click here to return to essay questions.

a) Examine what theists understand as the problem of evil

b) Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of TWO theodices which attempt to provide solutions to this problem.

a)  In this type of question you need to explain in detail what the problem of evil is.  Explore all the outcomes involved if you are a theist.  You should include:

Introduction:

  The problem of evil is one of the greatest challenges to believers in the God of Classical Theism. In light of such events as the Jewish Holocaust or the Asian Tsunami, it seems impossible to believe in that God is real and active in today’s world.

Body:

• The Problem of Evil  is based on a deductive argument

Premise 1 – God is omnipotent (all powerful) and therefore has the power to prevent evil and suffering.  He could have made a world where there was no suffering.

Premise 2 – God is omni benevolent (all good) and wants to prevent evil and suffering. It is His desire to have a world where is creation is free from suffering.

Conclusion – Therefore there is no evil and suffering 

However, the Problem of evil is that, through a posteriori reasoning we know there IS evil and suffering.  This evil comes in two forms – what are they and why is one harder to explain away than the other?

• This problem is one that only faces monotheists – believers in the God of Classical Monotheism.  Why? 
• People are left with four alternatives – what are they?
• Which do the monotheists have to choose – why?

b)     People generally answer this question by looking at Augustine and Iranaeus. This is a good idea as they have the most info and you can write more on their strengths and weaknesses.

Introduction: Address the question. You will show that there have been several attempts to address the problem of evil – define theodicy. Comment on the two you will chose and make a statement about which is more successful.

Body:

• Augustine – outline what his theodicy is.  Go into strengths and weaknesses.  Then you must analyse – does it work? Why.  Don’t be afraid to go into a few paragraphs on this section. It should NOT be all one paragraph on Augustine!
• Iranaeus – same again. Several paragraphs on the strengths and weaknesses with your analysis.
• Remember to link these to the question. The question is asking about how they attempt to answer the question so your analysis should tackle this issue and you should make comment as to how well these two do answer the question.
• The extra step here (if you have time) would be to comment on the main strength of both – Free Will and why it is that this became its own theodicy.  You don’t have to address it in the same way as the others but it is useful to comment on it.

Conclusion:

 Link to the question. Which is the stronger of the two and do either of them successfully address the problem of evil?

Phrases and people to include

Epistemic distance      Peter Vardy,   John Hick,   soul-making   Soul-deciding      seminally present    ex nihilo