Christian theology

===Theodicy: Allowance of evil===
{{Further|Theodicy and the Bible}}
[[Theodicy]] can be said to be defense of God's goodness and omnipotence in view of the existence of evil. Specifically, Theodicy is a specific branch of [[theology]] and [[philosophy]] which attempts to reconcile belief in [[God]] with the perceived existence of [[evil]].<ref>Encyclopædia Britannica: Theodicy</ref> As such, theodicy can be said to attempt to justify the behaviour of [[God]] (at least insofar as God allows evil).

Responses to the problem of evil have sometimes been classified as ''defenses'' or ''theodicies''. However, authors disagree on the exact definitions.<ref name="Stanford">The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "[http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil The Problem of Evil] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180906123231/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil/ |date=6 September 2018 }}", [[Michael Tooley]]</ref><ref name="IepEvidential">The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "[http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/evil-evi.htm The Evidential Problem of Evil] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090410032149/http://www.iep.utm.edu/e/evil-evi.htm |date=10 April 2009 }}", Nick Trakakis</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopaedia |first=Ted |last=Honderich |author-link=Ted Honderich |year=2005 |title=theodicy |encyclopedia=The Oxford Companion to Philosophy |isbn=0-19-926479-1 |quote=[[John Hick]], for example, proposes a theodicy, while [[Alvin Plantinga]] formulates a defense. The idea of human free will often appears in both of these strategies, but in different ways.}}</ref> Generally, a ''defense'' attempts to show that there is no logical incompatibility between the existence of evil and the existence of God. A defense need not argue that this is a probable or plausible explanation, only that the defense is logically possible. A defense attempts to answer the ''logical'' problem of evil.

A theodicy, on the other hand, is a more ambitious attempt to provide a plausible justification for the existence of evil. A theodicy attempts to answer the ''evidential'' problem of evil.<ref name="IepEvidential" /> [[Richard Swinburne]] maintains that it does not make sense to assume there are greater goods, unless we know what they are, i.e., we have a successful theodicy.<ref name=swinburne05>{{cite encyclopaedia |first=Richard |last=Swinburne |author-link=Richard Swinburne |year=2005 |title=evil, the problem of |editor=[[Ted Honderich]] |encyclopedia=The Oxford Companion to Philosophy |isbn=0-19-926479-1}}</ref>

As an example, some authors see arguments including [[demon]]s or the [[fall of man]] as not logically impossible but not very plausible considering our knowledge about the world. Thus they are seen as defenses but not good theodicies.<ref name="IepEvidential"/> [[C. S. Lewis]] writes in his book [[The Problem of Pain]]:
{{Blockquote|We can, perhaps, conceive of a world in which God corrected the results of this abuse of free will by His creatures at every moment: so that a wooden beam became soft as grass when it was used as a weapon, and the air refused to obey me if I attempted to set up in it the sound waves that carry lies or insults. But such a world would be one in which wrong actions were impossible, and in which, therefore, freedom of the will would be void; nay, if the principle were carried out to its logical conclusion, evil thoughts would be impossible, for the cerebral matter which we use in thinking would refuse its task when we attempted to frame them.<ref>Lewis, C. S., ''The Problem of Pain'' HarperCollins:New York, 1996 pp. 24–25</ref>}}

Another possible answer is that the world is corrupted due to the sin of mankind. Some answer that because of sin, the world has fallen from the grace of God, and is not perfect. Therefore, evils and imperfections persist because the world is fallen.{{citation needed|date=July 2022}} [[William A. Dembski]] argues that the effects of Adam's sin recorded in the Book of Genesis were 'back-dated' by God, and hence applied to the earlier history of the universe.<ref>William A. Dembski, The End of Christianity: Finding a Good God in an Evil World. (Nashville: Broadman and Holman, 2009</ref>

Evil is sometimes seen as a test or trial for humans. [[Irenaeus|Irenaeus of Lyons]] and more recently [[John Hick]] have argued that evil and suffering are necessary for spiritual growth. This is often combined with the free will argument by arguing that such spiritual growth requires free will decisions. A problem with this is that many evils do not seem to cause any kind of spiritual growth, or even permit it, as when a child is abused from birth and becomes, seemingly inevitably, a brutal adult.

The problem of evil is often phrased in the form: ''Why do bad things happen to good people?''. [[Christianity]] teach that all people are inherently sinful due to the [[fall of man]] and [[original sin]]; for example, [[Calvinist]] theology follows a doctrine called [[federal headship]], which argues that the first man, [[Adam and Eve|Adam]], was the legal representative of the entire human race. A counterargument to the basic version of this principle is that an omniscient God would have predicted this, when he created the world, and an omnipotent God could have prevented it.

The [[Book of Isaiah]] clearly claims that God is the source of at least some natural disasters, but Isaiah doesn't attempt to explain the motivation behind the creation of evil.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah+45%3A7&version=KJV|title=Bible Gateway passage: Isaiah 45:7 – King James Version|website=Bible Gateway}}</ref> In contrast, the [[Book of Job]] is one of the most widely known formulations of the problem of evil in Western thought. In it, Satan challenges God regarding his servant Job, claiming that Job only serves God for the blessings and protection that he receives from him. God allows Satan to plague Job and his family in a number of ways, with the limitation that Satan may not take Job's life (but his children are killed). Job discusses this with three friends and questions God regarding his suffering which he finds to be unjust. God responds in a speech and then more than restores Job's prior health, wealth, and gives him new children.

[[Bart D. Ehrman]] argues that different parts of the Bible give different answers. One example is evil as punishment for sin or as a consequence of sin. Ehrman writes that this seems to be based on some notion of free will although this argument is never explicitly mentioned in the Bible. Another argument is that suffering ultimately achieves a greater good, possibly for persons other than the sufferer, that would not have been possible otherwise. The Book of Job offers two different answers: suffering is a test, and you will be rewarded later for passing it; another that God in his might chooses not to reveal his reasons. [[Ecclesiastes]] sees suffering as beyond human abilities to comprehend. [[Apocalyptic literature|Apocalyptic]] parts, including the [[New Testament]], see suffering as due to cosmic evil forces, that God for mysterious reasons has given power over the world, but which will soon be defeated and things will be set right.<ref>Ehrman, Bart D., ''God's Problem: How the Bible Fails to Answer Our Most Important Question – Why We Suffer''. HarperOne, 2008</ref>