THE PROBLEM OF EVIL ESSAY PLANNING SHEET
Critically compare Augustine’s theodicy with Irenaeus theodicy in providing a solution to the
problem of evil (40)
To what extent is John Hicks theodicy a convincing explanation for evil and suffering (40)
Critically compare Augustine and Irenaeus theodicy (40)
To what extent is there no satisfactory solution to the problem of evil (40)
Does Augustine/ Irenaeus provide a convincing explanation to modern suffering in the 21 st century
(40)
There is no solution to the problem of evil and suffering (40)
Asses which logical or evidential aspects of the problem of evil pose the greatest challenge to
belief (40)
Critically asses whether it is possible to defend monotheism in the face of existence of evil (40)
PLAN FOR A GENERAL QUESTION ON EVIL/ COMPARISON OF THE TWO THEODICIES
INTRO:
- There are many debates about the presence of evil and suffering in the world, and how this
effects the nature and existence of the monotheistic creator g-d who is known to be omnipotent
and omnibenevolent
- Many would use evil and suffering to question the existence of g-d in general whilst others would
suggest despite evil in the world, it is still possible for g-d to exist
Augustine
- Through his soul deciding theology, holds the view that it is still possible for g-d to exist despite
evil, through the idea of human free will using original sin and the fall to explain evil as a privation
of good
Hick
- Would argue it is still possible for g-d to exist as evil is merely a tool in allowing humans to
develop into the likeness of g-d, acting as an instrumental good in the world
Logical and evidential problems
- State that it is not possible for g-d to exist at all with the presence of evil- as the empirical
evidence of evil must take away from his other attributes
My line of argument= g-d can still exist despite evil and suffering in the world- but only through
Augustine’s view on evil and free will- as this is the only biblically coherent explanation
, PARA ONE: GENERAL AUGUSTINE VS IRENAEN
Both theodicies argue for the existence of g-d in the presence of evil
AGAINST- IRENAEN THEODICY
- Soul making theodicy- sees evil as an opportunity to reach divine likeness
- Genesis “let us make man in our image according to our likeness”- evil is in the world to help
people develop their character and to shape the world into perfection
- This can be seen through g-d sending jesus- helping humanity to grow into the likeness of g-d
- We learn the right way through experiencing evil- like Jonah learns repentence in the belly of
the whale
- Without suffering we would not know the need for goodness
BUT- FOR- ISSUES WITH THIS
- There are fundamental issues in this way of thinking
- If we are looking at creation and genesis- why couldn’t g-d create people who only do good
or why cant he limit the amount of good in the world- do we really need this amount of
suffering to fall into his likeness
SO- FOR- THE BETTER APPROACH- AUGUSTINE
- Soul deciding theodicy
- Augustine is able to take away this issue by removing the blame on g-d and placing it in the
hands of humans
- He views evil as a privation of good rather than a thing in itself- just as darkness is a lack of
light, g-d cannot be blamed for evil because he cannot create a privation of something
- Supported by McCabe- who says a bad deckchair is not the same as a bad grape- the
deckchair might be made because its legs break whereas the gape is bad because it is sour
- Making this school of thought internally coherent- evil does not mean g-d has fallen short on
expectations- we have
- Evil is not something but a lack of ‘goodness’- meaning g-d is not responsible
So
- The strongest line of argument is Augustines theodicy- as it dissolves the logical problem of
evil by removing the blame from g-d and creating the idea of privation
Critically compare Augustine’s theodicy with Irenaeus theodicy in providing a solution to the
problem of evil (40)
To what extent is John Hicks theodicy a convincing explanation for evil and suffering (40)
Critically compare Augustine and Irenaeus theodicy (40)
To what extent is there no satisfactory solution to the problem of evil (40)
Does Augustine/ Irenaeus provide a convincing explanation to modern suffering in the 21 st century
(40)
There is no solution to the problem of evil and suffering (40)
Asses which logical or evidential aspects of the problem of evil pose the greatest challenge to
belief (40)
Critically asses whether it is possible to defend monotheism in the face of existence of evil (40)
PLAN FOR A GENERAL QUESTION ON EVIL/ COMPARISON OF THE TWO THEODICIES
INTRO:
- There are many debates about the presence of evil and suffering in the world, and how this
effects the nature and existence of the monotheistic creator g-d who is known to be omnipotent
and omnibenevolent
- Many would use evil and suffering to question the existence of g-d in general whilst others would
suggest despite evil in the world, it is still possible for g-d to exist
Augustine
- Through his soul deciding theology, holds the view that it is still possible for g-d to exist despite
evil, through the idea of human free will using original sin and the fall to explain evil as a privation
of good
Hick
- Would argue it is still possible for g-d to exist as evil is merely a tool in allowing humans to
develop into the likeness of g-d, acting as an instrumental good in the world
Logical and evidential problems
- State that it is not possible for g-d to exist at all with the presence of evil- as the empirical
evidence of evil must take away from his other attributes
My line of argument= g-d can still exist despite evil and suffering in the world- but only through
Augustine’s view on evil and free will- as this is the only biblically coherent explanation
, PARA ONE: GENERAL AUGUSTINE VS IRENAEN
Both theodicies argue for the existence of g-d in the presence of evil
AGAINST- IRENAEN THEODICY
- Soul making theodicy- sees evil as an opportunity to reach divine likeness
- Genesis “let us make man in our image according to our likeness”- evil is in the world to help
people develop their character and to shape the world into perfection
- This can be seen through g-d sending jesus- helping humanity to grow into the likeness of g-d
- We learn the right way through experiencing evil- like Jonah learns repentence in the belly of
the whale
- Without suffering we would not know the need for goodness
BUT- FOR- ISSUES WITH THIS
- There are fundamental issues in this way of thinking
- If we are looking at creation and genesis- why couldn’t g-d create people who only do good
or why cant he limit the amount of good in the world- do we really need this amount of
suffering to fall into his likeness
SO- FOR- THE BETTER APPROACH- AUGUSTINE
- Soul deciding theodicy
- Augustine is able to take away this issue by removing the blame on g-d and placing it in the
hands of humans
- He views evil as a privation of good rather than a thing in itself- just as darkness is a lack of
light, g-d cannot be blamed for evil because he cannot create a privation of something
- Supported by McCabe- who says a bad deckchair is not the same as a bad grape- the
deckchair might be made because its legs break whereas the gape is bad because it is sour
- Making this school of thought internally coherent- evil does not mean g-d has fallen short on
expectations- we have
- Evil is not something but a lack of ‘goodness’- meaning g-d is not responsible
So
- The strongest line of argument is Augustines theodicy- as it dissolves the logical problem of
evil by removing the blame from g-d and creating the idea of privation
