John Hicks's Argument On The Problem Of Evil

In John Hicks argument on the problem of evil openly claims that the Irenaean Tradition is the most logical and most accurate in terms why God allows “evil” on earth. For a very long time the Irenaean tradition was unpopular compared to the Augustinian tradition until recently. People who believe in the Irenaean tradition believe that mans sinful nature is not because they are trying to intentionally displease God, but because man is going through an imperfect world in which evil exists as a process to become more like what God envisioned them to be. Hick states that when God made humans he made them like himself but they are an unfinished product. In which the rigors of life would help mold man into God’s ideal “child”. What he means by this

Through this constant buildup of good deeds and righteousness, he makes himself a worthy candidate for heaven. Or he can choose the latter, simply indulge in the world’s sinful nature and slowly descend into sinfulness himself and be sent to hell. Therefore Hick does not believe that man was originally perfect and that the world was made perfect. The environment in which man would grow in is not for their pleasure but to bring out the necessary qualities God is looking for. Hick claims that if God made the earth solely on the purpose for pleasure then it would derail mans path towards righteous qualities therefore being unable to become worthy in God’s eyes. Hick makes the connection with parents who spoil their children, having undesirable qualities like selfishness and egotism which is more prevalent in a perfect world. Therefore without things considered evil like selfishness, lustfulness, poverty and crime being present in the world, one cannot learn to be good and honorable by knowing that these things are wrong. This is necessary for bringing man from a state of immature and unknowing to a state of righteousness like what God had planned for them to