evil which is the result of things beyond human control (disease, natural disasters, the suffering of animals)
moral evil
the harmful acts humans carry out or human inaction when someone is in need (stealing, murder)
the logical problem of evil
the epicurean paradox - if an omnipotent and benevolent god exists, then evil does not. A priori and deductive argument
the inconsistent triad
coined by john mackie. points out that evil, omnipotence and benevolence create a logical inconsistency
the evidential problem of evil
evil is logically consistent, however the extent of evil and purposeless evil lowers the probability that god exists. inductive and a posteriori argument.
purposeless evil
disteleological evil
which aspect of God does the evidential problem call into question
omniscience - did he not know the suffering that would exist?
william rowe
fawn dies in a forest fire. alone. no one ever knows. what lesson did this teach?
rowe said...
'there exist instances of intense suffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented...'
theodicy
a theory explaining how god and evil can exist together
epicurus said...
'is god willing to prevent evil, but not able? then he is not omnipotent. is he able, but not willing? then he is malevolent. is he both able and willing? then whence cometh evil?'
an evidential theodicy is...
the free will defence
the free will defence
god has given up control over human actions to bring about a greater good
can make our own decisions and develop valuable qualities (moral evil)
humans must be placed in situations that require decisions and consequences (natural evil)
what do those who believe fwd have to prove?
free will leads to moral evil
the results of free will are worth the price
strengths of fwd
key attributes of god are intact
appeals to atheists as well
addresses issue of natural evil
weaknesses of fwd
Plantinga's response is not necessarily true - hinges on libertarian free will
not all would agree that evil and suffering are justified
doesn't explain purposeless evil and doesn't develop qualities (its extent may be unnecessary)
mackie's rejection of the fwd
it is logically possible for people to make free good choices all the time
god could have made all humans like this
god did not do so
therefore, god must lack the power or isn't loving - fwd fails!
plantinga's defence of the fwd
there is no possible world where all humans can always freely do the right thing. freedom requires choice, so this is not logically possible
griffin's process theodicy
god made the world out of pre-existing chaotic matter and this placed a limit on creation. god is not omnipotent
what is process theology paced on
an interpretation of genesis 2
does process theology solve the logical problem?
yes because it removes the element of god's omnipotence
process theology and science
based on quantum theories
god sparked evolutionary process
in keeping with big bang theory
process theology and evil:
evil can happen despite god's best efforts - in time (panentheistic relationship w the universe)
god was right to create the universe as includes intrinsic goodness
price of great happiness is maybe having to suffer great evils
god = the fellow sufferer (not transcendent)
strengths of process theology
seen as a more realistic answer
supported by some quantum physics
believers can see that god suffers with his creation and understands their misery
weaknesses of process theoology
lack of omnipotence makes god unworthy of worship
the universe wasn't worth the amount of suffering it causes
admits god cannot control evil, so there is no guarantee that evil will eventually be overcome
what is the human goal (soul-making)
to have a personal and conscious relationship with god
hick's soul-making theodicy
we live in a world of growth where we can become children of god. this can only be done through entirely free will and experience of good and evil
epistemic distance
a distance of knowledge
epistemic distance in the world
the world is religiously ambiguous. if we knew god existed, we would not be able to meaningfully and authentically choose god. so the world had to contain a range of moral and natural evil to develop humans into becoming children of god
universalism
hick believed the idea of hell was incompatible with god, and so everyone will eventually reach heaven
strengths of hick's theodicy
fits with current scientific thinking (god willed the long evolutionary process)
epistemic distance justifies all evils and their extent
heaven justifies the means
new testament god doesn't rlly fit with the idea of hell
weaknesses of hick's theodicy
if we are evolved, how are we made in god's image
the ends don't justify the means - animal suffering
many christians reject because it goes against traditional beliefs