Give a response to this criticism of Augustine's theodicy:
- Rowe: case of Bambi - GCT wouldn't let animals suffer for human sin
Then give a criticism of the response
Augustine: for life to develop, we need death
>> Rowe: doesn't have to be so painful - God omnipotent
Hick criticism of Augustine's theodicy
contradictory to say perfect beings (angels) sinned
Schleiermacher's criticism of Augustine's theodicy
perfect world + imperfections = logical contradiction
- either never perfect, or God made it go wrong
- undermines omnipotence and/or omnibenevolence
Hick on epistemic distance
epistemic distance (lack of knowledge of God) lets us choose + be responsible for our choices - wouldn't be able to act freely if saw God there watching our actions and intervening in the world
Hick on pain
pain = instrumental good --> lets us grow spiritually + morally - paradise world without pain would be "morally static"
Hick on Hell
Hell is another vale of soul-making; another chance to improve + grow into God's likeness
Darwin's criticism of Hick/Irenaeus' vale of soul-making theodicy
Darwin: animals suffer without moral improvement, e.g. digger wasp eats alive caterpillar, Rowe: case of Bambi
give a response to this criticism of Hick's theodicy:
Darwin: animals suffer without moral improvement (Rowe: case of Bambi)
- Hick: animal suffering is survival mechanism
- animals don't suffer as much as us, e.g. no suffer from knowledge of mortality