- Question
Do theodicies explain why God allows evil in the world?
A theodicy is a story that attempts to demonstrate that the presence of evil in the world does not disprove the existence of a perfectly good, almighty, and all-knowing God. Theodicies and defences are two forms of response to this conundrum. Evil can be classified into natural evil such as disease and physical catastrophes or moral evil, which can be summed up as "man's inhumanity to man."
Yes, theodicies explain the existence of an all-powerful, benevolent God
This position holds that theodicies successfully explain the existence of an all-powerful, benevolent God despite evil. It argues that God is the sole perfect being, and that evil may serve a higher purpose we cannot grasp — so suffering does not contradict a loving, omnipotent creator.
Yes, theodicies explain that God allows people the free will to commit evil
This position holds that theodicies successfully explain why God allows evil, through the free-will defence. It argues that God grants human beings genuine free will, and that the evil some people commit is the price of that freedom — reconciling a good God with the existence of evil.
Yes, evil occurs as the absence of good and God is testing us.
This position holds that theodicies explain evil as the absence of good, permitted so God can test us. It argues that evil checks humanity's loyalty and enables personal growth — that, given free will, suffering is the price of an authentic relationship with God and of seeing his love.
No, a good God would not allow evil
This position holds that theodicies fail because a truly good God would not allow evil. It argues the coexistence of God and evil can only be explained by another potent spiritual force—a Satan—that creates evil, or else by concluding that God is not wholly benevolent after all.
No, the opposite: the existence of evil disproves the existence of God
David Hume in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779): “Is [God] willing to prevent evil, but not able? then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?”