An Explanation of the Five Theodicies

1.  “Counter Part Theodicy”- This Theodicy suggests that good and evil co-exist with each.  Without evil good would not exist.  The issue is that this suggests that God could not create good without evil and this is conflict with an omnipotent God.

2. Contrast Theodicy- This Theodicy suggests that without evil we wouldn’t know what good is. This is different from the Counter Part Theodicy because this makes the claim about what is known as opposed to what exists.  Counter Part Theodicy suggests without evil good would not exist, however Contrast Theodicy suggests that without evil we wouldn’t be aware of what good is.  An objection to this is this limits the power of God to give knowledge without creating evil.   This theodicy does not succeed because it is not compatible with being omnipotent. An omnipotent God can create good and not create evil.

3.  Freewill Theodicy- The idea that suffering and evil is caused by human choices.  God gives the ability to humans to choose and make decisions about their actions and humans abuse that choice.  An objection to this is an omnipotent God should be able to create a world where human always to choose an action that does not result in suffering.  This  theodicy  does  not succeed because this argue s that God watches evil, has the power to stop it, but does nothing.  This is not compatible with omnibenevolent. 

4.  Natural law Theodicy- The idea that God created world with physical and natural laws.  Evil is the result of those natural laws that God created.  For example, being hit by a car or drowning, or a hurricane.     An objection this is that an omnipotent God could not create natural laws that do not cause evil.  This theodicy succeeds because natural laws in and of themselves do not cause suffering.

5.   John Hick’s Soul Making- Is the idea that evil provides character building and spiritual maturity that could not be obtained otherwise without evil.   An omnipotent God should be able to bring a bought maturity without evil, given that people do mature without suffering.   This  theodicy succeeds however because maturity happens in suffering.