1. Team RS Revision 2018 The Problem Of Evil

2. The Problem Of Evil: Introduction
Evil / suffering part of the fabric of the world. Moral Evil: Results from human choices eg murder, rape, poverty, lying, steeling. Natural Evil: From natural sources eg disease, famine, drought, earthquakes. “Nature is a cruel murderer” (JS Mill). Sometimes Moral / Natural connected.
The Evidential Problem of Evil: Our personal experience of suffering /pain. A posterori.
The Logical Problem of Evil: The Inconsistent Triad: Epicurus, Hume, John Mackie: How can God be omnipotent, omnibenevolent and yet evil exists? Illogical. Contradictory. God would surely have the power / love to want to abolish evil. A priori.
Some people question the existence of evil – evil is an illusion eg The Church of Christ Scientist.
Some may question the traditional attributes of God. God has a bad side? Shiva the destroyer god in Hinduism. Not so big a problem for detached / impersonal God of Aristotle.
“We need light to appreciate the darkness” – Bit too philosophical? An inappropriate response that adds to the suffering in the world (DZ Phillips).
Theodicy: Attempt to justify goodness of God in face of evil.
Hans Kung: God knows suffering through Jesus. Richard Swinburne: A world without evil would be a toy world where nothing mattered. Evil and suffering is a teacher. Death comes when pain is too great.

3. The Augustinian Theodicy: St. Augustine: 4th century
Became a Christian in 387. Rejected Manicheism which said matter / spirit came from different gods.
Believed universe was created good by God: “God saw everything and it was good” (Genesis). God can only create the good. This goodness is not exactly the same as God’s goodness. Things are good in and of themselves. A stone is good for what it is to be a stone. A scale of goods in the world. There are variety and a rich goodness in creation.
God did not deliberately put evil there. Our responsibility.
Evil occurs when something goes wrong that was made for good. Evil is a privation / absence of good. Evil is not good. Sin is sin. Disease is the absence of health. Evil is not a force in its own right.
Some angels (led by Lucifer) chose to reject God. They received less grace than other angels and could not worship God without falling into sin. They Introduce evil and fall into Hell.
Adam and Eve tempted to choose to reject God and eat from the Tree of Knowledge in Eden by fallen angel Satan. Expelled and suffer pain of work/childbirth.
Punishments continue for generations. Evil = result of / punishment for sin. All humankind seminally present in Adam. Causes disorder in the natural universe too.
But God does not stop loving us and offers redemption through Jesus. God’s greatest gift.
A Soul Deciding Theodicy. We have a will (voluntas). We decide / chose. Free choice is essential for goodness / love. Genuine love of God cannot be forced. A world with evils from freedom is better than a world without freedom. A runaway horse better than a stone that does not move. A drunk person (no drunkenness still wrong) better in the dignity of nature than wine that makes no choice.

4. Irenaean Theodicy: St/ Bishop Irenaeus=pre- Augustine
2nd century thinker.
According to Genesis, we are made in God’s image and grow in God’s likeness to be mature/self- directed like God. Free Will an important part of this.
Adam and Eve were children who disobeyed a simple rule. Fall not a catastrophe. Irenaeus does not take fall / angels literally.
Humans mature over a lengthy period of time like a baby building up strength. Optimistic theory.
Evil and suffering exist so we can develop freely chosen mature relationships with God. There need to be genuine options to choose otherwise to have a free relationship with God. Emphasis on choice.
Christ is sent to help the learning process.
This development continues through life after death. Future hope.
Evil serves a purpose. We learn through experience. Virtue requires effort. Worthwhile things gained in difficulty. For kindness, bravery and generosity to exist, need other things We are clay in the hands of the potter (God) and offer our heart to God to be moulded.
Soul-making continues in the Next Life. Hell is for those hardened to God.
In 20th century, John Hick popularises these ideas. Stresses the importance of freedom for morality (a la Kant) and love. Created us at an epistemic distance from God. True love cannot be forced. This means a distance of knowledge. A world without pain would be a world without love, patience, courage, charity. Like a cricket match where no one is out. The world is instrumentally good and “a vale of soul-making” (Keats). The world is a place where characters / souls shaped. Evil part of “God’s plan2 to help us grow. God cannot disturb regularity in nature – a knife cannot be sharp one minute, blunt the next. Hick does not believe in Hell but suggests Purgatory as giving further opportunities for growth / soul-making before Heaven.

5. Criticisms Of The Theodicies
John Mackie: Why could an all-powerful/all-good God not create a world where people always freely choose the good? LImitations on God’s power?
If evil is there to help us grow why is sin considered bad?
The Adam / Eve Genesis / Satan story is unscientific. Evolution?
Angels do not exist and Bible questioned.
The idea of evil as absence of good does not do justice to world’s suffering.
Augustine – it is not fair we suffer because of Adam/Eve. Like punishing a family for the actions of one family member. Not loving of God. Same with Hell.
If God created the world good / perfect, why did it all go wrong? Could not an all-knowing (omniscient God) see this? Could not an omnipotent God put it right?
Goodness is subjective. Goodness all in the mind. Who decides goodness?
Are we actually free if we have to follow God? Augustine believes in predestination and God decides who is going to Heaven.
Is the freedom worth the suffering? Freedom not worth evil eg The Holocaust.
Through suffering, some people lose their faith.
What about people who do not know about God/Christ? We need full knowledge for full responsibility.
God is an irresponsible parent. God needs to help and support us.
DZ Phillips: It is a sign of a corrupt mind to state evil is instrumental or for some purpose. It makes God a moral monster. Macho god. It cannot justify the screams of the innocent. Like asking a sex worker to address their situation by charging more money.
The quantity off evil: Some suffer more than others. Some do not learn from suffering.
Life After Death does not exist.

6. There is no satisfactory answer to the problem of evil
There is no satisfactory answer to the problem of evil. (Define satisfactory and explain Logical / Evidential problems and as you do explain why many see them as great challenges with no satisfactory answers. Explain how for some Augustine and Iraenaeus and Hick provide satisfactory answers. Criticise these thinkers. Conclude).
The free will defence resolves some but not all the problems created by evil in the world. (Explain what the problems created by evil in the world are. Explain Logical and Evidential problems. Explain why for Augustine and Irenaeus and Hick the Free Will Defence solves the problems. Agree with the question. It does not solve all the problems. Bring in critics. Then say for some it solves no problems but creates others. Conclude).
To what extent is St. Augustine more successful than the Irenaean theodicy in explaining evil in the world. (Explain the logical and evidential problems. Define successful and explain. You could very briefly explain the theodicies but bee careful as we need to get to the question (but we also need to show knowledge/understanding) Why would people think is Augustine more successful than Irenaeaus. Focus on St. Augustine ‘s ideas and their strengths. Then move on to the weaknesses of Irenaeus. On the other hand…flip it…strengths of Irenaeus and weaknesses of Augustine. Say for some they are both unsuccessful. Conclude).
Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Hick’s theodicy. (Explain logical/ evidential problems. Define theodicy and may strengths / weaknesses. Explain Irenaeus who influences Hick and then Hick, pointing out strengths. Then move on to criticise using standard atheist critics. Briefly present Augustine as offering more. Conclude.
Discuss critically Augustine’s view that God cannot be blamed for the existence of moral and natural evil in the universe. (Standard question on Augustine. Do not be fooled by question language. Explain logical / evidential / moral / natural evil. Define blamed. Agree with the question using Augustine. Explain his ideas as you go. Use Irenaeus/ Hick to back up further. Stress Free Will. Bring in critics then conclude).
Evidence of evil and suffering in the universe provides a greater challenge to the existence of God than the logical problem of evil. Discuss. (Explain the various types of evil. Define greater challenge. Yes the evidential problem does. Experience of evil and suffering. Bring in any examples / experience. On the other hand – explain logical problem presents greater challenge. Inconsistent Triad. Say for some equal challenge. Mention challenge not necessary fatal to belief. Bring in Augustine, Irenaeus and Hick briefly to say challenge can be overcome. Conclude).
Irenaeus’ theodicy gives a more satisfactory response to the problem of evil and suffering than Augustine’s theodicy. Discuss. (Explain the various types of evil. Define satisfactory response. Agree with the q. Explain Irenaeus’ strengths. Bring in Hick. Explain Augustine’s weaknesses. Flip it. Disagree with question. Augustine’s strengths and Irenaeus / Hick weaknesses. Say both unsatisfactory. Bring in critics. Conclude).
How convincing is the claim that it is necessary for there to be evil in the world if we are to have genuine free will? (Do not be worried by this question. It is about the theodicies framed in particular way. Define necessary and explain the various types of evil. Explain the theodicies of Augustine, Irenaeus and Hick and focus on the importance of genuine free will being necessary. Then flip it and say genuine free will should not necessarily lead to evil. Bring in critics. God can do anything. Question whether evil needed anyway. Question whether free will needed. Use critics. Conclude).