-- Posted by Black American Dude at 2:56 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 In this paper, I will address J.L. Mackie's premise in his essay "Evil and Omnipotence" that because good cannot exist without evil God lacks omnipotence and the quality of being wholly-good. should there be a "," after evil and before God? as in In this paper, I will address J.L. Mackie's premise in his essay "Evil and Omnipotence" that because good cannot exist without evil, God lacks omnipotence and the quality of being wholly-good. -- Posted by iinsurgent at 2:57 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 Who's** -- Posted by Black American Dude at 2:57 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 also is it correct to use "that" after "Evil and Omnipotence"? or should I use "on" -- Posted by hateitandloveit at 2:58 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 Quote: from iinsurgent at 5:57 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 Who's** lol qft -- Posted by iBritt at 2:59 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 Quote: from Black American Dude at 5:57 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 also is it correct to use "that" after "Evil and Omnipotence"? or should I use "on" The whole "that" was a bit confusing.  It's a little bump in the sentence. But I think your comma is in the right place. -- Posted by omgnowayyy at 3:00 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 the entire statement kind of looks a mess to me, but the comma should be there. -- Posted by Black American Dude at 3:00 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 is this better? In this paper, I will address J.L. Mackie's premise: because good cannot exist without evil God lacks omnipotence and the quality of being wholly-good, in his essay "Evil and Omnipotence." -- Posted by EndLess LoVe at 3:03 pm on Sep. 8, 2008 If it were me It would go as; In this paper, I will address J.L. Mackie's premise which suggests that because good cannot exist without evil, God lacks omnipotence and the quality of being wholly-good, as written in his essay "Evil and Omnipotence".