Problem of Evil
Page 1 of 10
Problem of Evil
Page 2 of 10
Problem of Evil
Page 3 of 10
Problem of Evil
Questions:
Page 4 of 10
Problem of Evil
1. Name the two different types of evil
2. OUTLINE Epicure’s and Hume’s view on evil
3. What is the Free will defence?
4. State the two classic theodicies summarised by Peter Cole.
5. What is the inconsistent triangle?
6. OUTLINE Augustine’s theodicy
7. Give an example of a Natural evil.
8. Give an example of a Moral Evil.
9. Define Evil
10. What is a sin?
Answers:
Page 5 of 10
Problem of Evil
1. The two types of evil are:
 Natural Evil
 Moral Evil
2. Epicurus is generally credited with first expounding the problem of evil, and it is sometimes called "the Epicurean paradox" or "the riddle of
Epicurus." In this form, the argument is not really a paradox or a riddle, but rather a reduction ad absurdum of the premises.[3] Epicurus drew
the conclusion that the existence of evil is incompatible with the existence of the Gods who care about the matters of mankind, assuming
absolute concepts of benevolence, knowledge, and power. More generally, no paradox or problem exists for those who do not accept the
premises, in particular the existence of a benevolent god or Gods. However, many Greeks did; Plato, in his "Timaeus," states gods are good.
Either God wants to abolish evil, and cannot; or he can, but does not want to. If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does
not want to, he is wicked. If God can abolish evil, and God really wants to do it, why is there evil in the world? — Epicurus, as quoted in 2000
Years of Disbelief
Epicurus himself did not leave any written form of this argument. It can be found in Lucretius's "De Rerum Natura" and in Christian theologian
Lactantius's "Treatise on the Anger of God" where Lactantius critiques the argument.
Epicurus's argument as presented by Lactantius actually argues that a god that is all powerful and all good does not exist and that the gods
are distant and uninvolved with man's concerns. The gods are neither our friends nor enemies. The stronger form most people know of
Epicurus' problem of evil is actually David Hume's formulation of the problem of evil in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion:
"[Gods] power we allow [is] infinite: Whatever he wills is executed: But neither man nor any other animal are happy: Therefore he does
not will their happiness. His wisdom is infinite: He is never mistaken in choosing the means to any end: But the course of nature tends
not to human or animal felicity: Therefore it is not established for that purpose. Through the whole compass of human knowledge,
there are no inferences more certain and infallible than these. In what respect, then, do his benevolence and mercy resemble the
benevolence and mercy of men?"
Marcion, the 2nd century sect leader is presented by Tertullian in his "Adversus Marcion" as presenting this puzzle: "why does God who is all
powerful and has foreknowledge of the future allow evil?" Marcion's answer is that god is in part evil himself.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil#Epicurus
Page 6 of 10
Problem of Evil
3. See box:
The free will defence can be viewed as an attempt to show that there some kinds of good that even an all-good, all-powerful, all-knowing God
can't bring about without permitting evil. The version below is modelled (loosely) on what Alvin Plantinga says.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Creatures who are significantly free cannot be causally determined to do only what is right.
Thus, if God creates creatures that are significantly free, He cannot causally determine them to do only what is right. (from 1)
Thus, if God creates creatures that are significantly free, he must create creatures that are capable of moral evil. (from 2)
Thus, if God creates a world containing creatures that are significantly free, it will contain creatures that are capable of moral evil.
(from 3)
If God creates a world containing creatures that are capable of moral evil, He cannot guarantee that there will not be evil in that world.
Thus, if God creates a world containing creatures that are significantly free, He cannot guarantee that there will not be evil in that
world. (from 4 and 5)
A world containing creatures that are significantly free (and freely perform more morally good than evil actions) is more valuable, all
else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all.
Thus, God has good reason to create a world containing creatures who are significantly free. (from 7)
Thus, God has good reason to create a world, which He cannot guarantee will not contain evil. (from 6 and 8)
Source: http://www2.gsu.edu/~phltso/freewillD.html
Page 7 of 10
Problem of Evil
4. The two summaries:
 The Augustinian theodicy is a soul-deciding theodicy
 The Irenaean theodicy is soul-making
5. INCONSISTENT TRIAD
The problem of evil can be viewed as an inconsistent triad:
The three are logically inconsistent. If God is omnipotent, he is aware of the existing evil and suffering and knows how to put a stop to it. If
God is omni benevolent he will want to put a stop to it. Yet evil and suffering does exist.
Source: http://www.tutor2u.net/newsmanager/templates/?a=769&z=61
Page 8 of 10
Problem of Evil
6. AUGUSTINIAN THEODICY (SOUL-DECIDING THEODICY)
Based on the narratives of Genesis 1-3, Augustine’s theodicy argues that God created the world and it was perfect, without the existence of
evil or suffering.
Genesis 1:31: “God saw all that he had made and saw that it was very good”
Augustine defined evil as the privation of goodness, just as blindness is a privation of sight. Since evil is not an entity in itself, just like
blindness is not an entity in itself, God could not have created it.
The existence of evil originates from free will possessed by angels and humans, who turned their back on God and settled for a lesser form of
goodness thus creating a privation of goodness as the narrative of ‘the fall’ in Genesis 3 tries to explain. As a result the state of perfection was
ruined by sin.
Natural Evil: Occurred because of the loss of order in nature, defined by Augustine as the ‘penal consequences of sin’
Moral Evil:
Derived from human free will and disobedience
Augustine reasoned that all humans are worthy of the punishment of evil and suffering because we are “seminally present in the loins of
Adam”’ deserving of the punishment for original sin.
God has the right not to intervene and put a stop to evil and suffering since he is a just God and we are worthy of punishment. It is by his
grace and infinite love however, that we are able to accept his offer of salvation and eternal life in heaven.
Source: http://www.tutor2u.net/newsmanager/templates/?a=769&z=61
Page 9 of 10
Problem of Evil
7. An earthquake causing destruction, death and permanent fear.
8. Genocide.
9. See box:
Evil is the antithesis of good in all its principal senses, in the widest sense, evil is that which is the reverse of good, whatever is censurable,
mischievous, or undesirable, morally depraved, bad, wicked, vicious; doing or tending to do harm, hurtful, mischievous, prejudicial, depraved
intention or purpose, desire for another’s harm, causing discomfort, pain, or trouble, unpleasant, offensive, disagreeable, troublesome, painful.
"Abstain from all appearance of evil" means not to do, think or say it if another can misconstrue it. "Everyone practicing evil hates the light and
does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly
seen, that they are done in God."
Source: http://miriams-well.org/Glossary/index.html#E
10. A sin is simply a transgression of a religious or moral law which has been set in the past. When the person decides to disobey and break
this religious or moral law they are known as a sinner. Usually it’s seen as doing something inhuman, shameful or completely incorrect.
Page 10 of 10