• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Explain how the theodicy of Irenaeus differs from that of Augustine.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Explain how the theodicy of Irenaeus differs from that of Augustine. A theodicy is "an attempt to justify God's existence in the face of evil and suffering", necessary as a result of the idea of the Inconsistent Triad, which states that the classic qualities of omnipotence and omnibenevolence associated with the conventional idea of the Christian God are entirely incompatible with the idea of evil and suffering. Either God is not all-powerful, and therefore cannot intervene to prevent evil, or God is malicious and chooses to inflict evil upon humanity. Both views are obviously unsustainable for Christians and necessitate theodicies such as those put forward by Augustine and Irenaeus in an attempt to prove that classical visions of deity are still sustainable when challenged by the evident evil and suffering present in our world. The Irenaean theodicy attempts to justify God's existence alongside evil by rationalising evil as a result of the free choice of humans. ...read more.

Middle

Augustine stated that natural evil was a fitting punishment for this sin and justified the fact that this might appear to contradict the idea of a loving and forgiving God by stating that God was clearly merciful as he had allowed the sacrifice of his only son; he also used the idea of innate sin to dismiss the idea of innocent suffering. He said that since all human beings were present in Adam then we all bear his sin and there is no longer such thing as an innocent or perfect human being. Augustine stated that evil did not stem from God, but was brought in through human abuse of the natural order. When Adam and Eve committed the Original Sin and gained knowledge, they abused nature and introduced evil into the world. Therefore evil stems entirely from humanity, and not from God, which means that the question of God's involvement in evil and suffering is not necessary. ...read more.

Conclusion

Irenaeus' ideas have also been supported and built upon by modern philosophers Hick and Swinburne, who maintain Irenaeus' idea that goodness must be developed to have any meaning. However, there are still inherent problems with the ideas expressed by Irenaeus. Man's choices do not always lead to development and growth and there is evidence that humans can occasionally prevent this. This refutes Irenaeus' ideas about human choices resulting in development. Although logically Irenaeus is much more satisfactory than Augustine, the argument that love can never be expressed by such huge suffering as has been experienced in the world, no matter as to what end, is still valid in the case of both the Augustinian and the Irenaean theodicies. It seems that the quantity and inhumanity of recent suffering, even during the 20th century alone, would render an explanation of a loving God allowing this to occur for any reason appalling. Neither theodicy really addresses this problem or justifies a reason for an omnipotent God allowing this to happen. Furthermore, the problem of evil is not dismissed entirely by either theodicy, and both remain reflective and insubstantial. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. Good and Evil

    To endorse this point, the philosopher, St. Augustine once made a statement, "the deliberate sin of the first man is the cause of original sin", this original sin is what causes man now to sin, not the, some may call this the evil but not the devil.

  2. Present the strengths and weaknesses of Augustine's and Ireneaus' theodicy

    It was their, the humans, choice on whether to take evil and suffering or good and if they chose evil and suffering and say God should have never let it happen they are in fact saying that God should take away their humanity.

  1. 1.) Compare and contrast the Augustinian and Irenaean theodicies and their attempts to solve ...

    Irenaeus suggested that human "goodness" comes from its response to moral decisions made in an imperfect world; that when temptation is resisted it is infinitely more valuable a lesson learnt than if it had been an inherent part of the being.

  2. Evaluation of Augustine's Theodicy.

    Another objection to the Augustinian Theodicy is from Friedrich Schliermarcher. God created the first humans with free will, these humans were perfectly good. The world around the first humans was perfectly good, which begs the question as to why humans would fall from being perfectly good, into sin, thereby creating evil.

  1. Select two theodicies. Comment on their success or otherwise. (13)

    Through his grace however, God sent his son to die on the cross so that some might be saved and go to heaven. This demonstrates that God is merciful as well as just. The Irenaean theodicy admits that God is partly responsible for evil.

  2. The Irenaean theodicy - Questioning God.

    This Christ arrives as a paradigm of human existence to which we respond as he too endured the growth from innocence to perfection. Therefore his theodicy is one which growth and development towards a fixed end this fixed end will be the likeness of God.

  1. Good and Evil

    At the Eucharist, by sharing bread and wine Christians remember the meal Jesus shared with his disciples on the night before he was put to death, at his last supper. "While they were eating, Jesus took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to his disciples, saying, 'Take and eat; this is my body.'

  2. Show how the theodicies of Irenaeus and Augustine account for natural evil.

    This is where original sin derived from. Original sin is classed, by Augustine's' standards, as Natural Evil and it was this that started the spread of 'moral evil'. Therefore suffering is a fully deserved consequence of human sin. Humanity was created with the responsibility of being guardians of the Earth

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work