The Argument For The Problem Of Evil Is A Theodicy
The Problem of Evil
In this essay, I will examine the argument for the Problem of Evil, a possible theodicy against the argument, and reply to the theodicy. The Problem of Evil is an argument that shows that God cannot be either all-powerful, all-knowing, or all-good. The term ‘all-PKG’ is used as an abbreviation to denote the ‘all-Powerful, all-Knowing, and all-Good’ aspects of God. In the face of the varieties of sufferings that people encounter through their lifespan, it is hardly possible to accept that God, being omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent could allow all these to happen – or, at least, He could not be a reason of these events. The Problem of Evil is an argument that shows that God cannot be the all-powerful, all-knowing, and …show more content…
The aim of theodicy is to defend the position that God is all-PKG. For example, the theodicy shows that God is all-PKG even though evil and suffering exist, and according to this branch of theology, God would allow it to exist and would not prevent it or intervene. This is because human beings are created as God’s replica, so they have the potential to rise spiritually to God’s level, and these sufferings are needed to crystallize the moral perfection within human beings (Davis 40). Free will is essential here. Through sufferings, people are able to develop divine qualities such as humility, faith, and acceptance. However, this theodicy fails to meet ‘all-good’ trait. Even though the above accomplishment leads to goodness, it does not really appeal to the traditional view on benevolence.
One theodicy is the Irenaean theodicy. This theodicy outlines that God is all-PKG even though evil and suffering exist; God allows it to exist and would not intervene or prevent it because He assumes that a human has a potential for spiritual growth. It is assumed that people were created in the image of God and the sufferings are needed to uncover this spiritual potential as sufferings help to crystallize the moral perfection within human-beings (Davis 40). Free will is essential here. Through sufferings, people are able to develop divine qualities such as humility, faith, and
In this essay, I will examine the argument for the Problem of Evil, a possible theodicy against the argument, and reply to the theodicy. The Problem of Evil is an argument that shows that God cannot be either all-powerful, all-knowing, or all-good. The term ‘all-PKG’ is used as an abbreviation to denote the ‘all-Powerful, all-Knowing, and all-Good’ aspects of God. In the face of the varieties of sufferings that people encounter through their lifespan, it is hardly possible to accept that God, being omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent could allow all these to happen – or, at least, He could not be a reason of these events. The Problem of Evil is an argument that shows that God cannot be the all-powerful, all-knowing, and …show more content…
The aim of theodicy is to defend the position that God is all-PKG. For example, the theodicy shows that God is all-PKG even though evil and suffering exist, and according to this branch of theology, God would allow it to exist and would not prevent it or intervene. This is because human beings are created as God’s replica, so they have the potential to rise spiritually to God’s level, and these sufferings are needed to crystallize the moral perfection within human beings (Davis 40). Free will is essential here. Through sufferings, people are able to develop divine qualities such as humility, faith, and acceptance. However, this theodicy fails to meet ‘all-good’ trait. Even though the above accomplishment leads to goodness, it does not really appeal to the traditional view on benevolence.
One theodicy is the Irenaean theodicy. This theodicy outlines that God is all-PKG even though evil and suffering exist; God allows it to exist and would not intervene or prevent it because He assumes that a human has a potential for spiritual growth. It is assumed that people were created in the image of God and the sufferings are needed to uncover this spiritual potential as sufferings help to crystallize the moral perfection within human-beings (Davis 40). Free will is essential here. Through sufferings, people are able to develop divine qualities such as humility, faith, and