Suffering is an inevitable part of human existence. Deriving from evil comes suffering, evil comes in two main forms, moral and natural. Moral evil can be explained by humans choosing to act against God’s laws and giving into temptation, therefore it is under human control. Philosophers have argued that moral evil is the unavoidable risk that free will entails. Whilst, natural evil is suffering caused by the events that do not have anything to do with humans, rather, the world. Beyond human control and unpredictable. These forms of evil created the impression for non religious people that if the classical God of theism is omnipotent; all powerful, omniscient; all knowing, and omnibenevolent; all good, then how can God allow evil and suffering. …show more content…
This is consequently defined as the existence of at least one deiry. Within theism religions, Gods are considered omnipotent; all powerful, omnibenevolent; all righteous, and omniscient; all knowing. Christian theodicies, such as Irenaeus and Hick’s theodicy, aim to justify the assumptions about the nature of God in a world filled with evil and suffering. The word theodicy stems from the Greek word ‘theos’ and ‘dike,’ which translates to God righteous meaning the ‘justice of God’, however when applied to the problem of suffering and evil is ‘the justification of God’. A theodicy is an attempt to defend the justice and righteousness of God in the face of evil and suffering. An attempt to explain the apparent existence of evil and suffering, whilst also retaining the three attributes of the God in classical theism of omnipotence, omnibenevolence and omniscience. Theodicies need to be consistent with religious traditions in which it stands and with the nature of the world as revealed by scientific enquiry. Ireneans is a tradition theodicy, whilst Hicks is a more modern theologian who stems off of the Irenaeus …show more content…
The theodicy of Hicks is based on the Irenaean tradition. St Irenaeus, a Christian philosopher, based his thought system on the account of the creation of man within Genesis, as it states: ‘Then God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness’ (Genesis). Irenaeus stated that man was made in the image of God, and that humanity must develop into the likeness of God throughout life. God did not intend to create humanity perfectly, Irenaeus claimed, but instead created humans with the potential for knowledge of God. He believes that it was necessary in order to create an epistemic disrobe from God in order to achieve his likeness. Hick developed on Irenaeus theodicy and established the belief that the purpose of suffering within the world was to enable humanity to morally and spiritually grow into God’s likeness. Hick’s theodicy is one of ‘soul-making’ arguing that both natural and moral suffering are essential to ‘soul-making’. Suffering is viewed as a positive concept which was created by God in order for the development of humanity to occur without suffering, response viral to the Christian ethos, such as compassion, courage, selflessness and love, would have no means to exist, solidifying the purpose of suffering within the world in the view of the