The Problem of Evil

key terms

theodicy - a theory to justify gods righteousness when faced with evil

moral evil - evil that is a result of human free choices

natural evil - evil that comes from nature or natural sources

suffering - pain or harm experienced by a person - a consequence of evil

innocent suffering - the suffering experienced by those who do not deserve it

logical and evidential problems of evil

logical problem

evil is a problem for the believer not because t challenges the existence of god but because it challenges the nature of god - logical problem

theistic religions believe god to be all powerful and all loving yet evil exists

how can god be all powerful and not stop evil?
how can god be all loving an not want to stop evil?

in order for this inconsistent triad to be resolved it seems tha one of the three parts of it must not be true

either god isnt omnipotent
either god isnt benevolent
perhaps our definitions need to change
perhaps evil does not exist as we think it does

evidential problem

evil is evidentially a problem because it can be seen in the evidence of people suffering - especially in the quantity of suffering and innocent suffering

e.g. natural disasters can displace, injure and kill many thousands at a time, moral evil can cause some humans to perform acts that for others are unthinkable

if god really knows everything why did he create the universe knowing that extreme examples of evil and suffering would occur?

responses

perhaps evil is part of a 'big picture plan' that god has for the world and shoudnt be taken at face value

some suffering is good because it teaches us to learn from our mistakes or it warn s us that something worse might happen

suffering and evil can bring out the best in people

suffering could be a result of the previous actions of people - form of punishment

if we are to be allowed to be genuinely free then suffering is something we have to accept in some way

the bible suggests that there comes a point where we have to 'let go' of our intellectual questioning about evil and suffering and accept the love of god

Augustine

a bishop who saw evil and suffering as coming out of free will

original perfection

therefore evil is an absence or privation of good

e.g. in the same way that blindness is an absence of sight

evil is a falling short of good

believed that a perfect god could only create a perfect world

the fall

even before adam and eve some angels misused their free will and fell from gods grace and so hell was created and the harmony of creation disturbed

in the garden of eden, adam and eve disobeyed gods commands by giving in to temptation and they too broke the harmonious relationship with god

all evil in the world stems from these acts of disobedience

theodicy

everything is created perfectly by god
however all things fall short of this perefection due to the fall of both angels and humans
this led to a loss of harmony in nature which in turn leads to natural evil
people continue to fall short and this leads to moral evil

all humans deserve to be punished for the original sin of adam and eve and for their continuing sinfulness
we deserve this because we are all seminally present in the loins of adam - we are all descendants of adam and eve and so share in the effects of original sin

as god is fair and just he cannot stop evil and suffering because he cannot interfere with free actions
however he sent Jesus to earth as a sign of his grace to give the opportunity for people to go to heaven

just like a picture is improved by good use of shadows so too is evil part of the natural balance of the universe and from gods perspective the universe is aesthetically pleasing because its beautiful and balanced
a world with evil and genuine free will is better than a world without choice
augustine compared this to a runaway horse which is better than a stone that stays in place by itself because the stone has no movement or perception of its own

for augustine evil comes ultimately from the fall affecting harmony in the world and resulting in human punishment
however gods benevolence shows that humans have not been abandoned
for augustine all evil is either sin or punishment for sin
in modern terms his theodicy is described as soul deciding
we have to decide whether or not to obey god

Augustines theodicy - strengths

Augustines approach seems to fit with our expectations of the real world - free will seems to cause most suffering so it is possible to extend this to the idea that it is the cause of all suffering including that caused by natural evil
seems reasonable to put emphasis on human action not gods action

Aquinas explored natural evil further and said that it might only be evil because of the way we look at the world
for aquinas the idea of death as an aspect of our punishment gives a motivation to humans

the idea of privation also makes sense and emphasises the ultimate goodness of god
analogy - a bad deckchair is not the same as a bad grape the deckchair may be bad if it collapses when you sit on it but that wouldnt make a grape bad
so privation is the idea that something is bad if it falls short of our expectations for it
some might argue that augustines theodicy is therefore internally coherent
evil does not mean god has fallen short of expectations but that we have

Augustines theodicy - weaknesses

it requires a reading of genesis that is not always accepted by christians today and this is challenges by the theory of evolution
evolution also suggests that over time species are adapting towards perfection
augustine works the other way around suggesting that we are moving away from perfection

if the adam and eve story is true and the world was created perfectly how can they have known that they were disobeying god and choosing evil
did they have genuine freedom to choose evil?

the idea of humans being seminally present in the loins of adam does not seem fair or just
why should we be punished for adam and eves actions?
this point also doesnt tie in to our biological understanding of reproduction

it doesnt seem to make sense to say that all things were made perfectly by god and then went wrong
if they were made perfectly why/how did they go wrong?
equally if god made hell why did he make a place that assumed things would go wrong?
this must leave part of the blame for evil with god not placing it entirely onto umans

perhaps humans are simply flawed and cannot be perfect

Augustines view is that because of the fall humans have a natural inclination to sin
it does not seem fair that we can be fully responsible for our actions because we are no longer able to make fully free choices

augustine also believed that god is in control of who goes to heaven and who goes to hell
-in this case again human free will seems to be limited

it is difficult to see how angelic disobedience could have caused plate tectonics - earthquakes happen because of the way the world was made

the theodicy does not help people who are suffering to understand what they are going through nor does it explain the sheer quantities of suffering

Augustines response to the suffering of innocent babies is that they are tainted by original sin which some find difficult

Hick

Irenaean theodicies

see evil as an opportunity
not soul deciding but soul making
focus on the idea that evil is in the world to help people to develop their characters in some way and so evil and free will are both part of god shaping the world to perfection

gods likeness is something that we need to achieve or grow into through the development of our characters because true likeness is chosen not given and so evil is part of a process not just in our lifetimes but over the whole course of human history

Hicks reworking

took free will as his starting point when considering the problem of evil
free will must be complete and genuine and must have been given so that we can have a complete and genuine relationship with god
with true freedom comes the possibility of consequences even if they are negative
genuine freedom requires all possible choices and all possible consequences and needs to be free from gods intervention

the reason behind this is hicks idea of the epistemic distance between god and humanity
this gap in knowledge between us and god gives us the space we need to use our freedom fully

for hick something is only good when iits purpose is considered
if there were a world with no possibility of pain that might be good on one level but it wouldnt be good in the sense of soul making
this is known as instrumental good - something that is good for a purpose
this world is instrumentally good because it is good for our development into gods likeness
hicks phrase is that the world is a 'vale of soul making' - a place whose purpose is to make souls

we are made in gods image but must develop into his lkeness
in this vale of soul making we have to try to come to a fuller knowledge of god - overcoming the epistemic distance
we can only do this with free will - if god presented himself to us we would be able to choose a relationship with god with complete freedom - in the same way true love has to be freely chosen and not forced
we need to use evil and suffering in this process by responding appropriately to them
our response to suffering develops our virtues such as compassion and charity which helps us to grow as people

hick felt the idea of hell contributes to the problem of evil because no good can come out of a place of eternal suffering
for hick hell must be a place of cleansing - further soul making - before humans go on to heaven especially is people die at different stages of their soul making process and some die as a result of innocent suffering
hick therefore believes in universal salvation which will take place after further opportunities to develop into the likeness of god

Hick - strengths

hicks approach seems to overcome many of the weaknesses in the augustine theodicy - evil is a tool used by god and not a result of god failing to anticipate the results of free will - it does not rely on seminal presence to justify its approach

its developmental aspects is in line with modern understandings of evolution

it allows a non literal approach to genesis

it incorporates suffering into its approach

it looks beyond the moment of suffering and sees a bigger picture

it recognises the role of jesus in christian thought as not just a role model but also the reason all may go to heaven

it places relationships at the centre of human existence - with god and also with each other - which corresponds to how we experience life

universal salvation seems closer to an understanding of a god who loves and cares for his whole creation

it gives a purpose to natural evil that other theodicies find difficult to explain

Hick - weaknesses

why is the epistemic gap so great and why is the world so full of suffering? why couldnt the world have been a little bit nicer?

hicks approach doesnt take into account the suffering of animals or of the planet - some would say that this suffering is on a far greater scale and therefore more important than human suffering - the only difference is that we can communicate our pain clearly to each other - all of gods creation has importance

hick does not explain the imbalance of suffering in the world between different people nor the sheer quality of innocent suffering - all he suggests is that the end goal in heaven must be worth it

universal salvation seems to remove some of the freedom that hick keeps central

universal salvation - the idea that everyone goes to heaven

universal salvation also seems to undermine what jesus achieved through dying and rising and reduces him to a role model which makes christians doubt the theodicy

surely there are ways other than pain suffering and evil for god to develop humanity? why would a perfect god use evil as a means to an end?

some people such as babies or those with disabilities are unable to use suffering in a developmental way - is it fair for them to suffer at all?

discussing the problem of evil

analysing the logical and evidential approaches

logical

the definition of an all powerful god assumes that gods power means that god can do absolutely anything but it might be that gods power is limited because god has given humans free will

the idea of an all loving god assumes that our understanding of love is correct - hick sees suffering as developmental so in his view god must be more benevolent by allowing suffering

the idea that evil exists is challenged by augustine who says that evil is simply a privation - irenaean theodicies do not deny that evil exists but argue that its existence is not set against omnipotence and benelovence

evidential

argues that the observation we have of evil in the world is enough to argue against the existence of god
these arguments assume that we know fully what it is to be god and what it is to make gods decisions
religious believers might think this is the wrong starting point and reject the approach

augustine - is god spared the blame?

yes

privation means that evil is not something that god can have made

natural evil came about by the disruption to the order of gods creation

moral evil comes about by continued use of free will

the focus is gods refusal to engage with evil - god keeps away from it

evil seems to be more significant than a privation

god could still stop prevent or change natural evils - or protect the victims

god does not have to hold us accountable for the sins of adam and eve

god does not have to keep away from it - that is not the sign of a loving creator

hick - does soul making justify evil?

hicks theory does not fully explore the issue of balance and quantity of suffering nor fully take into account other suffering sin the world such as animal sufferings - very human centred
although hick would point to universal salvation as a way of justifying the sufferings of the world arguably if we know we are all going to heaven - perhaps our freedom is not genuine as we cannot choose to be bad in the same way
presumably true freedom requires the genuine option of us ending up in hell

religious believers might feel that suffering does improve people in the long term and that it allows them to put their trust in god and accept what is happening to them
christians would point to the suffering of jesus as the model for their suffering
it is perhaps an assumption to say that suffering is intrinsically bad - it could be instrumentally good

irenaeus

god created humans in his image and we need to develop into his likeness
this development is like a child needing to start on their mothers milk before moving on to solid foods
our development uses suffering to learn just like jonah learnt when he was in the belly of the whale
god is like a potter moulding his clay - just like clay needs to be moist to be moulded we need to keep ourselves moist by being open to his workmanship - if we do we will be highly rewarded
if we do not then we will be condemned to hell which is a very real possible outcome for irenaeus