Evil And Suffering Essay Example

uncertain if Jesus provided an answer to this problem, Job's own experience on a trash heap led him to seek God's audience. Personal and social suffering remains a challenge that tests the faith of most believers. Theology and religion's seeming inability to fully account for this problem has been posited as the biggest cause of modern atheism. Wrestling with this issue may lead one towards atheism; however, for those who believe, it raises questions about God's existence and how to respond to suffering. Ultimately, believers may wonder why a benevolent God would allow such pain and hardship. Some suggest that if God did not exist, the problem would not arise at all while others take a more radical stance. Regardless, people often cry out to God when they undergo suffering.

People ask why God permits their suffering and reflect on the evil they may have done to deserve it. Such true suffering and hopelessness, including endless war in Sudan, the September 11 terrorist attack, and individuals with terminal illnesses, can distort people's understanding of God and belief in themselves as created in his image. They question whether God is an indifferent force or apathetic. To learn more about potential factors for terrorist attacks, select all factors here.

There is curiosity regarding whether humanity, the marvelous work of God's creation, possesses any goodness similar to what Karl Rahner claims. At the same time, Western societies are increasingly rejecting suffering as an intrinsic evil, seeking to eliminate it without acknowledging its origin or significance. Problematically, some individuals and communities reject suffering as an integral component of profound emotion, preventing it from effectively communicating the cause of discomfort. These

people desire complete and painless happiness, repressing and thwarting the genuine potential of suffering.

According to Moltman, passion and suffering are necessary aspects of our existence, even though they may not bring about nobility. Life is lacking without passion and the readiness to endure suffering. Overcoming fear of passion and suffering is essential.

[5] According to Weil, the experience of true suffering is the personal and emotional reaction to physical, psychological, and social pain. [6] As individuals and societies, we can either confront the root causes of our suffering or merely manage the symptoms. When we choose the latter option, it often leads to self-medication with drugs and alcohol, consumerism (particularly in Western cultures), or seeking out alternative defense mechanisms like music, dance, and sex (as found in some African cultures). Thus, suffering becomes a problem that we attempt to control through addictive behaviors or coping mechanisms. However, despite our efforts, suffering and evil persist and challenge even those who have abandoned religion and belief in a higher power. In exploring the issue of evil and suffering, I hope to examine the relationship between sin and suffering as it relates to St.

In various pastoral settings, such as hospitals where physical pain is faced, as well as in family and group dynamics, ministering with the displaced and landless refugees, and the poorest, most abandoned, and marginalized of society, the issue of evil and suffering is a live topic. Augustine acknowledges this fact, but more importantly, it is crucial to understand that these individuals need not a solution but a potential model for inviting re-engagement with the question of God and our human response to personal and

societal suffering. Hence, this paper proposes mystical theodicy as a possible answer to the question of evil and suffering in the world. This response is not just limited to those who are alienated from God but for anyone who finds conventional theodicy insufficient. Through defining pertinent terms used in this discussion, examining the origin and operation of evil in human life and how traditional Christian theodicy comprehends it, this paper aims to present mystical theodicy as an alternative approach to delving into the issue of evil and suffering in the world.

Mystical theodicy involves defending God’s justice and power despite the existence of suffering in the world. This religious concept attempts to address the question of how an omnipotent and good God could allow pain, evil, and suffering to occur in society. Christianity links theodicy with images of God, and the purpose and nature of suffering. While justifying God is crucial, traditional theodicies often neglect other facets of the issue. A satisfactory response to evil and suffering should also provide comfort and positivity.

Christian mysticism holds a significant role in Christian spirituality. Bernard McGinn provides a definition of Christian mysticism as the part of Christianity that deals with the readiness for, awareness of, and response to direct experiences of the presence of God. This description does not suggest that such experiences are exclusive to a select few chosen ones. While Christian tradition has typically seen mystical experiences as rarefied states achieved by only the most advanced contemplatives, there is an increasing awareness that mystical consciousness exists within all people, regardless of faith. This realization may explain why many African and non-Western cultures venerate their ancestors,

who may not have been extraordinary or traditional mystics, but who lived lives filled with the presence of God.

True mysticism is a way of experiencing the direct presence of God in everyday life, including social, political, and economic experiences as well as suffering and evil, rather than through piety or isolation. To understand evil, it is important to examine traditional Christian theodicy and how it has approached the issue throughout history.

The most common belief within Christianity is the theme of divine retribution, which can be seen in the story of Job. According to this view, God rewards the righteous with blessings and punishes the sinful and wicked with pain and suffering. Job challenged this belief by protesting his innocence and faithfulness to God during a time of troubles that affected his family, property, and personal well-being.

Although Job's friends provide a retributive explanation that is rejected by the author of the book of Job, Job still has his day in court with God. However, God sidesteps Job's questions by reciting his mighty deeds of creation. The court ends with Job's confession, which is something we all must do when confronted with evil forces: "I have dealt with great things that I do not understand" (Job 42:3). The prevalence of the retributive model in theologies among Christians and non-Christians can be attributed to the inherited images of God from Hebrew Scriptures. Modern theologians have criticized this view, and Dostoevsky's Brothers Karamazov exposes the inadequacies of a retributive theodicy, among others.

Noting the suffering of children, the speaker questions how a child could deserve such pain. Many, like Ivan Karamazov, reject a God that would allow such unjust suffering.

However, it is not God who is insufficient, but rather the image of God and resulting theodicy. Another commonly held theodicy is the free will model, which views evil and suffering as inevitable consequences of human freedom. This idea has its roots in Hebrew Scriptures and was developed further by St. Augustine's concept of humanity's fall and original sin.

[11] The free will theodicy explains the relationship between suffering and sin, as outlined by Augustine in his doctrine of original sin. He begins by detailing the pre-sin state of Adam and Eve, in which they lived in a state of grace, possessing a supernatural gift of sanctifying grace, along with other preternatural gifts. This state rendered them free from concupiscence, endowed with special knowledge and freedom from death.

According to [12], our proto parents were bestowed with supernatural gifts such as immortality, impassibility, integrity, miraculous knowledge, and freedom from error. Augustine's perspective reveals that before the fall of humanity, there was a time when evil and suffering did not exist. Augustine's theological discourse delves into the explanation of how such moral giants fell. He believes the pre-modern scientific viewpoint based on the fall of humanity in the genesis account is actual and occurred at a certain point on earth.

According to his argument, the original state of grace in which humans were created was disrupted by sin. This resulted in Adam losing not only sanctifying grace, but also all preternatural gifts - not just for himself but for his descendants as well. As a consequence, the world changed from a place of idyllic harmony to one of pain and agony, where immortality was lost and existence became unbearable,

culminating in the fearful death. Evil is deeply rooted in sin and the free will of individuals, and should not be viewed as external to them. Under Augustinian philosophy, God cannot be held accountable for sin or evil. Instead, pain and suffering serve as punishment and means of purification for those seeking final rewards in the afterlife.

Augustine believes that sin is the only form of Evil and it involves disobeying God's will. The suffering inflicted on humanity results from this sin. Augustine does not acknowledge natural evil, claiming that everything God created is essentially good, as stated in Genesis. Any misery caused by nature is a consequence of either not recognizing the goodness of creation or being punished by God due to sin.

According to Augustine, there is a hierarchy of fundamental goodness that includes both higher and lower goods. Although humans have the freedom to choose between them, they often select the lower good instead of the higher one. This choice results in alienation from the Absolute Good and leads to pain, suffering, and death. Therefore, evil should be viewed as a moral concern rather than simply a flaw or imperfection in the world that was created.

The fall of humanity in Genesis 3 implies that people must endure suffering and death due to their sin. In Romans 5:12, it is stated plainly that sin entered the world through one person and death followed, spreading to all because of their sin. This view releases God from responsibility for evil and holds humans accountable for their actions. However, it can also lead to attributing suffering to punishment for wrongdoing, causing concern about the suffering of the innocent.

A spiritualized response connects the suffering of the righteous to God's salvific plan and views the suffering of the innocent as redemptive, expressing divine love in a sinful world.

Augustinian teachings view evil as a “privation,” that is a severe distortion and negative expression of what is essentially good. According to this belief, God does not will evil in any positive form but only permits it while always keeping in mind a greater good, for which evil serves as the inevitable counterpart. While the free-will theodicy has had a significant impact on Christian theology historically, it provides insufficient understanding of moral evil and cannot explain natural disasters such as floods or earthquakes, making it inadequate for contemporary people of faith.

Augustine's analysis of evil and its origin serves as protection against the manichaeaistic dualistic response to the problem of evil. This view sees evil as the opposite of good, dividing all of creation into spiritual and good, or material and evil categories. However, this interpretation removes responsibility for the existence of evil from people, stating it is a natural part of the world. Augustine's approach instead emphasizes human freedom and God's authority in combating evil. Despite traditional explanations of evil as a lack of goodness, this does not provide a solution to the problem at hand - evil remains a problematic issue.

The mystery of evil is difficult to comprehend and can only be recognized for its impact on human dignity. Christian theodicy struggles to reconcile the coexistence of evil and God's uniqueness. Another form of theodicy, called the "eschatological" or teleological model, sees present suffering as necessary to achieve a better future state. This model looks towards

the future for justification of current suffering.

[20] The teleological theodicy provides comforting answers to most people, but it also has its challenges. By emphasizing the end-time scenario, it may reduce the urgency to address present evil conditions, leading to a critique by Karl Marx as "an opium of the poor" to suffering. The potential issue with this approach is that it may deprive sufferers of their ability to assess their strengths and emotional energy and discover truth to live by. [21] Hence, some may prefer the viewpoint of modern philosophers and theologians such as John Hick, who proposes a "soul-making theodicy" for human destiny amidst suffering and evil.

In his religious philosophy, John Hick turns to Iraneaus instead of Augustine and embraces the belief that humans are made in God's image. He sees life as a journey towards becoming more like God, and responding to God's presence in the world is key to achieving this. According to Hick, the struggles of the world help individuals grow spiritually and become "divinized children of God." Moral evil, which results from free will, can hinder this progress by leading individuals away from God. Natural evil, however, is viewed as a necessary challenge that encourages spiritual development. Despite its teleological perspective, there are still limitations to Hick's theodicy.

Father Zosima from the Brothers Karamazov presents a soul-making theodicy, informing a mourning mother that her pain and tears will ultimately transform into quiet joy and tenderness that purifies the soul. Although this offers limited comfort in the present, a child's illness or death may provide empathy and compassion for parents. However, most parents would reject these benefits to save

their child from suffering, especially from severe illnesses or evil such as torture during war or lack of food experienced by refugees. These circumstances often result in soul destruction instead of soul-making. Nevertheless, there are various forms of this teleological soul-making theodicy that offer some semblance of understanding and consolation.

Within Brothers Karamazov, Alyosha's thoughts and actions display a mystical theodicy centered around active love and compassion, which allow for a spiritual ideal of recognizing the interdependence of all creation with God as the unifying force. According to Dostoevsky, this perspective acknowledges that love and compassion surpass the destructive power of evil and suffering. However, the mystical understanding of the world, although accessible to everyone, may not be easily grasped or put into practice by many. This type of theodicy is situated in a teleological framework, where suffering is viewed as a necessary component of the soul's transformation into the image of God. The initial stage of mystical life involves purification through detachment, renunciation, and personal suffering, as noted in the writings of mystics.

Mystics have a different perspective from most teleological theodicies. They don't believe the purpose is located in the afterlife and instead see it as a goal that can be achieved in the present, both personally and socially. The mystical goal is to unite with a Trinitarian God, which shapes their understanding of suffering and theodicy.