Evil and Suffering (AQA A-Level Religious Studies): Revision Notes

Theodicy and process theology

Overview of theodicies

A theodicy attempts to explain why an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent God allows evil and suffering to exist in the world. Two major modern approaches are John Hick's soul-making theodicy and David Ray Griffin's Process Theology. Each offers different explanations for the problem of evil, with varying implications for Christian belief.

John Hick's soul-making theodicy

Rejection of Augustine's theodicy

John Hick (1922-2012), an English philosopher of religion, begins by dismissing the traditional Augustinian theodicy as "utterly unacceptable" in the modern world. He identifies several fundamental problems with Augustine's approach:

Hick argues that any attempt to salvage Augustine's theodicy "stretches credibility beyond breaking point."

The Irenaean tradition as foundation

Instead of Augustine's fall narrative, Hick draws on the earlier ideas of St Irenaeus (second century CE). In this tradition, humans were not created perfect and did not fall from perfection. Rather, they were created as imperfect beings with the potential to develop into "children of God."

The parent-child analogy

Hick develops his theodicy using an extended metaphor of the parent-child relationship:

How human parents raise children:

• Parents cannot force their children to love them
• Children learn to love through freely responding to their parents' care
• Good parenting does not mean shielding children from all difficulty
• Parents develop their children's character by teaching them to respond constructively to challenges
• The goal is to help children mature into responsible adults

How God relates to humanity:

• God creates humans for a loving relationship, just as parents love their children
• Like parents, God cannot compel love—it must be freely given
• God allows humans to face challenges and hardships as opportunities for character development
• The ultimate goal is for humans to mature spiritually and freely choose to love God

The two-step process: bios and zoe

Hick identifies a two-stage process in human development, drawing on Genesis 1:26 where God decides to create humans in his "image and likeness":

Stage 1: Bios (biological life)

• Humans are created as biological beings
• This represents our physical existence and basic human nature
• We are capable of a personal relationship with God, but remain spiritually immature

Stage 2: Zoe (perfect personal life)

• This represents the spiritual perfection seen in Jesus Christ
• Through experience and moral development, humans can achieve Christ-likeness
• This is the fulfilment of God's purpose: creating "children of God" who freely respond to their Creator in love

Hick describes this final state as "the perfecting of man, the fulfilment of God's purpose for humanity."

Universal salvation

A distinctive and controversial feature of Hick's theodicy is his belief in universal salvation. Unlike Augustine's view where some people go to heaven and others to hell, Hick argues that:

• Eventually, all humans will freely come to love God and enter heaven
• God's infinite persuasive power means that every individual will ultimately be saved
• This process may take different lengths of time for different individuals
• For some, it may even require "many lifetimes, in different levels of existence"

Hick rejects the doctrine of hell as "abhorrent" and incompatible with a God of love. He argues that if hell were real, it would constitute "the worst part of the problem of evil" because no loving Father would condemn any of his children to eternal torment.

Epistemic distance

One of the most powerful concepts in Hick's theodicy is epistemic distance—a "distance of knowledge" between God and humanity.

The necessity of evil for soul-making

Building on the concept of epistemic distance, Hick explains why various types of evil must exist:

First-order evils (basic suffering and wrongdoing) provide the context for developing second-order virtues such as:

• Courage (in the face of danger)
• Compassion (in response to others' suffering)
• Sympathy and empathy (understanding others' pain)
• Forgiveness (in response to wrongdoing)
• Patience (in difficult circumstances)

Hick's response to objections

Hick anticipates three major objections to his theodicy and provides responses:

Objection 1: Animal suffering

Animals cannot grow spiritually, so why do they suffer?

Hick's response:

• Animals do not fear death or worry about future evils
• Pain serves a protective function, warning animals of danger
• If humans were the only species on Earth, we would suspect our position was privileged, breaking the epistemic distance
• Therefore, other animals must exist, evolution must occur, and animal suffering is an unavoidable consequence that we cannot fully explain

Objection 2: Pointless evils

Some evils seem to serve no purpose (like William Rowe's example of a fawn dying unseen in a forest fire).

Hick's response:

• If we could explain all forms of suffering, we would have clear evidence for God's existence
• This would breach epistemic distance and compromise our freedom
• Some evils must appear pointless to maintain the necessary uncertainty
• Being able to explain all suffering would eliminate faith and hope, which are essential for personal development

Objection 3: The extent of evil

Why does God allow such terrible evils as the Holocaust?

Hick's response:

• All evils are matters of degree
• If we removed the worst evils (like the Holocaust), the next-worst evils would then seem most terrible
• The more evil we remove, the less moral freedom and responsibility humans have
• This would defeat the purpose of allowing evil in the first place—to provide opportunities for moral development

Strengths of Hick's theodicy

1. Epistemic distance as a comprehensive defence

The concept of epistemic distance provides a unified explanation for various forms of evil. Hick can justify:

• Moral evil (human wrongdoing must be possible for freedom to be real)
• Natural evil (disasters and suffering maintain uncertainty about God)
• Animal suffering (part of maintaining epistemic distance)
• Apparently pointless suffering (must exist to prevent certainty about God)

His thesis is that "the end (heaven for all) justifies the means."

2. The necessity of challenge for development

Hick's argument that evil is necessary for soul-making resonates with human experience:

• Individuals and societies cannot develop without facing challenges
• Suffering often does lead to character development
• We cannot expect to experience great goodness without also being exposed to the possibility of great evil
• This reflects a realistic understanding of moral and spiritual growth

3. Rejection of hell

Hick's argument against eternal damnation is morally compelling:

• A God who condemns people to hell might be just, but would hardly be loving
• The existence of hell would itself constitute the worst aspect of the problem of evil
• Universal salvation is more compatible with the concept of a loving God

4. Compatibility with evolution

Unlike Augustine's theodicy, Hick's approach:

• Incorporates evolutionary theory
• Does not require belief in a literal Adam and Eve
• Fits with scientific evidence about human origins
• Sees biological evolution as the first stage of human development

Weaknesses of Hick's theodicy

1. The problem of animal suffering

Hick's explanation for animal pain contains several problems:

2. The ends may not justify the means

Two key problems emerge:

Lack of consent:

• The promise of heaven is not a contract that humans can accept or reject
• Is God morally justified in allowing evil without obtaining the consent of those who suffer?
• We did not choose to participate in this soul-making process

The evidential problem remains:

• Is the promise of heaven sufficient compensation for the total amount of suffering in the world?
• Ivan Karamazov's objection remains powerful: even if he does not reject God, he rejects "God's ticket to paradise, because the journey is not worth it"
• Without experiencing heaven, how can we judge whether the suffering is justified?

3. Inconsistency with traditional Christian teaching

Many Christians reject Hick's theodicy because:

On salvation:

• If all humans are saved, what was the purpose of Jesus' crucifixion?
• At best, Jesus becomes merely a role model rather than a saviour
• This undermines the traditional doctrine of atonement

On religious pluralism:

• Hick sees different world religions as various responses to one Divine Reality
• This conflicts with the belief that salvation comes only through Christ
• Many Christians find this unacceptable

4. The problem with universal salvation

If everyone eventually reaches God's Kingdom:

• What is the point of the spiritual journey?
• If the destination is guaranteed, why bother with the struggle?
• Why not create spiritually mature people from the start?

Response to the "why not create them mature" objection:

Some argue that experiencing the painful journey is necessary to make arrival worthwhile. But Hick's critics counter that God could have created everyone with a built-in memory of having made the journey, achieving the same result without actual suffering.

5. Dependence on libertarian free will

Like the Free Will Defence, Hick's theodicy assumes humans possess libertarian free will—the ability to make genuinely free choices. However:

• Libertarian free will cannot be proved
• Many philosophers and scientists hold determinist or compatibilist views
• Without a settled account of free will, the theodicy remains unproven

Process theology as presented by Griffin

Background and origins

Process Theology arose primarily from the work of Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947), an English philosopher and mathematician. Whitehead was fascinated by quantum mechanics, which revealed the universe as being in constant flux and change. He concluded that God, too, must be growing and changing. David Ray Griffin (born 1939), an American theologian and philosopher, developed these ideas into a distinctive Process Theology.

Griffin's rejection of creation ex nihilo

Griffin begins by challenging the Christian doctrine of creatio ex nihilo—"creation out of nothing." He argues this doctrine is based on a mistranslation of Genesis 1:1-3.

Traditional translation (Revised Standard Version):

In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. And God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light.

This translation implies:

• God's first act was to create the universe
• God called the universe into existence from nothing
• God used words of creative power to bring about existence

Alternative translation (preferred by Griffin):

In the beginning of God's creating the heavens and the earth, the earth being without form and void, and darkness being upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God moving over the face of the waters, God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light.

This translation suggests:

• The universe ("the earth") already existed in a chaotic state
• God did not create the universe from nothing
• God's creative role was to bring order out of pre-existing chaos

Griffin's rejection of God's omnipotence

The doctrine of creation from nothing supports the idea of God's omnipotence—if God can bring the universe into existence from nothing, God must have unlimited power. However, if creation occurred from chaotic materials, these materials likely possessed their own inherent power that could resist God's will.

According to Griffin, chaotic materials have two types of power:

1. They partially determine themselves
2. They can influence each other

Therefore, God is not omnipotent—God's power is significant but limited.

Griffin's method of doing theology

Griffin establishes ground rules for developing a theodicy:

Using these principles, Griffin constructs a theodicy that radically reinterprets traditional Christian beliefs.

God and the universe: panentheism

Griffin argues for a panentheistic relationship between God and the universe:

Traditional view (transcendence):

• God exists above and beyond space-time
• God created the universe but remains separate from it
• God can intervene in the universe from outside

Process view (panentheism):

• God and the universe exist together necessarily
• The universe is "in" God
• Both God and the universe are eternal, without beginning or end
• What exists necessarily is "God-and-a-world" (God plus the universe as an inseparable unit)

God's inability to intervene

Griffin contrasts traditional Christianity with Process Theology to show why Process Theology avoids the problem of divine intervention.

Traditional Christian logic:

a. If God creates from nothing, he must exist transcendently (outside space-time) b. God possesses the power to intervene and break natural laws c. The Bible records many interventions: miracles of Jesus (raising Lazarus, calming storms, feeding thousands), the incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection d. These interventions show God's power over both moral and natural evil e. The problem: If God sometimes intervenes to restrict evil, why doesn't he eliminate it completely? f. Traditional answers (Free Will Defence, Hick's soul-making) fail to adequately address the evidential problem of evil

Process Theology's alternative:

a. God created the universe from pre-existing chaotic matter b. Both God and chaotic matter exist necessarily in a panentheistic relationship c. God is the "soul" of the universe and cannot control its physical workings, just as a human mind cannot control all bodily functions d. Over vast periods, God can persuade chaotic matter toward organised forms (electrons, atoms, molecules) e. God's "creation" is a drive toward increasing complexity over 13.77 billion years: forming stars and galaxies, then developing thinking beings through 3.5 billion years of evolution f. No miraculous intervention occurs—only the long process of divine persuasion g. The evidential problem of evil does not arise because God cannot intervene to prevent evil

Why did God pursue increasing complexity?

Griffin explains God's motivation for persuading matter toward greater complexity:

Increasing richness of experience:

• Greater complexity produces richer experiences
• Richer experiences bring the possibility of enjoyment
• Living cells are probably the lowest level at which enjoyment begins
• At this level, we can begin to speak of "value"

The animal leap:

• Animals, especially those with central nervous systems, represent an exponential increase in complexity
• They can experience many different types of value
• They have greater capacity for enjoyment than simple organisms

The Janus face: why evil arose

Janus was the Roman god of beginnings and endings, depicted with two opposing faces looking to past and future. Griffin uses this image to explain evil:

Evil is therefore not a design flaw or punishment, but an inevitable consequence of the process that also produces good.

Griffin's response to the evidential problem

Knowing that increased complexity would lead to evil (including atrocities like the Holocaust), why did God start the evolutionary process?

Griffin admits God bears responsibility for setting chaotic matter on the path to complexity, but argues we cannot blame God. His reasoning:

1. God's goal was to produce good, not to avoid suffering

We should understand this through analogy:

• Human parents have children despite knowing this will cause suffering for both parent and child
• By analogy, God could have avoided creating beings capable of evil, but then there would be no world with significant value

2. For God not to bring about good would itself be evil

Griffin states: "I cannot imagine that I would ever conclude that the evils of life have been so great that it would have been better had life never emerged, or that the evils of human life, as horrendous as they have been (and quite possibly the worst is still to come!), are such that it would have been better had human life never been created."

In other words, existence with suffering is better than non-existence.

3. God shares all suffering

Since God and the universe exist panentheistically:

• God experiences the entirety of pain and suffering in the universe
• God is "the fellow sufferer who understands" (Whitehead's phrase)
• Just as "I" share the pains of my bodily parts, God shares all suffering in creation

Why God cannot prevent natural evils

Griffin addresses why God does not at least prevent some natural disasters:

Low-grade entities:

• Natural evils are caused by "low-grade" entities: electrons, atoms, molecules
• These are very difficult for God to influence except over long periods
• Any changes in them occur slowly
• They lack sufficient awareness to respond directly to God

Aggregates:

• Things like rocks, water bodies and planets have "no dominant member"
• There is no "lead-molecule" or "soul" that God can influence
• God cannot affect the behaviour of a puddle, river or sea as a whole
• Therefore:
  • God cannot stop a tsunami from drowning you
  • God cannot prevent earthquake rocks from crushing you
  • God cannot stop a speeding car from hitting you

Strengths of Process Theology

1. Realism about divine power

Griffin's conclusion that God is not omnipotent provides a realistic answer to the problem of evil:

• Evil exists because God lacks the power to control it
• This avoids the logical problem of why an omnipotent God permits evil
• It matches many people's experience that God does not intervene to prevent suffering

2. Support from quantum mechanics

The discovery that reality at the sub-atomic level is chaotic, characterised by flux and change, lends some support to Griffin's argument that:

• God's creation was not from nothing
• The universe consists of the gradual ordering of pre-existing chaotic material
• Reality is fundamentally about process and change, not static being

3. Biblical support for creation from chaos

Griffin is probably correct that:

• The Hebrew text of Genesis 1:1-3 describes creation from chaotic materials rather than from nothing
• This understanding is supported by connections to Babylonian creation myths (Enuma Elish), where "creation" means imposing order on pre-existing chaos
• The doctrine of creation ex nihilo may not be as biblically grounded as traditionally assumed

4. God as fellow sufferer

The concept that God shares all suffering provides consolation for believers:

• God is not distant or indifferent to suffering
• God experiences every pain in the universe
• Believers can find comfort knowing God truly understands their suffering

Weaknesses of Process Theology

1. God's lack of omnipotence

While Griffin's non-omnipotent God solves some problems, it creates others. John Roth comments:

By the implications of Griffin's theory, when Elie Wiesel arrived at Auschwitz, the best that God could possibly do was to permit 10,000 Jews a day to go up in smoke... A God of such weakness, no matter how much he suffers, is rather pathetic. Good though he may be, Griffin's God is too small.

2. The evidential problem persists

Griffin argues that having this universe is better than having none, even given all the evil. But several problems remain:

Questionable judgement:

• Griffin claims that even if greater evils than we have yet experienced are still to come, he would still judge God to be right
• How many people share this conviction?
• Is this a realistic assessment or wishful thinking?

Why not stop?

• Even if God is not omnipotent, at the point when God saw that persuading matter toward complexity was also producing vast amounts of evil, why did God not cease?
• Why start a process you cannot control?
• This criticism parallels Ivan Karamazov's objection to Hick: "the universe is not worth it"

3. No guarantee of victory over evil

Process Theology admits an element of "risk" in God's strategy:

• There is no guarantee that God will succeed in overcoming evil
• Advanced entities like humans have sufficient power to resist God's persuasion
• Human existence could end in nuclear, biological and chemical obliteration
• As Griffin notes: humans discovered that E = mc² relatively quickly after learning to write, and "can use this knowledge to destroy the world even more quickly"

4. Many consider it unchristian

Process Theology is often labelled "unchristian" because it:

• Denies creation from nothing
• Denies God's omnipotence
• Eliminates miracles
• Rejects divine intervention
• Has minimal eschatology (doctrine of what happens after death or at the end of time)

However, Griffin would respond:

• Different Christian groups have always accused each other of being unchristian
• We do not actually know if God is omnipotent or how God created
• No amount of "doctrinal table-thumping" will settle these issues
• Process theologians regard their ideas as probabilities rather than certainties, which may be more intellectually honest than claiming to possess absolute truth

5. Limited eschatology

Process Theology offers little teaching about life after death:

Objective immortality:

• All individual entities remain forever in God's mind
• In this sense, they never truly die
• But there is no traditional heaven or hell

Possibility of subjective immortality:

• Griffin suggests, based on parapsychology and near-death experiences, there is a "strong cumulative case" that the soul might survive bodily death
• This remains tentative and speculative

For many believers, this lack of clear teaching about eternal life weakens Process Theology's appeal.

The relationship between philosophy and faith

The problem of evil creates a complex relationship between philosophical reasoning and religious faith. Different responses are possible:

1. Traditional theological responses

Augustinian theodicy:

• Endorsed by the Catholic Church and many Protestant groups
• Hell is real for those who reject Christ
• Heaven awaits those who accept Christ as saviour
• Believers make every effort to follow Christian moral rules to avoid hell and reach heaven

2. Practical responses to evil

Many Christians respond to evil through action rather than philosophy:

• Prayer and intercession for those who suffer
• Service to others (for example, hospice work, charitable giving)
• Working to reduce suffering in practical ways

3. Faith over philosophy

Some Christians abandon philosophical explanations in favour of faith:

Biblical examples:

• Job, who protests his innocence but ultimately accepts that God's ways are beyond human understanding
• Jesus, who accepts his crucifixion, even praying "not my will, but yours be done"

4. Philosophy undermining faith

Philosophical theodicies can lead people away from belief in God:

When rational arguments fail:

• All theodicies struggle with the evidential problem of evil
• If philosophical defences of God's goodness fail, belief may collapse

5. Evil strengthening radical faith

Conversely, extreme evil can lead people toward more radical versions of Christianity:

Apocalyptic / Millenarian movements:

• Belief in a thousand-year reign of Christ on Earth
• Followed by universal resurrection and final judgement
• The just go to heaven, the damned to hell

Historical pattern:

• After the 1918-1920 flu pandemic, Millenarian groups emerged in Nigeria, Belgian Congo, Southern Rhodesia and South Africa
• Such groups can be encouraged by increased evil, seeing it as evidence of the impending final battle between good and evil described in Revelation