









Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
The age-old question of why God allows evil and suffering to exist in the world. It delves into various perspectives, including theodicies that attempt to justify God's actions and atheistic arguments that challenge God's existence. The document also discusses the distinction between natural and moral evil and the role of free will in the existence of evil.
Typology: Lecture notes
1 / 16
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
The problem of evil and suffering is considered to be one of the most powerful arguments against the existence of God.
If God is all-loving and all-powerful, then why is there evil and suffering?
Some believe that God allows evil and suffering to happen as tests in humanity’s growth.
Others say it is the result of humanity’s disobedience of God.
Some believe that God has given humanity free will in order to choose right from wrong.
QUICK OVERVIEW
There are two types of evil – natural evil which stems from the natural world, for example, diseases, earthquakes, and famines, and moral evil, which is the result of human actions, such as murder, war and serious harm. The problem of evil challenges those who believe in an all-loving, all-powerful God.
If God is omnipotent (all-powerful), then he can do anything. This means he could create a world that is free from evil and suffering and he could stop all evil and suffering.
If God is omniscient and knows everything in the universe, then he must know how to stop evil and suffering.
If God is omnibenevolent (all-loving), then he would wish to end all evil and suffering. No all-loving God would wish his creation to suffer for no reason..
Yet evil and suffering do exist, so either God is not omnipotent or omnibenevolent or he does not exist.
Are these views completely right or can you think of other possibilities?
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM?
MODERN DEVELOPMENTS CONCERNING THE NATURE OF THE PROBLEM
Mackie focussed on the logical problem of evil. The logical problem arises because theists maintain that there are no limits to what an omnipotent being can do. However, Mackie claims that the only solution to the logical problem is to deny this and that all so called ‘solutions’ or ‘theodicies’ actually limit God’s power but misleadingly keep the term ‘omnipotence’. He argues that in the various theodicies:
Therefore, Mackie argues that the theodicies do not give a solution to the problem of evil since they have changed the premise (i.e. that God is omnipotent).
William Rowe in his work: ‘ The problem of evil and some varieties of atheism ’ (1979) argued that, whilst it seemed reasonable for God to allow some limited suffering to enable humans to grow and develop, he could not accept God allowing what he called ’intense’ suffering’ Animal suffering also seemed pointless. Rowe used the example of a fawn caught in a forest fire as an example of pointless animal suffering. He argues:
Gregory Paul argues that the death of so many innocent children challenges the existence of God. He estimates that over 50 billion children have died naturally and some 300 billion human beings have died naturally but prenatally. He argues:
God’s goodness is a very different concept from human goodness and many religious believers say that God allows evil to exist as part of his greater plan of love. Such an approach has led to the development of theodicies to justify the existence of a loving God in the face of evil.
Irenaeus (130-202CE) wrote about the idea that human beings are developing towards perfection:
More recently, John Hick took these ideas and developed them into a full theodicy:
it contradicts religious texts of many faiths and suggests that there is ultimately no reason to be good.
and often seem to produce nothing but great misery and suffering.
happen: What are we to say of the child dying from cancer? If this has been done to anyone that is bad enough, but to be done for a purpose planned from eternity
and so never reach perfection.
The main difference between Augustine and Irenaeas is that the former believed that humanity was created perfectly and turned against God, leading to evil and suffering coming into the world. Irenaeas, on the other hand, believed that humanity was deliberately created imperfectly so that, though suffering, humanity could develop into goodness.
CONCLUSION
NATURAL EVIL events caused by nature that cause suffering but over whichhuman beings have little or no control e.g. earthquakes.
MORAL EVIL events in which responsible actions by human beings causesuffering or harm e.g. war.
THEODICY a evil.^ justification^ of^ the^ righteousness^ of^ God^ given^ the^ existence^ of
OMNIPOTENCE the characteristic of being all-powerful. Some philosophers exclude thepower to do the logically impossible.
FREE WILL the ability to make choices that are not determined by prior causesor by divine intervention.
OMNISCIENCE the characteristic of being all-knowing of all things actual and possible.
EX NIHILO a Latin phrase meaning ‘out of nothing’. Refers to the belief thatGod did not use any previously existing material when he created.
SOUL-DECIDING the Augustinian-type theodicy in which people’s response to eviland God’s rescue plan decides their destiny.
SOUL-MAKING the Irenaean-type theodicy in which the presence of evil is deliberateand helps people to grow and develop.
a distance of knowledge of God. God is hidden and so allows human beings to choose freely.
SECOND-ORDER GOODS moral goods that result from a response to evil.
CLASSICAL THEISM
the belief in a personal deity, creator of everything that exists, who is distinct from that creation and is sustainer and preserver of the universe.
PRIVATION the absence or lack of something that ought to be there. In relationto evil as a privation, then evil is seen as an absence of good.
JUSTIFICATION evil^ and^ suffering^ are^ justified^ because^ of^ the^ eventual^ outcome.
KEYWORDS
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL
ANSWERS
1 I. Moral evils are events in which responsible actions cause suffering whilst natural evils are events in nature which cause suffering but human beings have little or no control. II. Omnipotent means all powerful whilst omnibenevolent means all good III. First order goods are goods achieved directly from an action whilst second order goods are goods that result from a response to evil
2 The logical problem of evil identifies an apparent contradiction in logic between the existence of God and the existence of evil. The problem of suffering is about the experience of suffering and whether God can be trusted given the occurrence of suffering.
3 Called soul-deciding because the response to evil ultimately decides peoples destiny.
4 Called soul-making as the presence of evil helps people to grow and develop.
5 Mackie argues that all theodicies in some way or another limit the power of God.Hence no theodicy really accepts a God that is all powerful.
6 I. The Fall in the Bible is not to be taken literally but represents each person’s rebellion against God. OR The fall is correct and evolution is in error. II. People must be free to choose and their choices have consequences OR there is annihilation rather than hell OR hell is an empty threat and in fact all are saved. III. It is not possible to create free beings and make them always to choose right.
7 I. Jesus’ death is an inspiring example II. But ultimately all will achieve the goal of perfection III. There is evidence –eg remembered lives, spiritualism
The basis of the Irenaean type theodicy is that human beings are developing towards perfection. The emphasis is to understand the world as a “vale of soul- making”. God deliberately created a world in which it is not immediately and overwhelmingly evident that there is a God. This allows human beings to have freedom to come to God and to make free and responsible moral choices. Evil and suffering are justified since they are the means by which all human beings will eventually succeed in becoming morally perfect. Indeed, some moral goods are responses to evils and hence cannot exist without them – for example, compassion.
In the 21st century this approach to the problem of evil has some attractions. It is compatible with a scientific view of evolution and therefore is more successful than the Augustinian type theodicy. However, if the Biblical accounts are regarded as depicting historical events then the Irenaean type theodicy would not be persuasive. Indeed, for a Christian theodicy, it would seem to be wanting as the atoning work of Christ and his redemptive power of salvation through death on the Cross seems to be irrelevant. There seems no place for the forgiveness of sins. Also, surely an all powerful benevolent God could find a more compassionate mechanism for his creation to grow and develop towards God? Indeed, evil often ruins and destroys people rather than making them perfect.
THE SKILL OF EVALUATION
Discuss in a group to what extent you think this answer has fully addressed the question set
Identify effective aspects of the answer in terms of its style.
How does this answer differ from the style of evaluative answer that lists arguments in favour and then lists arguments against?
Discuss any ways that the answer could have been improved upon?
Look back at the comments to question 1 and think ways in which you could incorporate those into the answer.
Underline any words in the answer that show it is evaluative
Now attempt to write your own answer to the question set.
REVIEW QUESTIONS