1. ‘Assess the credibility of different responses to the problem of evil’ (12 marks)
Clarify key ideas
Evil challenges the qualities of God
Mackie and the inconsistent triad
Explain what a theodicy is.
Outline opinion
Focus on Augustine and Irenaeus – both are equally weak
Idea
A – privation of good contradicts other parts of the Bible
I – suffering does not always make someone a better person
Argument Against
A – places blame for suffering with humans – not God
I – allows for free will
Counter Argument
A – if suffering is a punishment, then why do the innocent suffer?
I – Suffering is disproportionate and how do some people develop without suffering?
Conclusion
Weaknesses are too significant to be overcome.

2. ‘Assess the credibility of different responses to the problem of evil’ (12 marks)
The problem of evil and suffering is often considered to be the biggest barrier to believing in the existence of the God of classical theism. This is because evil and suffering seem to challenge the very nature of what we believe God to be. J.L. Mackie explained this using the ‘inconsistent triad’. Mackie believed that it was impossible for God to be omnipotent and omnibenevolent and yet for evil to still exist. Mackie argues that an all-powerful God could do anything they wanted to and, since evil clearly exists, God must not want to stop it and so is not all loving.
In response to such challenges, a number of theodicies have been put forward to defend the existence of God. A theodicy is an argument that suggests that God is right to allow the existence of evil and suffering because in some way they are necessary.
I intend to focus on the Augustinian and Irenean theodicies and seek to argue that both lack credibility due to the extent of their specific weaknesses .
The Augustinian theodicy claims that there is no such thing as evil, it is simply the ‘privation of good’. This idea is inconsistent with many Biblical teachings that describe evil as an actual force in the world such as Satan tempting Jesus in the wilderness and possessing Judas at the Last Supper. As regards the Irenean theodicy, I believe this to be flawed as it focuses on suffering making people a better person and this fails to take into account that suffering can often cause fear, resentment and worsening of characteristics, for example, 75% of those abused as children go on to abuse others later in life.
Some however would argue that these theodicies do defend God against the problem of evil as the Augustinian theodicy places the blame with humans meaning that God’s qualities remain unchallenged. With regard to Irenaeus’ ideas, they focus heavily on God allowing free will to allow for human development. This could be seen as a strength as this allows humans to make their own decisions rather than behaving like robots.
However, I believe that these theodicies are still weak as the Augustinian theodicy claims that evil is the punishment for sin and that those who do not sin, do not suffer. This idea is seriously flawed as there is a wealth of empirical evidence that suggests that innocent people regularly suffer, for example the Jews in the Holocaust. With regard to the Irenaen theodicy, this fails to adequately explain why suffering is often disproportionate, for example can the horrors of the Rwandan genocide really be justified in the process of soul making? Furthermore, it does not explain why many people appear to be able to develop the characteristics of kindness and patience without having to suffer.
In conclusion, I don’t believe that either the Irenaen or Augustinian theodicies offer a satisfactory resolution to the problem of evil as their individual weaknesses are too significant to be overcome.