Irenaean Theodicy

Question 1

Where do Ireneaus and Augustine agree?

Answer 1

Both believe that evil is the result of free will. I said that we have the choice to perform good or evil, but frequently choose evil

Question 2

Where do I and A disagree in terms of free will?

Answer 2

I thinks that God gave us free will so we could achieve a specific purpose - to obtain spiritual and moral perfection to become truly in the image of God

Question 3

Why did I believe that free will was essential to good?

Answer 3

Because if humans were programmed to only choose good, then their good would be a coercion and therefore not truly good

Question 4

What did I think would make up for the suffering we experience on Earth?

Answer 4

Eternity in heaven

Question 5

What is Hick’s theodicy called?

Answer 5

The vale of soul making - it is largely an extension of I’s theodicy

Question 6

What belief do I and A share about evil?

Answer 6

Irenaeus shared Augustine’s belief that evil was the result of free will – humans have the choice to commit evil, and frequently choose it

Question 7

How do I and A differ in their beliefs about evil?

Answer 7

Irenaeus differs in that he thinks God gave us free will in order to achieve a specific purpose. He said that this was to allow humans to develop spiritual and moral perfection to become truly in the image of God

Question 8

Why does I think that evil is necessary?

Answer 8

He thought that having the choice between good and evil was essential for this perfection. If God made humans so that they could only choose good, their good would be a coercion and therefore not truly good

Question 9

Why does I think that God cannot intervene to prevent evil?

Answer 9

God cannot intervene to stop evil, because then this essential freedom would be lost

Question 10

Why does I think that God could not create a world where no evil existed?

Answer 10

If God had created a world where no evil existed, then the good characteristics needed for moral development, like courage and compassion, could not be developed

Question 11

What did I think would make up for the suffering we experience on Earth?

Answer 11

He argued that eternity in heaven would make up for the suffering we experience on Earth

Question 12

What is Hick’s theodicy called?

Answer 12

Hick’s theodicy is called the vale of soul making and is largely an extension of the Irenaean Theodicy

Question 13

How is H’s theodicy similar to I’s?

Answer 13

He also believed that humans go through life in a process of moral development, working towards perfection

Question 14

What purpose does H think evil serves and what is the counter to this view?

Answer 14

He says that evil can help us develop good characteristics. For example, experiencing the suffering of others can help us develop compassion and sympathy. Experiencing the outcome of lies can make someone more honest. This can be disputed, as people who grow up in abusive homes are much more likely to be abusive parents themselves

Question 15

What does H call the process of human moral development?

Answer 15

Hick calls this process soul making and says that it justifies the existence of evil

Question 16

When does H think that moral perfection can be reached?

Answer 16

Moral perfection might not be reached in this life, but Hick held that it would be reached in the afterlife

Question 17

Explain H’s idea of epistemic distance?

Answer 17

Hick believed that humans were created at an epistemice distance from God. This means that they were created at a special distance from God where they were close enough that they could know him but not so close that they had no choice to believe in him – this way faith is a choice

Question 18

Why does H think that we could not have been created at a closer epistemic distance to God?

Answer 18

If we had been created at a closer epistemic distance, then humans would be good because of their closeness to God and this would have compromised their freedom

Question 19

Explain H’s parable of the celestial city

Answer 19

Hick gives his theodicy an eschatological justification (synoptic link to John) using the parable of a journey to a celestial city. Both atheists and theists are on the same journey and have the same destination. If the theist is right then their idea of a celestial city will be verified in the afterlife. If the atheist is right, then they will never achieve verification because both the theist and the atheist will simply cease to be when they die

Question 20

List the strengths of the Irenaean Theodicy

Answer 20

Responsibility for evil is placed on humans rather than God, making it a successful theodicy

Humans have free will, which is consistent with our interpretation of existence

If makes suffering and evil easier to deal with because they are presented as having some higher purpose

It shows that this is the best possible world – as it would not have been logically possible for God to have created a world in which we have free will and can obtain moral perfection where no evil exists. However, God should be able to do things that are logically impossible, otherwise he is bound by logic and therefore no longer omnipotent

Question 21

List the weaknesses of the Irenaean Theodicy

Answer 21

God should have been able to make a process whereby achieving moral perfection was not so difficult or time consuming

Some suffering doesn’t result in soul making, like the death of a baby, and therefore seems pointless and arbitrary

Some suffering is particularly brutal and seems excessive for the purposes of soul making

People can develop good qualities without suffering, like JC. However, JC is the physical incarnation of the Word of God, so this is perhaps different

Animal suffering, as they are not rational beings so cannot be edified