<P> Views on the nature of evil tend to fall into one of four opposed camps: </P> <Ul> <Li> Moral absolutism holds that good and evil are fixed concepts established by a deity or deities, nature, morality, common sense, or some other source . </Li> <Li> Amoralism claims that good and evil are meaningless, that there is no moral ingredient in nature . </Li> <Li> Moral relativism holds that standards of good and evil are only products of local culture, custom, or prejudice . </Li> <Li> Moral universalism is the attempt to find a compromise between the absolutist sense of morality, and the relativist view; universalism claims that morality is only flexible to a degree, and that what is truly good or evil can be determined by examining what is commonly considered to be evil amongst all humans . </Li> </Ul> <Li> Moral absolutism holds that good and evil are fixed concepts established by a deity or deities, nature, morality, common sense, or some other source . </Li> <Li> Amoralism claims that good and evil are meaningless, that there is no moral ingredient in nature . </Li>

Describe things that a person could do that would lead to good consequences because of god