Problem of Evil AO2 and Essay Plans

Question 1

There is no satisfactory answer to the problem of evil

Answer 1

• JL Mackie- the inconsistent triad seems to be the most logical explanation for the problem of evil. The formula itself puts evil squarely in the face of God, and therefore cannot be reconciled with an apt answer.
• Schliermacher - how could a perfect world become imperfect, in a perfect world how would imperfectness be understood.
• If we have free will in a perfect world would we not only do perfection as that would be all that would ever be understood?
• Since we experience evil and suffering such experiences affect and question ones own belief in God. William Rowe analogy of the deer, moral and natural evil have no purpose.
• Augustines’s teaching on Original Sin and the continuation of punishment for all of humanity is illogical from an ethical and a biological standpoint, no point in punishing a newly born child.
• Dysteleological evil: not everyone learns from evil-often it serves no purpose and instead of making people better t makes them more sour and unkind.
• Hicks theodicy can justify the existence of evil but not explain why there is so much of it and why it is so unnecessarily intense.

Question 2

There is a satisfactory answer to the problem of evil

Answer 2

• In Augustine’s theodicy, God in now way tolerates or want’s evil to be part of creation.
• The privation of good is a logical conclusion considering that the default position of a human is to do good.
• Places the blame for evil at the feel of human beings, it has nothing to do with God.
• Strongly supported by scripture.
• IT works well with a more metaphorical understanding of scripture adopted by most churches today- it is not a direct contradiction to modern science.
• avoids blaming God for unreasonably allowing evil to happen in the world.
• evil is not something independent, but rather lacking of something intended, a privation boni, or a privation of good.
• this is due to a misuse of free will that there is evil and suffering, we lead to an imperfect world.
• we are thus seminally present, and so distant from God that there is no end to our own ‘wretched condition.

Question 3

Strengths of soul-making theodicies

HICK AND IRANEAUS

Answer 3

• Evolutionary: Based on evolution ideas rather than dependent on the biblical view of humanity.
• Valued free will as the means by which man develops morally and spiritually
• God is therefore not responsible for man’s evil choices
• Evil is teleological it’s purpose is to facilitate growth
• works well with a metaphorical understanding of scripture adopted by most churches Churches today- it is not in direct contradiction to modern science.
• The view that things are instrumentally good is supported by many modern consequentialist ethical theories.
• Avoids blaming God for unreasonably allowing forever to happen in the world.
• Supports modern principles of universalism and a truly loving God.

Question 4

Weaknesses of soul-making theodicies

HICK AND IRANAEUS

Answer 4

• Imperfect: suggests that God’s creative work was imperfect.
• Growth: Man’s free choices do not always lead to growth in power, freedom and knowledge.
• Salvation: This is universal and based on mans own striving
• Purgatory: if the completion of man’s soul is in purgatory then why face trials in this life?
• too optimistic
• Dysteleological evil: not everyone learns from evil- often it serves no purpose and instead of making people better it makes them more sour and unkind.
• The theodicy can justify the existence of evil, but it cannot explain why there is so much of it and why it is so uneccesarily intense. DZ PHILLIPS.
• Hicks view of universal salvation calls into question the reason for Jesus’ death on the cross.
• Any excise for God for permitting evil is morally insufficient. DZ PHILLIPS

Question 5

Strengths of soul deciding theodicies

AUGUSTINE

Answer 5

• Biblical- based on the bible- appeals to beliefs in creation and the fall.
• Choice: values free will as the best choice God could have made for mankind.
• Man: God is therefore not responsible for man’s evil choices.
• Evil: Evil is not originally part of God’s creative work.
• The idea of evil lacking substance can make logical sense, just like darkness being the absence of light and cold being the absence of heat are logically coherent ideas.
• God in no way tolerates or wants evil to be part of creation
• The privation of good is a logical conclusion considering that the default position of a human is to do good.
• Seems harsh at first, but is based on a more realistic understanding of human nature.
• It places the blame for evil at the feet of human beings, it has nothing to do with God.

Question 6

Weaknesses of soul-deciding theodicies

AUGUSTINE

Answer 6

• out of date: may be considered outdated by an evolutionary view of man’s development
• begs the question of whether God could have created free beans who always choose what is morally right
• Salvation: this is reserved for the few accept Jesus.
• The eternity of hell appears to question the ‘integrity’ of God’s justice- can the notion of an eternal hell be part of any theodicy?
• Prevention: If God foresaw mans fall then he should’ve prevented it.
• It lacks optimism
• It requires a literal reading of scripture- rejected by modern evolutionary science.
• Augustines teaching on Original Sin and the continuation of punishment for all of humanity is illogical from an ethical and a biological standpoint. DAWKINS.
• If creation was perfect it is a logical contradiction that it could go wrong. SCHLIERMACHER
• the privation of evil suggests that evil is of a lesser importance than it is, evil isn’t something trivial as Augustine suggests.

Question 7

Criticisms of John Hick’s theodicy

Answer 7

• Can we really justify so much pain and suffering as necessary to bring about the perfected state of humankind? (e.g can we really justify a Child starving is necessary for any reason?)
• Evil seems to strike arbitrarily/randomly (As J.S Mill pointed out- happiness and suffering are not handed out proportionally to good and bad people.)
• Plausability Hick rejected Augustine’s theodicy as implausible- it could be argued that if everyone is saved in the end, then what is the point of pain and suffering? We could equally be saved without it.
• Injustice: Traditional Christianity emphasises the fact that human beings are responsible for their own actions and God will judge them. Jesus said this himself several times. Thus the idea of universal salvation is unjust.

Question 8

Strength’s of John Hick’s theodicy

Answer 8

-All extremes of evil serve a purpose in God’s plan. If we want less evil, we must exchange that for our free will ( free will defence theory)
-Hick claims that such obvious punishing and reward took place, it would be the same as God giving us direct knowledge of right and wrong, which would undermine our free will.
- Some argue that the theodicy is the most comforting and more useful for those with faith than any other theodicy.
(Here, God is an infinitely wise being who understands that although suffering is terrible, it also has the potential to bring about amazing goods.)
-Optimistic- in Hick’s theodicy all will be saved (universal salvation)