong and contradicted to the all social norms. They recognized that they were not extraordinary men. Dostoevsky made this novel very educative and filled with morality. It is great for people of all times and generations. It reveals what is good and wrong; it teaches how to be a