Irenaean Theodicy Flashcards
Where do Ireneaus and Augustine agree?
Both believe that evil is the result of free will. I said that we have the choice to perform good or evil, but frequently choose evil
Where do I and A disagree in terms of free will?
I thinks that God gave us free will so we could achieve a specific purpose - to obtain spiritual and moral perfection to become truly in the image of God
Why did I believe that free will was essential to good?
Because if humans were programmed to only choose good, then their good would be a coercion and therefore not truly good
What did I think would make up for the suffering we experience on Earth?
Eternity in heaven
What is Hick’s theodicy called?
The vale of soul making - it is largely an extension of I’s theodicy
What belief do I and A share about evil?
Irenaeus shared Augustine’s belief that evil was the result of free will – humans have the choice to commit evil, and frequently choose it
How do I and A differ in their beliefs about evil?
Irenaeus differs in that he thinks God gave us free will in order to achieve a specific purpose. He said that this was to allow humans to develop spiritual and moral perfection to become truly in the image of God
Why does I think that evil is necessary?
He thought that having the choice between good and evil was essential for this perfection. If God made humans so that they could only choose good, their good would be a coercion and therefore not truly good
Why does I think that God cannot intervene to prevent evil?
God cannot intervene to stop evil, because then this essential freedom would be lost
Why does I think that God could not create a world where no evil existed?
If God had created a world where no evil existed, then the good characteristics needed for moral development, like courage and compassion, could not be developed
What did I think would make up for the suffering we experience on Earth?
He argued that eternity in heaven would make up for the suffering we experience on Earth
What is Hick’s theodicy called?
Hick’s theodicy is called the vale of soul making and is largely an extension of the Irenaean Theodicy
How is H’s theodicy similar to I’s?
He also believed that humans go through life in a process of moral development, working towards perfection
What purpose does H think evil serves and what is the counter to this view?
He says that evil can help us develop good characteristics. For example, experiencing the suffering of others can help us develop compassion and sympathy. Experiencing the outcome of lies can make someone more honest. This can be disputed, as people who grow up in abusive homes are much more likely to be abusive parents themselves
What does H call the process of human moral development?
Hick calls this process soul making and says that it justifies the existence of evil
When does H think that moral perfection can be reached?
Moral perfection might not be reached in this life, but Hick held that it would be reached in the afterlife
Explain H’s idea of epistemic distance?
Hick believed that humans were created at an epistemice distance from God. This means that they were created at a special distance from God where they were close enough that they could know him but not so close that they had no choice to believe in him – this way faith is a choice
Why does H think that we could not have been created at a closer epistemic distance to God?
If we had been created at a closer epistemic distance, then humans would be good because of their closeness to God and this would have compromised their freedom
Explain H’s parable of the celestial city
Hick gives his theodicy an eschatological justification (synoptic link to John) using the parable of a journey to a celestial city. Both atheists and theists are on the same journey and have the same destination. If the theist is right then their idea of a celestial city will be verified in the afterlife. If the atheist is right, then they will never achieve verification because both the theist and the atheist will simply cease to be when they die
List the strengths of the Irenaean Theodicy
Responsibility for evil is placed on humans rather than God, making it a successful theodicy
Humans have free will, which is consistent with our interpretation of existence
If makes suffering and evil easier to deal with because they are presented as having some higher purpose
It shows that this is the best possible world – as it would not have been logically possible for God to have created a world in which we have free will and can obtain moral perfection where no evil exists. However, God should be able to do things that are logically impossible, otherwise he is bound by logic and therefore no longer omnipotent
List the weaknesses of the Irenaean Theodicy
God should have been able to make a process whereby achieving moral perfection was not so difficult or time consuming
Some suffering doesn’t result in soul making, like the death of a baby, and therefore seems pointless and arbitrary
Some suffering is particularly brutal and seems excessive for the purposes of soul making
People can develop good qualities without suffering, like JC. However, JC is the physical incarnation of the Word of God, so this is perhaps different
Animal suffering, as they are not rational beings so cannot be edified
