POE Part 1

“Almost no other theme recurs in great literature more often than that of humanity’s capability for Evil.” (Michael Peterson, God and Evil Westview Press, Oxford, 1998. 3) Given that atheistic philosophers refer to the problem of evil as the “Achilles heel” of theism, it’s no wonder that this issue has been so prevalent in journals and books within philosophical and theological academia. What started out as a pessimistic outlook on life within Greek tragedy, Voltaire, and Hume, has turned into a strengthening proof for atheism and a source of discomfort for many. As the photo above shows, much of the debate over the problem of evil stems from a belief that some of the most fundamental truths we hold about God are not compatible with a world that is full of evil.

While the problem of evil has been argued and rebutted in two predominant forms, logical and evidential, John Feinburg’s thesis in The Many Faces of Evil is the most accurate position regarding the magnitude and complexity of the problem of evil. He states:

"There is no such thing as just one theological/philosophical problem of evil that attacks all theologies in the same way. That is, there are as many distinct theological/philosophical problems of evil as there are theological systems.. What this means is that not everyone holds to the same account of God and evil."
(John S. Feinburg, The Many Faces of Evil Crossway Books, Wheaton, IL, 2004. 24 This book was the third revision of his doctoral thesis. It is one of the most comprehensive treatments of the problem of evil from a theistic perspective that has ever been produced.)

If we hold to Feinburg’s claim, the problem of evil cannot be limited to a logical inconsistency or an evidential probability. It must be seen in light of the diversity of theologies and philosophies concerning the character and attributes of God. This means that neither a free will defense by Plantinga, nor an epistemic rebuttal (CORNEA) is sufficient to make the problem of evil go away.

What is needed is, as John Milton said, “an attempt to ‘justify the ways of God to man.’” This is called a theodicy. Many different theodicies have been attempted, most notable being Augustine, Aquinas, Leibniz, Hick, Yandell, etc. Each of these men proposed ways to account for the problem of evil within a Christian theological framework, without ignoring the reality of evil (such as Spinoza or the Christian Scientists). While these men have been the focus of a majority of the scholarship and work of different theodicies, several other theologians have sought to deal with evil by attempting either theodical suggestions or a full blown theodicy itself.

Within this overview of the POE (problem of evil)it will be in our best interest to to skim the whole and only focus on a few of the main players. While who the main player are could be a subject of another discussion, I have chosen to focus on six of them. They are: St. Augustine, David Hume, Fyodor Dostoevsky, J.L. Mackie, Alvin Plantinga, and William Rowe. While the works of Spinoza, Leibniz, John Hick, Marylin McCord Adams, Karl Barth, etc. are all important and have added much to the discussion on evil, for the sake of brevity, I will only focus on these six men.

The intent of this treatment of evil is twofold. One, I would like those who have never looked at the issue to have some sort of framework and reference point from which to approach the issue in real life situations. Second, I would propose that although the POE has become a major theme and discussion in modern day academia and culture, it remains a modern day problem stemming from the enlightenment's subjective turn to the self and our overwhelming sense of entitlement that is hammered into the very fibers of who we are as humans today. As we go bit-by-bit through this difficult issue, I will conclude this whole discussion with the thesis I have just presented and try to establish and verify its validity. In doing so, we must deal with Immanuel Kant, which is never an easy thing to do, but necessary nonetheless.

Again, I welcome any feedback and will do my best to answer questions or make necessary changes in order to make this discussion more readable and enjoyable for everyone.