• 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...


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.


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.


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. 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. 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. Explain the Ontological argument.

    Many however have argued that this is an unreasonable starting point, but Jung refused to let this argument counter any evidence against his argument, believing that he safeguarded it from being refuted by empirical evidence. However, he had no justification in his conclusion.

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

    Augustine emphasised that evil is either a sin or a punishment for the sin previously committed by Adam and Eve. This is due to the links that we have with 'Adam' who is present in us all. This reflects the ancient belief that every generation is guilty because they inherit his guilt for disobeying God.

  1. Research on St Augustine Theodicy.

    So it may be that he is more concerned with qualitative degrees of being rather than quantitative degrees of Being (although an absence of 'measure, form and order' would lead to a totally evil being - which could not exist!).

  2. Good and Evil

    own choices, we must decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong. Some people blame the evil in the world on "society." However, I believe that society is composed of individuals who make individual choices. I believe that every choice we make will have it's own consequence, therefore

  1. Explain how natural evil may be seen as a challenge to belief in God ...

    Evil and suffering is a philosophical problem, because it causes the believer to accept conflicting claims, which is logically impossible to reconcile. For a theist God is omnipotent, because he created everything. He grants eternal life and makes everything good.

  2. Good and Evil

    'That is not free will', these were the words of a Christian (-William C. Easttom II),in his opinion, by looking at this quote it seems like God is ordering us to do good so really there is no choice. Morality can be used to distinguish the right from the wrong

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