The whole problem of evil and suffering is that it causes so much pain to many humans and religious people start to question why god allows it. An example is the fact that so many people in third world countries suffer almost every day of their lives due to poverty caused mainly by third world debt. Also many starve and need aid for diseases that are easily treatable in first world countries but harder in these countries due to the lack of doctors and hospital equipment.
There are 4 different solutions to the question and they are known as the ‘4 ways out. Each one means suffering different but all relate to evil and what is the cause.
- Firstly - God does not exist – this statement relates most to atheists. Here it is to be believed that God never did exist and that humans created suffering and evil themselves.
- Secondly – Process Theodicy – This theodicy basically means that god is still developing himself and that is the reason why the world is not perfect. But if this is so how can God be omniscient.
- Monism – the idea here is that evil is just an illusion and it is just something that happens naturally to everyone as a result of evolution.
- God is Boo! – God
There are five theodicy’s for the answer to this question. Philosophers Augustine and Ireaneas had their own theodicy for evil and suffering, and the others theodicy’s are freewill defence, process theodicy and Monism.
Augustine’s Theodicy
St Augustine believed that God had created everything and the sinning of humans had corrupted this ‘perfect world’ and that evil and suffering came as a result. He uses texts from Genesis to support him with his answers as he talks about how god created us in his likeliness. He strongly believed that ‘fallen angels’ were the result of evil. This is because a fallen angel, known as the devil who refused to follow God, tempted Adam and Eve to disobey him ending in the result of the first sin, which Augustine believes was the first act of natural evil which, led to moral evil eventually in his terms. Although he provides a good defence there are errors in his theodicy such as the fact evil appeared in a perfect world in his theodicy. If the world was perfect how did evil come along? This would mean that the world was not perfect at all in the first place. Also the moral evil statement being the creation can only partly be related to. It is sort of a natural disaster since it caused humans to act of their own freewill but at the same time Jesus went on the cross to die for our sins.
Irenaeus’ theodicy
Irenaeus believed that God was partly responsible. He believes that because God created humans imperfect by giving us the mind of free choice, we created suffering and evil by not following his word. He also argued against people who asked why God never steps in at disaster or points if evil. His idea was that if God stepped in every time, he would be acting like an overprotective parent and us, as humans would never develop. His conclusion was that although we were created in God’ image we will eventually evolve into his likeliness.
The pro’s of his argument is that he believes God gave humans their own freewill to
Do however they feel. Irenaeus believes God done this so we will eventually evolve into what we are meant to become. He also felt that suffering of humans couldn’t be an expression of gods love because god is seen as all - loving and it is morally wrong for God to hurt human beings. The criticisms of his theory are that is does not apply the suffering to others on the earth e.g. animals. God created them before which means they are just as equal as humans
The Freewill Defence
This Theodicy is in relation to the Irenaeus idea of humans having their own freewill is the cause for evil and suffering and that God is not responsible for anything that happened. Richard Swinbarne supports the idea explaining that if god stepped in every time humans made a mistake, god would be acting like an overprotective parent.
Swinbarne also believed that death was essential because if all humans were immortal then we would always be able to make up for the mistakes we commit. The freewill defence gives a clear understanding of why humans have turned away from God and the main reasons why. The cons are that Swinbarne quoted that the holocaust was part of humans freewill, but the true fact is that everyone there died because of their race or culture and it never helped anyone in the end do the end does not justify the mean.
Monism
The impression given by monism is that evil is not a reality. Basically it is like an illusion, something you see but does not appear real. Only a few number of philosophers actually support monism. One of them was Mary Baker Eddy. She agued that monism was just a figment of the human mind. ‘‘The only reality of sin, sickness and death is the awful fact that unrealities seem real to humans, erring beliefs’’. This means to her that all evil is to humans is an illusion. The let down about monism is that it goes against the reality of evil and bible teachings. In the bible it is shown many times where cases of evil exist. Even if it is an illusion it is strong enough to cause suffering to others. For example was the suffering of many in the holocaust an illusion of humans? This there fore shows that Evil cannot be claimed as an illusion.
Conclusion
In the end I have discovered that humans have split the problem of evil and suffering into three parts. There are those that believe that Humans are totally responsible for evil and suffering (Augustine), those who believe humans were responsible but God had a part to play (Irenaeus) and those who believe that evil and suffering is just a fabrication of the human mind. No matter how much people try they will never be able to explain why evil and suffering exist because we do not have the knowledge or full evidence. It is like trying to find evidence for how gravity came about. It cannot be solved. All we can assume are the theory’s that have all ready been made and leave it there.
Word count: 1345
