The Irenaean theodicy is another reasoned argument for the problem of evil, which states that God created a world with suffering because soul-making is exactly the purpose of living in this world. The challenging environment of the world enables us to develop good habits and virtuous qualities of character, and these virtuous qualities are much more valuable than ready-made virtues given directly by God. Again, I feel that the Irenaean theodicy can only account for small amount of evil and suffering, but not the amount of evil we have in this world. It is undeniable that the suffering some people experience is simply too extreme and as a result their will is broken. God could have taught them the same lessons but with a lesser degree of pain. Moreover, a truly omnibenevolent God would not test someone beyond his limits. It is just like we can justify a loving father’s action of telling his son off when he does something wrong, but we cannot justify a father who beats his son up violently when he does something wrong- he simply cannot be said to be a loving father.
Other people believe that reasoned arguments can indeed account for the amount of evil in this world. Following on from the Augustinian theodicy, some argue that the amount of suffering in this world is in fact proportionate to the amount of sin, i.e. the abuse of free will which causes one to fall away from goodness. Every one of us has selfish desires and everyday we commit sins, however small the sins may be. In other words, we are abusing our free will on a daily basis. When we add up the amount of sins committed by everyone in the world since the beginning of time, the existence of the enormous amount of evil in the world can be justly explained. The Christian God, who is a God of justice, does not have a choice but to punish us according to the gravity of our sin. I do not agree with this view as it does not seem to be fair for righteous people to suffer the consequences of sins which they never committed.
Following on from the Irenaean theodicy, some could also argue that God does indeed know where our limits are and will not test us beyond that. God allows evil to exist to help us become better people, not to break us. It is true that some people do suffer a great deal, and indeed significantly more than others; however it might be because God has created them with more inner strength than others and he has plans for them, which require them to have more faith and perseverance. These qualities can only be achieved by having challenging life experiences with the existence of evil. People supporting this view often draw examples from the Bible, and a good example would be Job. In order to test and strengthen Job’s faith, God takes away all his possessions, as well as his all his children, and later even his health too. When Job emerges from this extremely trying situation, he emerges as a man who is even more pious and righteous than he was before. Another example is the prophet Jonah. God intended for him to be the one who preaches repentance to the city of Nineveh. Initially he lacked the faith to do so and decided to run away; however after three trying days in a whale’s stomach, where he repented and prayed to God, he gained faith and succeeded in his mission. Joseph is another example and this view can be summarized in what he says in Genesis 50:20, “What you meant for evil, God used for good.” I do not agree with this view because some people suffer much more than their fair share and the fact that many are broken by the amount of suffering and consequentially lose the will to go on shows that God has already tested them beyond their limits, if it is indeed God who has inflicted the suffering on them.
In conclusion, I agree with the statement. I believe that reasoned arguments can only account for a limited amount of evil, but not the enormous amount of evil that exists in this world. I believe that, fundamentally, the notion of the inconsistent triad still holds truth.
by
perlie (student)
