Outline the key features of The Problem of Evil and two solutions

Bishop Irenaeus also put forward a theodicy, however unlike Augustine, he believed God allowed evil to exist so we can grow into a free relationship with God. Irenaeus proposed that God had created humankind in his own image and in order for individuals to grow in his likeness; they had to overcome challenges that were presented in life. Therefore, the purpose of evil and suffering is to offer opportunities for individuals to learn and grow in the likeness of God, as spiritual maturity does not occur until the after life. Irenaeus also suggested that evil is needed for people to understand what is good. Without evil, we would not be able to comprehend the difference between the two. "How, if we had no knowledge of the contrary, could we have instruction in that, which is good?" Irenaeus is saying that evil is necessary in order for individuals to appreciate good. Some goods are only possible in the face of evil, such as suffering, which enables us to forgive our enemies. Sometimes adversity helps to push things along, other times it doesn’t. If we didn’t have these problems, it’s a possibility we wouldn’t be rising to them as we are. Hick developed the Irenaean theodicy further by describing the world as a “vale of soul making” a description that he borrowed from Keats. He stated that we are purposely created at an epistemic distance from God, as this is the only way we can be free. If everyone had knowledge of God, no one would have free choice because they would be compelled to follow his commandments. Furthermore, Hick said that if God had created us in his likeness, then this “goodness” would be valueless. This is because in order for it to have value, it must be chosen freely. “Virtues are better won than ready made.”

Question: The Problem of Evil cannot be solved?

The Problem of Evil has been a major barrier for theists who believe in a God of classical theism. Both Irenaeus and Augustine have faced criticisms for their theodicies and attempted to respond.

John Hick was a critic of Augustine’s theodicy. He focused on Augustine’s use of the traditional story that angels fell from sin due to a lack of grace. Hick questioned how the angels fell if they were perfect as surely they had ultimate grace. If they have ultimate grace, there would be no reason for them to go against God. For, if they fell because of pride, their perfection would have intervened. However, to be perfect they wouldn’t have this imperfection. Nonetheless, the response is that angels do not need to be perfect for the theodicy to work. Or, their free will intervened. If God had not let free will exist, he would not be an all-loving God.

Another critic of the Augustine theodicy is Schleiermacher. He questioned why did God allowed this lack of perfection, as an omnipotent God would have the power to prevent this flaw. C.S Lewis responded to this stating “He does not house-train the earwig or give baths to centipedes.” This quotation can be explained by examining the purpose and design in all God allows. God allows free will to exist so we are able to follow our own impulses and desires, which eventually lead to humankind becoming aware of God’s presence, especially after experiencing pain. Pain then becomes an important tool for our betterment in the hands of an all-seeing God of eternity. C.S Lewis replies by suggesting that the best possible universe should not be one where everyone is forced to be perfect, but rather one with free will that allows humans to grow and develop, strengthening their faith.

To conclude, I think the Problem of Evil cannot be solved. The reason for this is because humankind is not powerful enough to defeat natural evil. Although individuals can intervene with moral evil by sharing empathy amongst others and caring for them when they suffer, we cannot prevent natural disasters or unexpected deaths. This is the price we must pay to live a life of free will, as freedom brings disadvantages. To this extent, evil cannot be solved. However, the suffering of war and human sin can be prevented to a certain extent if people were to consider the consequences of their actions and turn their attention to society, rather than themselves. But even this cannot be pursued fully as the whole purpose of free will is that people cannot be controlled, therefore we cannot force people to think or act in certain ways.