Problems Of Evil and Suffering

• Saint Augustine believes that evil does not naturally exist, evil is just a privation of good. Anything that does not have goodness in, we automatic call it evil. We can make a distinction between natural evil, non-evil and moral evil.
• Natural evil- Evil caused by the natural state of things. For example the 2018 Indonesia earthquake. Doesn’t just include natural disasters but also disease, day-to-day suffering, serious illness and injuries. These are all forms of natural evil even if some are minor.
• Moral evil- Evil that is a direct result of human intentions and choices. For example, the Las Vegas route 91 music festival shooting in 2017. This also includes murder, rape, theft and the list is endless
• For religious belief, moral evil is easier to explain due to God giving humans free will. Natural evil is more difficult to explain, because if God is all-powerful and all-good, then he should be able to prevent natural disaster. But shouldn’t an omnipotent being be able to prevent Moral evil?
• Logical problem of evil

  Focuses on the inconsistent triad first put forward by the pre-Christian Greek thinker, Epicurus. It’s also based on the fact God is classically held to be omnipotent, benevolent and omniscient
• number of possibilities

  • God knows about evil, wants to stop it, but can’t. Then God cannot be omnipotent.
  • God knows about evil, is able to stop it, but doesn’t want to. But God isn’t benevolent.
  • God can stop evil, but doesn’t know about evil in the world. But then God isn’t omniscient.
• J.C Mackie


  ‘Problem of Logical inconsistency’ as the premises he uses can’t all be true at the same time. (Premises 5 to 7 together imply that if classical theism existed, there would be no evil or suffering in the world.

  With the premises, Mackie says that two or three could be true at the same time but not all four. While none directly contradict each other, we can deduce a contradiction from them.
• Hume


  Supports Mackie’s ‘Problem of logical inconsistency‘ and that ,only at best, only two of God’s attributes can work together. Hume argues as evil exists, the God of classical theism does not.
• Evidential problem of evil

  • First put forward by Mill and Cater and developed by Rowe.
  • People, like Hume, called the ‘problem of evil’ the ‘rock of atheism’ and Rowe makes an argument for atheism rather solving the problem of evil.
• Physical evil- Pain and mental anguish.
• Metaphyscial evil- Refers to imperfection contingently as a feature of the cosmos
• The logical problem of evil

  “Is he neither able nor willing? the why call him God?”-Epicurus, if God is all-loving then there shouldn’t be any evil in the world. God doesn’t follow his characterisitcs.
• The logical problem of evil

  Religious belief says that God gave us free wi;;, but takes it away at times to test and prove individuals what it is like without free will.
• The logical problem of evil

  ”If God is omnipotent, omniscient and fully good, whence evil?”- David Hume, the logical problems of evil that God cannot have these characteristics if evil exists in the world.
• The logical problem of evil- strengths

  • Mackie has stated the logical problem of evil in lucid terms
  • Mackie draws attention to the fact that all the ‘solutions’ to the problem of evil involve surrendering one of the characteristics of God.
  • Free will defence fails, as God is omnipotent, God should be able to make creatures who don’t choose evil
  • Free will is incoherent as it must mean random behaviour or it means actions proceeding from character
• The logical problem of evil- weaknesses

  • Free will is compatible with God determining how people will act. Free will and determination are incompatible.
  • God might be aware of all human behaviour without determining it, makes it unfree if God exists out of time- in which case our future is God’s present
  • Freewill fits with the ‘Doctrine of Divine Simplicity’ (DDS) and the idea of God being a necessary being, is important in other areas (cosmological, ontological and ensign argument)
• The logical problem of evil- Mill

  If God was moral, he would distribute the suffering instead of some feeling it and others don’t.
• The logical problem of evil- Rowe


  One explanation of suffering and evil; could be that God allows it to happen to prevent it would stop the greater good from happening.

  CA- Religious POV: Jesus is someone who suffered a lot but ended up creating something good later on (salvation)
• Augustine theory 


  Augustine argued that the Bible shows that God is wholly good, and that he creates a world which was perfectly good and free from defeat, “God shows all that he had made it was very good.”

  Evil entered the world by:

  1. Fall of Angels
  2. The fall of Adam and Eve
• Augustine-weaknesses

  • Eternal punishment seem to contradict the idea of a loving God, it serves no purpose.
  • Contradicts evaluation, humans evolved from lower forms of life, suffering is essential to survival.
  • How could there be the freedom to obey or disobey God, because good and evil were unknow?
  • Suffering is essential to survival- Things muse die in order that others might eat and live. God must bear the responsibility for this, to call it evil questions natural order
• Augustine- Strength

  • For Christian’s, his ideas match well with the bible.
  • Arguments avoid thinking of satan as an independent demonic power, which would compromise the idea of God’s existence.
  • Free will justifies the existence of evil. Free choice is needed for human morality to operate, and without it, faith in God would be meaningless.
• The fall of Angels


  Once Satan fell, he still had access to God. He was able t R roam freely throughout heaven, he still had access to god. Augustine believes this is why evil exists on Earth. Because Satan can roam freely
• Iranaen theodicy


  Value of soul-making theodicy: Evil can be traced back to free will. God created humans in his own image but was going to provide them opportunities to gain his characteristics. This would be accomplished overtime, so he gives us free will to do this
• Hick soul-making theodicy


  Develops off of Iranaeus, “sou-making” is used to describe the process of moral growth. If God intervened with free will it would undermine human freedom.
• “We rejoice in our suffering because we know that suffering produces preservative and character.” Iraneaus, St Paul and Hick agree evil helps us to develop morally. Suffering deters you from bad choices
• ”Not in the immediate divine presence but at some presence but at same distance from God.” Hick
• Epistemic Distance


  God gives us space and doesn't intervene so we have free will.
• Process theodicy 


  Solving the problem of evil

  • Redefines God as he‘s not omnipotent.
  • God is omniscient, he started the process evolution, knowing how it would turn out.
  • God is not powerless- he has a persuasive power over the creation. He cannot stop evil.
  • God undergoes the same suffering as humans. He cannot control us, only influence us
• Criticisms of process theodicy

  • Not A theodicy as it does not defend the traditional notion of God in the fae of evil.
  • No promise of heaven, we cannot be sure our efforts on earth will be rewarded.
  • It is elitist- many suffer but only a few gain any benefit
  • Denies God is all-powerful. He seems to lack the all-loving qualities of the God of classical theism.
  • Doesn’t explain the nature of God justifying the existence of evil.