Therefore his theodicy is one which growth and development towards a fixed end this fixed end will be the likeness of God.
Therefore 4 points Irenaeus makes:
- He sees sin as a coming of maturity process. As you mature the sin goes.
- He sees that the sin allows us to mature.
- You need to have the option of good and evil, so as you grow you become more mature, therefore loosing sin.
- Sin accounts for us making the wrong decision.
The coming of Christ provided us with knowledge to change our ways, so we are more like Chris.
In summary Irenaeus sees man as having been created imperfect and immature who then is to undergo moral and spiritual development to reach perfection intended by God. Soon we reach our telos (God) and become the likeness of God. As Irenaeus dismisses the Augustinian view of “The Fall”, to blame and as a punishment for our sins we have evil, but rather he holds the world of good and evil as essential for us moving towards our perfection in terms of the fulfilment of God’s purpose for us.
1. (b) Hick moves towards a theodicy that is based in part on the Irenaean tradition, whilst still placing great importance on human free will. Hick’s argument leads him to conclude that suffering is necessary in order that humans can develop individual souls. This is the Irenaean aspect of his thought, as like Irenaeus, Hick believes that humans are imperfect and immature creatures who have the responsibility to find what is required to respond to God'’ love.
Hick talks of creation happening in two stages:
- “The fashioning of homo sapiens as a product of a long evolutionary process.”
-
Man’s “sudden or gradual spiritualizion as a ‘child of God’”
The first stage of creation was to our anthropomorphic imaginations, easy for divine omnipotence. Using creative power God caused the physical universe to exist, and to bring forth organic life, and finally to produce out of organic life personal life. (The creation of humans. Which is God driven.)
The second stage is of a different kind. It cannot be performed by omnipotent power as such, as personal life is essentially free and self-directing. It cannot be perfected by divine fiat, but only through the uncompelled responses and willing co-operation of human individuals in their actions and reactions in a world which God has placed them. An important point to raise here is that because the 2nd stage is driven by man we must have free will, so that we can get closer to God. And we “must” have free will, otherwise if God did it, it would be pointless.
Hick uses a few key words which put forward his position:
- Human Responsibility
- Uncompelled responses / willing co-operation
- Responsible choice
- Freedom
As the nature of the demands placed on human beings is such that they learn (Developmental), move towards the demands of their creator (Teleological / Goal) and then reach some unknown (or partially understood) reality beyond this life.
Hick says that other theologians and philosophers of asking the wrong question about the nature and creation of the world. For example Hume’s criticisms regarding the theistic creation of the world as examples of the imperfections which could suggest either God’s ineptitude or non-participation in creation, or, moreover, his very non-existence, then evil would raise the same problems.
Hume’s example of an architect to show how some antitheist writers would claim the world is of poor design due to the unnecessary existence of evil within it, is what Hick uses. The responsibility for bad design must lie within the designer; thus restating the problem that Hick is seeking to address. This is why the purpose of evil is give humans choice.
2. Both the Irenaean and the Augustine theodicys mention about the Bible which therefore will be very difficult for a true religious believe to make a decision. Augustine put forward the Free will theodicy which is Biblically based because it refers to beliefs in the creation and the fall. The Fall is when the free creatures fell from grace (this is the relationship with God) and that from this fall all other evils have proceeded. This is also known as original evil.
To a religious believer this would be very simple to understand but using the fall may cause more questions to be asked and therefore more stumbling blocks. A religious believer firstly would look to his/hers religious book and in this case I shall use Christianity. This religious believer would look to the Bible and shall find,
“Man created in the image and likeness of God” (Genesis)
This quote means that if we are evil then God must be evil, but God is infinitely perfect so he cannot be evil. This only leaves the option of the Free will, and we decided to do evil. This is the start of the fall in which the free will led to sin and its consequences – evil and suffering.
Within the new testament we find that Jesus was put on the cross for man’s redemption from sin, this must of meant that God foresaw man’s fall before the foundation of the world and planned its compatibility with the balanced perfection of his (Gods) universe. Therefore using the Free will belief God is not responsible for man’s evil choices, but the clear fact is that:
If God foresaw man’s fall the he should have prevented it
Ireneaus’ theodicy says that humans were created imperfectly with the form but not the content of God, and he says that as humans are infinite and not yet disciplined, we need to gain all (moral, spiritual, etc knowledge) to be like God. God created us with the ability to make moral choices and live free lives. However, mankind is:
“Only at the beginning of a process whereby we will grow and develop within our finite context. Thus we are only potentially the perfected being who God is seeking to produce.”
A difference with the free will theodicy put forward by Augustine and the Irenaean theodicy is that Augustine said that:
“The exercise of the free will leads to sin and its consequences (evil and suffering).”
While the Irenaean theodicy states that:
“The exercise of the free will enables man to make a difference to his environment.”
This theodicy basically means that we start of immature and during our infinite life we mature and the sin goes. Ireneaus says that we need to have the option of good and evil, so we can become more mature and as a result we loose our sin. Sin accounts for us making the wrong decisions but Christ provided us with the knowledge to change our ways, so if we strive to be like Christ (mature) we shall loose our sin.
“Evil can lead to good”
The Irenaean theodicy I believe has more strengths than the Augustinian free will theodicy, the whole theodicy can be summed up into a simply. The Irenaean type of theodicy means by man develops morally and spiritually. Therefore God is not responsible for mans evil choices, therefore evil is teleological – it’s purpose to facilitate growth.
Both of these theodicys depend on the principle of free will - even if it that God created man in his perfect likeness, from which he fell through the inevitable use of his divinely given free will – or if man’s moral development is evolutionary, that is, he has the capacity to grow into the likeness of God through the use of free will. I believe that Irenaeus’ theodicy does show fewer stumbling blocks for a religious believer especially in the present day.
