Skip to main content
EnglandReligious StudiesSyllabus dot point

Is the existence of evil and suffering compatible with an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent God, and do the Augustinian and Irenaean theodicies succeed?

Component 01 The problem of evil: the logical and evidential problems (Mackie, Rowe), the Augustinian theodicy (privation, the Fall, free will) and the Irenaean (Hick's soul-making) theodicy, with their strengths and weaknesses.

An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the problem of evil. Covers the logical problem (Mackie's inconsistent triad), the evidential problem (Rowe), the Augustinian theodicy (privation of good, the Fall, free will) and the Irenaean soul-making theodicy (Hick), with the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.817 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. The answer
  3. Examples in context
  4. Try this

What this dot point is asking

OCR Component 01 frames suffering as "the challenge for religious belief of the problem of evil". The challenge has two forms, logical and evidential, and the believer answers with a theodicy, a justification of God in the face of evil. You study the Augustinian theodicy (evil as privation, the Fall, free will) and the Irenaean theodicy as developed by Hick (soul-making). The exam rewards stating the problem sharply, explaining each theodicy precisely, and then evaluating whether either justifies the suffering we actually observe.

The answer

The logical and evidential problems

The Augustinian theodicy

The Irenaean (soul-making) theodicy

Strengths and weaknesses

  • Augustinian strengths: preserves God's goodness; locates moral evil in free will. Weaknesses: a perfect creation should not go wrong (Schleiermacher calls this logically incoherent); a literal Fall conflicts with evolution; inherited guilt and the punishment of all seem unjust; natural evil is poorly explained.
  • Irenaean strengths: makes freedom and suffering purposeful; fits an evolving universe. Weaknesses: the amount and unfair distribution of suffering seem excessive (Rowe); animal suffering and the suffering of those who never grow are unexplained; universalism seems to remove the moral seriousness of our choices.

Examples in context

Try this

Q1. "The problem of evil makes belief in God irrational." Discuss. [40 marks]

  • What the marker wants. An AO2 essay weighing the logical and evidential problems against the Augustinian and Irenaean theodicies, judging whether either rescues belief, especially over natural evil and the scale of suffering. AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15.

Q2. Assess whether the free-will defence adequately explains natural evil. [40 marks]

  • Cue. The free-will defence fits moral evil but not earthquakes and disease unless tied to a literal Fall. Weigh this gap against Hick's stable-world account and judge.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

OCR H573/01 2017 (style)20 marksAssess the success of the Augustinian theodicy in solving the problem of evil. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)
Show worked answer →

A 40-mark Component 01 essay on the six-level scheme (AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15). Outlining the theodicy earns AO1; the higher levels reward judging whether it succeeds.

Explain (AO1). Augustine holds evil is not a substance but a privation of good (privatio boni). God's creation was wholly good; evil entered through the free choice of angels and humans (the Fall), so the fault is ours, not God's. All humans share original sin and so deserve suffering; God's grace offers redemption to some.

Evaluate (AO2). Strengths: it preserves God's goodness and locates evil in free will. Weaknesses: a perfect creation should not go wrong; Schleiermacher calls this incoherent; the science of evolution contradicts a literal Fall; inherited guilt and the punishment of all seem unjust, and natural evil is poorly explained.

Judge. A top answer decides whether the theodicy succeeds, partly succeeds, or fails, and defends the verdict.

OCR H573/01 2020 (style)20 marksCritically assess Hick's soul-making theodicy as a response to the problem of evil. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)
Show worked answer →

A levels-of-response essay testing AO1 understanding of the Irenaean theodicy and AO2 evaluation of how convincing it is.

Explain. Following Irenaeus, Hick argues humans are created immature, at an "epistemic distance" from God, in a world that is a "vale of soul-making". Genuine freedom and real suffering are necessary to develop virtues and grow into God's likeness; universal salvation finally justifies the process.

Evaluate. Strengths: it makes free will and suffering purposeful and fits an evolving world. Weaknesses: the amount and distribution of suffering seem excessive and unfair (Rowe's fawn); animal suffering and the suffering of those who never "grow" are unexplained; universalism removes the moral point of the choices.

Judge. A high-level answer weighs whether soul-making justifies the suffering we actually see, and reaches a justified conclusion.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this