problem of evil & suffering

• Deductive problem of evil

  1. If God is omnipotent he has the ability to abolish evil
  2. If God is omnibenevolent then he has the desire to abolish evil
  3. If God is omniscient then he both knows of all evil and how to abolish it
  4. Yet evil exists
  5. Therefore an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God does not exist
• strengths:

  classical theism, deductive, a posteriori
• Evidential problem of evil

  William L Rowe - The sheer amount of suffering in the world goes against God.

  A fawn is an a forest when lightning strikes a tree, and a forest fire breaks out, trapping the fawn. It suffers for days before finally dying a miserable death. What lesson is learnt and how can there be any justification for that?
• J.L. Mackie's inconsistent triad

  Evil exists, God is omnipotent, God is omnibenevolent. All three cannot exist at once, one must be false
• Hume:


  "the problem of evil is the bedrock of atheism"
• Solutions - Augustinian theodicy

  Art analogy - to appreciate light you must experience dark. When viewed up close, evil is all-encompassing. However, from God's eyes (epistemic distance) evil is necessary to form a beautiful picture

  Evil is the privation of good

  The fall - everything was created good (ex nihilo) -> Adam & Eve were tempted by the serpent to eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Hierarchy was disrupted, chaos

  Seminally present through Adam - we are descendants so Original Sin was passed on
• Criticisms of the Augustinian theodicy

  Freidrich Schleiermacher - God created the world ex nihilo, and so is responsible for everything in it, including the serpent

  J.L. Mackie - in response to the art analogy - problematic because God is omnibenevolent, only a small amount of dark is required to appreciate light

  contrasts modern science - we are not all descendants of Adam. +evolution shows we improved over time, not get worse

  Hell- omniscient God would know it would go wrong and some would go to Hell. Why would an omnibenevolent God allow his children to suffer?
• Strengths of the Augustinian theodicy

  • consistent with the God of classical theism - attractive to traditional Christians
  • God is not responsible for evil - free will
  • Salvation is available through accepting Jesus as your Lord and Saviour
• Solution: Irenaean theodicy - Leibniz, Irenaeus, John Hick

  
  

  Leibniz - 'best of all possible worlds' for developing qualities

  Irenaeus - 'must develop from immaturity in the image of God to maturity in the likeness of God' - developing qualities such as compassion and wisdom

  John Hick - vale of soul-making -> develop perfection via suffering

  -Pet/owner = spoiled, undeserving

  -Child/parent = some suffering required

  God at an epistemic distance to us -> we must give our love freely, requires faith

  soul-making continues post-mortem -> eventually leading us all into heaven
• Criticisms of the Irenaean theodicy

  Henri Blocher- universalism contradicts free will -'Godward bias'- not giving ourselves freely

  D.Z. Phillips - God's love for us cannot be shown through suffering What soul-making opportunities were gained from the pointless extermination of 6 million people? Suffering is never justified as we do not learn (Rwanda 1990s, Cambodia 1970s)

  Michael Tooley- We do not all suffer equally, many starve while others eat themselves to death
• Strengths of the Irenaean theodicy

  • gives people a goal in life to develop positive characteristics
  • Evil can be understood as something real and not just a 'privation of good'
  • This theodicy does not contradict science and can sit well with evolution
• Solution - Process theodicy

  A.N. Whitehead and David Griffin

  God is not omnipotent

  God is part of an everchanging process 'a fellow sufferer who understands'

  God started the process of evolution but did not create the universe

  He is not responsible for evil

  God is dipolar: physical (the world) and mental (the heavens)
• Criticisms of Process theodicy

  • Not a genuine theodicy
  • God started evolution and although he cannot intervene, he is just as responsible for evil as an arms dealer is responsible for a war (supplies)
• Strengths of the Process theodicy

  • Allows God to avoid responsibility for evil as he desires to do so but cannot so evil and God can co-exist
  • More attractive to a largely atheistic worldview where an intervening being is hard to accept in the face of empirical evidence