Criticisms of the Irenaean Theodicy
- Suffering should never be the instrument of an omni-benevolent God
- The possibility of future reward in the form of spiritual perfection doesn't make up for the immense suffering endured by millions
- Suffering isn't evenly spread throughout the world, this suggest inconsistency with God's mechanism of perfection
- How is good moral behaviour encouraged on earth if even Hitler will achieve moral perfection in the end?
- Doesn't this compromise one of the central tenets of most belief systems, is eternal salvation not contingent upon behaving morally on Earth?
- The central Christian belief of needing atonement through Christ is compromised by the concept of soul-making
- Has been called a 'soul-breaking' rather than a 'soul-making' theodicy due to the intensity of the suffering felt
Criticisms of the Augustinian Theodicy
- Perfection is immutable, it cannot change, a perfect creation will always be perfect
Similar Philosophy resources: