The problem of evil and suffering

The
term
evil
requires
discussion.
There
are

roughly
two
forms
of
evil;
moral
and
natural.

Man’s
inhumanity
to
man
in
the
case
of
rape,

murder
and
genocide
constitutes
moral
evil.

The
experience
of
famine,
ﬂood
and
disease

may
be
cited
as
instances
of
unmerited
physical

suﬀering
or
natural
evil.

Both
these
categories
point
to
a
marked

incompatibility
with
an
able
and

compassionate
deity

Even
those
proponents
of
the
teleological

argument
are
forced
to
admit
that
the
design

of
the
universe
is
ﬂawed.

General
explanations
such
as,
‘pain
and
suﬀering

and
loss
are
inevitable
aspects
of
an
evolving

world’,
lead
to
the
question
of
‘why
didn’t
God
do

better?’

1.
We
conceive
of
God
as
an
omniscient,

omnipotent
and
omibenevolent
being

2.
The
existence
of
God
is
incompatible
with

the
existence
of
an
omniscient,
omnipotent

and
omnibenevolent
God.

3.
Evil
occurs.

4.
Therefore
there
is
no
omniscient,
omnipotent

and
omnibenevolent
God.

Theistic
replies
to
the
problem
of
evil
are
called

theodicies
and
generally
involve
a

reinterpretation
of
premises
1
and
2.

Traditional
theodicies
defend
God’s
part
in

allowing
suffering,
where
as
post
Holocaust

theodicies
attempt
to
redefine
the
divine

attributes
as
described
in
the
first
premise.

The
Irenaeus
theodicy

Refers
to
Genesis
1:26,
which
states
that
God

made
humans
in
his
image
and
likeness.
From

this
he
argues,
there
are
2
distinct
phases
of

evolution
in
the
human
race.

We
were
created
as
intelligent
though

imperfect
creatures,
possessing
an
enormous

capacity
for
moral
and
spiritual
development.

We
were
immature,
but
had
promisingly
full
of

potential.

During
the
second
phase
of
our
evolution,

through
which
we
are
currently
living,
human

beings
are
transformed
from
what
we
might

call
‘human
animals’
into
what
Irenaeus
calls

‘children
of
God’.

Irenaeus
likens
this
progress
to
a
journey-‐
our

own
freely
chosen
movement
towards
God.
God

has
always
wanted
and
intended
to
create
human

beings
in
this
way,
so
that
they
would
grow

towards
him
naturally
and
freely
as
they
learnt
the

true
nature
of
themselves.

The
distance
which
exists
between
humans
and

God

has
been
a
strategy
which
encouraged

human
beings
to
seek
knowledge
and

understanding
and
to
move
towards
God
and

become
more
fully
human.

According
to
Irenaeus,
suﬀering
exists
as
a

necessary
condition
for
the
creation
of

humanity
in
the
likeness
of
God.

¡ 
Is
he
correct
in
asserting
that
all
the
richest

human
virtues
would
have
never
developed
in

a
world
devoid
of
danger,
risk
or
diﬃculty?

¡  Since
it
is
clear
that
we
are
not
morally

perfect
being
when
we
die,
does
the
process

of
soul-‐making
continue
beyond
the
grave?

¡  Does
any
ideal,
spiritual
state
‘closer
to
God’

justify
the
suﬀering
of
innocent
people?

The
Augustinian
theodicy

Augustine’s
defence
consists
of
three
strands
of

argument:

1.  Malfunction

2.  Moral
balance

3.  Appreciation

Asserts
that
creation
is
as
God
intended
it
to
be

and
in
inherently
good,
only
becoming
corrupt

or
‘evil’
when
part
of
it
malfunctions.

Example
of
the
human
eye.
Discuss.

Augustine
faces
the
problem
of
applying
this

argument
to
the
universe
as
a
whole
in
order
to

solve
the
theological
problem
of
evil
.
Therefore

Augustine
stated
that
‘all
evil
is
either
sin
or
the

punishment
for
sin’.

Augustine’s
argument
has
come
to
be
known

as
the
argument
from
moral
balance:
sin
is

punished
as
justice
dictates
it
should
be.

The
institution
of
justice
is
a
greater
good
than
the

suﬀering
experience,
and
a
moral
balance
cannot
be

achieved
any
other
way.

Another
aspect
to
this
argument
is
that
evil
exists
as
a

contrast
to,
and
even
a
complement
to
goodness.

Pain
is
needed
to
appreciate
pleasure.
The
suﬀering

we
experience
in
this
life,
is
for
our
own
private
good.

1.  A
universe
created
by
a
God
who
possesses

absolute
power
cannot
be
conceived
of
going

wrong
as
the
idea
of
a
perfect
creation
that
can

malfunction
is
self
contradictory.

2.  Irenaeus
and
Augustine
cannot
build
a

philosophical
defence
on
a
religious
document

such
as
the
Eden
story.

3.  Finally,
the
responsibility
for
the
presence
of

evil
in
the
world
must
lie
with
God.
Why
is
free

will
so
precious
in
the
face
of
suﬀering?

1.  Explain
one
reason
for
God
to
allow
evil
to

occur.

2.  Does
the
existence
of
evil
in
the
world
mean

that
God
does
not
exist?

3.  How
do
Irenaeus
and
Augustine
reconcile

evil
and
suﬀering
in
the
world
with
the

existence
of
God?

4.  Do
you
think
these
arguments
are

philosophically
sound?
Why
or
why
not?

The problem of evil and suffering

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to The problem of evil and suffering (12)

More from philipapeters (20)

The problem of evil and suffering