Theodicy Essays

Gottfried Leibniz wrote the Problem of Evil and it revolves around the idea of theodicy. Theodicy means the clear justification of God he makes his argument by proposing that there is always theme of good v.s. evil. He found this intriguing because he couldn’t believe that there is the all-powerful God and that there is still an existence of evil. Leibniz asks why does it always seem that evil is more consistent and seen in this world, when God is almighty one and that he should be the thing seen

philosophers draw from various theodicies. For the purpose of this paper, I will be examining the punishment theodicy. This paper will look at the various ways in which the punishment

To be able to have a genuinely rational theodicy we have to admit that just due to the fact that we do not like a specific belief, that does not make it untrue. The most popular theodicy is referred to as The Free Will Defense. The Free Will Defense maintains that God maximized the goodness within the world by means of creating free beings. If we are free, that

of evil refute this assumption of a perfect of God by stating that both can’t co-exist. This paper will dive into the main problems of evil and how they disprove the idea of god. In addition, it will show how the philosopher Augustine created the theodicy for the existence of both Evil and God and if he solved the problem for the existence of evil. The problem of evil attempts to discredit the existence of God. God is described as all power, all- knowing and entirely good. In addition, it was believed

Peter van Inwagen argument entitled “Free Will Defense,” is a theodicy because it attempts to show why God would allow evil in the world as opposed to a defense which would try to explain, logically, how evil could exist in the world with an all-loving an all-powerful God. Peter van Inwagen purposed that, yes, God is all-loving and all-powerful, and because he is all-loving, he allows for humans to make their own decisions even if these decisions lead to evil and pain. I find this to be an extremely

Course Paper Option 1: The problem of evil & theodicy God is gracious. To say that God is gracious means God desires good and wants humanity to flourish. God’s justice is the claim that God is fair. The problem of evil makes it hard to defend God’s graciousness and justice. The problem of evil questions if God is all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing then why does evil exist? Theodicy is the attempt to defend God’s omnibenevolence while evil exists (Hanneken, 2.3.1). Evil is the absence of good

there are numerous ways to critique this argument by using the theodicies. I believe that the theodicies provide sufficient reasoning as to why the Argument from Evil is wrong. The theodicies that I will be touching base on state that God’s ways are beyond us, free will was given to the human race for a reason, and that evil is necessary for the growth of one’s soul. Of course, one could argue that there are issues with theses theodicies, but I believe that the pros outweigh the cons of these issues

Irenaean theodicy is different to the Augustinian theodicy because it doesn’t rely on literature and the theodicy irenaeus presents is modern and fits with evolution (lewis, 1957). How the Augustinian theodicy provides proof from the bible and removes the blame for evil from god and blame humans. The Augustinian theodicy believes that god is just meaning that you’re punished for the things you do wrong and that for justice to be served evil must be in the world however the irenaeus theodicy says that

Discuss whether the existence of evil disproves the existence of God A major argument used by atheists against the existence of God is the existence of evil in the world. In philosophy evil is viewed in two different ways: moral evil, which is a result of human action, and natural evil, which caused by a fault in the natural world; the consequence of both types of evil is suffering. Due to this God’s presence is questioned by many non believers, because an omnibenevolent God wouldn’t allow suffering

would have done so. So why is there evil?”(Swinburne, 254). In theory, he thinks that if God exists then evil should not, but it does. So he creates and argues a theodicy to show that God and evil can exist at the same time. He comes up with the “Free Will Theodicy” which states that humans are the cause of evil, not God. The Free Will Theodicy discusses two kinds of evil: moral evil and natural evil. Natural evil is evil that is not caused by human choice such as natural disasters and disease. Moral

There are numerous references to chaos, destruction, death, and resurrection found within the pages of Revelation. A heavily symbolic book written by the believer John during his exile (exactly where is debated, though many believe it to be the island of Patmos), Revelation hints, through the use of metaphor, historical references, and prophecy, at the final days of the world. One of the passages of this Holy and strange book reads, “And in those days people will seek death and will not find it.

solve the issue of evil and its existence because of the impact of evil that the holocaust caused on millions of people. Scholars have devoted their time to account for the horrifying events that took place during the holocaust by examining different theodicy

God either does not have the power to stop evil or God is no so loving and will allow evil in the world. I will analyze Epicurus’ question through John Hick’s theodicy of soul making. Argument Because of imperfections in the world and humanity, evil exists. God created humanity to be imperfect; Therefore, God and evil co-exist. Hick’s theodicy states that in order for humanity to improve on their soul and growth, we need pain and suffering to aid us in this process. He suggests that evil and God can

their reasons. While the problem of evil does provide eloquent arguments that certainly can leave Christians tongue-tied, however, Christians have theodicy defenses to withstand philosophers like Epicurus and William Rowe’s reprimands and produce plausible counter-arguments. While on the subject of the problem of evil and the theistic response, a theodicy is a philosophical defense to justify and defend God’s actions and reasons for the continuance and use of

The problem appears to be that an omnibenevolent, omnipotent, and omniscient, God should not (could not) exist with the presence of evil. The theodicy, that I think is best, is the “soul making” theodicy. I like what this one has to say, “it holds that any world leading to personal and moral development must include the experiences of pain and loss” (176). My sentiments exactly! How could we possible state that we are

“all powerful” God, yet evil and pain are still prominent. If God is omnibenevolent and omnipotent, then why does evil still exist? In John Hick’s Evil and the God of Love, Hick attempts to justify the existence of evil in his own Theodicy. Hick’s “soul-making” theodicy” attempts to defend the existence of God with an understanding and acceptance of the existence of evil. Hick acknowledges that there is a knowledgeable separation between God and people, and he states that people are morally flawed

there will be a rainbow and the sun will come out brightening the day. After a devastating event there is often times that reason and an explanation cannot be given. Alvin Plantinga said it best stating “neither a Free Will Defense nor a Free Will Theodicy is designed to be of much help to one suffering from… a storm in the soul… Neither is to be thought of first of all as a means of pastoral counseling. Probably neither will enable someone to find peace with himself and with God in the face of the

with our creator. However, with free will comes the ability to reject God and make wrong choices. I believe this theodicy rightly emphasises that much of the evil and suffering we see in the world is the responsibility of man and not God. Each of us makes choices every day which can ultimately result in our own or others suffering, whether we see that suffering or not. Free will theodicies conclude that it is man who needs to be justified and not God. The Bible tells us that God created the world and

world? Moreover, a world with an astronomical amount of pain and unnecessary suffering? Could such evil exist and the existence of the aforementioned God still be plausible? To address the problem of evil, philosophers and theologians have put forth theodicies,

Evaluation of Keith Ward's reply "The Evil God Challenge — A Response" (2015) When examining the monotheistic belief, the foundational aspect of it is the description of an omniscient, omnipotent, and "good" God. Throughout Stephen Law’s paper, “The Evil God Challenge”, this supreme being is hypothesized to be all-powerful, all-knowing, and benevolent, a theory he refers to as the "good-god hypothesis". Regarding God’s morality, Law also poses an alternate view, stating that, assuming the existence