Evil and suffering — AQA A-Level Religious Studies

The problem of evil and suffering is one of the most significant challenges to religious belief, particularly within Christianity. It questions how an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God can allow evil and suffering to exist. This topic is central to the AQA A-Level Religious Studies course, as it examines the coherence of theism and the adequacy of theodicies. Students explore both moral evil (caused by human free will) and natural evil (caused by natural processes), and evaluate responses from philosophers and theologians such as Augustine, Irenaeus, and John Hick.

Understanding this topic is crucial because it forces students to engage with deep philosophical and theological debates that have real-world implications. It also develops critical thinking skills, as students must assess arguments for and against the existence of God in light of evil. The topic connects to broader themes in the philosophy of religion, such as the nature of God, free will, and life after death. Mastery of this area is essential for achieving high marks in the A-Level exam, as it frequently appears in essay questions.

In the AQA specification, the problem of evil is studied under the philosophy of religion component. Students are expected to know the logical and evidential problem of evil, theodicies (Augustinian, Irenaean, and process theodicy), and the responses of scholars like Alvin Plantinga (free will defence) and Richard Swinburne (soul-making). The topic also requires evaluation of whether evil and suffering can be justified, and whether they undermine religious belief entirely.

• →The logical problem of evil: The claim that the existence of evil is logically incompatible with the existence of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God (e.g., J.L. Mackie's inconsistent triad).
• →The evidential problem of evil: The argument that the amount and intensity of evil in the world makes belief in God improbable (e.g., William Rowe's example of a fawn dying in a forest fire).
• →Augustinian theodicy: Evil as a privation of good, resulting from the Fall and human free will; God is not responsible for evil.
• →Irenaean theodicy: Evil as necessary for soul-making and moral development; God allows evil to bring about greater goods (e.g., John Hick's vale of soul-making).
• →Free will defence: Alvin Plantinga's argument that it is possible that God cannot create a world with free creatures who always choose good; thus, evil is a necessary consequence of free will.

• Distinction between natural and moral evil
• Understanding of the logical problem of evil
• Understanding of the evidential problem of evil
• Explanation of Hick’s soul-making theodicy
• Explanation of the free will defence
• Explanation of Process theodicy as presented by Griffin
• Evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of each theodicy

• 💡Ensure clear distinction between the logical and evidential problems of evil.
• 💡When discussing soul-making, focus specifically on Hick's interpretation.
• 💡When discussing Process theodicy, ensure it is linked to Griffin's presentation.
• 💡Always evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each response as required by the specification.
• 💡Use precise terminology: In essays, always define key terms like 'omnipotent', 'omnibenevolent', 'moral evil', and 'natural evil'. This shows the examiner you understand the concepts and can apply them accurately.
• 💡Evaluate both sides: A top-level response must critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of each theodicy. For example, while Hick's soul-making theodicy explains evil as necessary for growth, it struggles to justify excessive suffering (e.g., the Holocaust).
• 💡Link to scholars: Reference specific philosophers and their arguments (e.g., Mackie, Plantinga, Hick). This demonstrates depth of knowledge and engagement with academic debate. Avoid vague statements like 'some people say'.

• Misconception: The problem of evil only applies to Christianity. Correction: While the problem is often discussed in a Christian context, it challenges any theistic belief in an all-powerful, all-good God. However, some religions (e.g., Buddhism) do not posit such a God, so the problem is less relevant.
• Misconception: Theodicies prove that God exists. Correction: Theodicies are attempts to defend God's existence despite evil; they do not prove God exists but aim to show that evil does not disprove God. Students should evaluate their strengths and weaknesses, not treat them as conclusive proofs.
• Misconception: Natural evil is always caused by human sin. Correction: While Augustine's theodicy links natural evil to the Fall, many theologians (e.g., Irenaeus) see natural evil as part of a world designed for soul-making. Modern science shows natural evil predates humans, so this view is problematic.