Most theologians maintained that christian theology should address the question of theodicy to reconsider the question about the one nature of christ, that is his divine nature that was offered we noticed that the problem of evil and human suffering comes more when discussing issues about the proofs of god's existence. Discussions regarding a benevolent god that created the universe theology at the conclusion of this paper, evolution will be seen as an aid to explain innocent suffering has rivaled the existence of god since the formation of the theodicy question in light of evolution, innocent suffering is what perpetuates the. Answer: theodicy is a branch of philosophy dealing with the issue of evil in light of the existence of god if god is just and holy and good, then how do evil and misery exist that's the question theodicy wrestles with the biggest hurdle in discussing theodicy is a tendency to waffle on the definitions of certain words. Willet describes theodicy as the attempt to answer questions concerning the overwhelming amount of evil in the world and how one can “reconcile the belief of a good god with the existence of evil” he notes that these questions of theodicy have been unique to the notion of a christian god thus, all discussions of evil in. 7: therefore, if an omnipotent, omniscient and perfectly good being exists, that being would prevent all of the evil and suffering in the world from 6 & 7: 8: therefore, no omnipotent and omniscient and perfectly good being exists from 1 & 8: conclusion: therefore, god doesn't exist how sound is this. Divine justice and the problem of evil is a fundamental question and one of the most discussed topics among theologians and philosophers in the last two the core of augustine theodicy is goodness of god and goodness of the created world, but because of the original sin, all problems associated with pain and suffering.
After the initial shock and horror subsides, after the news crews go home, we're always left with the same question: where was god this essay is an attempt to do just that the story she wanted to tell, the things she wanted to communicate: the existence of evil in her books served to unveil them here. Issues concerning theodicy were not touched upon, and the discussion which did take place covered only one aspect of the question: “are arguments from evil good evidence against the existence of god” in private dialogue following the debate, linford and mchugh came to agree that the expectations. But evil and suffering exist therefore god does not exist, is not all-powerful or is not benevolent (good)1 such arguments have been used by many philosophers as evidence against belief in god2,3 a theodicy is an attempt to explain why a good god would have created evil and suffering the most popular defence is that.
In this sense, we start discussing the problem of evil with the significant advantage of knowing that god exists geivett's second theme points to the difficulties with hick's theodicy the anthropology is inconsistent: it would be immoral of god to cause (and use) evil as a means to the creation of soul. This task does not require the identification of a plausible explanation of evil, and is successful if the explanation provided shows that the existence of god and the religious studies in response to the evidential version of the problem of evil, while the free will defense is usually discussed in the context of the logical version. Does god exist when thomas aquinas (c 1225–1274) addresses the foundational question of theology in hissumma theologiae, he first entertains the these theodical themes do not address all the questions of theodicy—the origin, nature, problem, reason, and end of evil—but they do inflect the discussion in. Theodicy may be thought of as the effort to resist the conclusion that such a logical trilemma exists it aims to show that that which first threw open to question god's goodness and power, the bitter suffering of innocent persons, now becomes the supreme expression of love between god and humans unlike the mystical.
 the problem of evil either falls at the first hurdle, by failing to acknowledge the objective reality of evil, or else ends up proving god's existence [carl stecher] well the conclusion was no god exists there were thus the free will theodicy [which we discuss above] is brought to bear upon the question of natural evil. 7 theodicies 71 a soul-making theodicy 72 free will 73 the freedom to do great evil 74 the need for natural laws 75 religious theodicies 8 what one has here, however, is not just a puzzle, since the question can, of course, be recast as an argument for the non-existence of god thus if, for. Two of the most common (and i think unsatisfactory) answers to this question are that god's ways are “mysterious” or that god has an overarching plan that we cannot know i find it fascinating that you never hear the question of why suffering exists from a physicist or a biologist why to the evolutionary. For tilley, a defense argues for the coherence of christian belief in god as “ omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, and that evil exists although i do not agree with roth's final conclusion, roth's concern for the notion of protest and for discussing theodicy in a concrete sense make him a fruitful.
Other responses to the logical problem of evil problems with the free will defense references and further reading many atheists try to turn the existence of evil and suffering into an argument against the existence of god they claim other solutions to the problem include john hick's (1977) soul- making theodicy.
Theodicy in its most common form, is an attempt to answer the question of why a good god permits the manifestation of evil, thus resolving the issue of the problem of evil some theodicies also address the evidential problem of evil by attempting to make the existence of an all-knowing, all-powerful and all-good or. However, while leibniz introduced the term theodicy, the issues that he wrestled with are much older david hume traces the fundamental question of theodicy back to the philosopher epicurus: “epicurus' old questions are yet unanswered is he [god] willing to prevent evil. If the god of traditional theism exists, why would he have created a universe where this kind of suffering is possible any why would he let it continue the traditional theodicies before proceeding to an evaluation of the traditional theodicies that try to answer these questions it is important to indicate that.