a) Belief that creation was good; evil and suffering is a privation of good due to the fall of the angels and man because of the misuse of free will, soul-deciding, significance of reconciliation.
b) Belief that creation is a mix of good and evil linked to the vale of soul making theodicy, including free will defence, best of all possible worlds, epistemic distance, eschatological justification.
c) Process theodicy: God is not responsible for evil and suffering, but he is co-sufferer and cannot coerce the free will of human agents.
d) Strengths and weaknesses of theodicies and solutions: compatibility or otherwise with modern views about origins of life, nature of God, innocent suffering, hypothesis of life after death.
1 Explore key ideas of one solution to the problem of suffering. (8) 2018 Exam Q
1 Explore Either the Augustinian or Irenean Theodicy. (8)
1 Explore key ideas in one theodicy or solution to the problem of evil. (8) 2020 AS Q
1 Explore the concepts of Natural and Moral Evil in the Augustinian Theodicy. (8)
1 Explore the belief that creation was good; evil and suffering is a privation of good due to the fall of the angels and man because of the misuse of free will.
1 Explore the idea of theodicy as soul-deciding and the significance of the idea of reconciliation. (8)
1 Explore the Augustinian theodicy as a response to the problem of suffering. (8)
1 Explore the Irenaean solution to the problem of evil and suffering. (8)
1 Explore the ideas of Irenaeus in relation to the problem of evil and suffering. (8)
1 Explore the belief that creation is a mix of good and evil and the linked idea of to the vale of soul making theodicy. (8)
1 Explore the weakness of the Irenaean solution to the problem of evil and suffering. (8)
1. Explore Leibniz’s theodicy idea that this is best of all possible worlds in the (8)
1 Explore the ideas of epistemic distance and eschatological justification. (8)
1 Explore epistemic distance, and eschatological justification in the Irenaean theodicy as a response to the problem of suffering. (8)
1 Explore the Process solution to the problem of evil and suffering. (8)
1 Explore how Griffin’s Process theodicy and Hick’s Soul Making theodicy respond to the problem of evil and suffering . (8)
1 Explore the free-will defence as a response to the problem of suffering. (8)
1 Explore the free-will defence in relation to the problem of evil and suffering. (8)
1 Explore process theodicy as an alternative response to the problem of suffering. (8)
1 Explore the ideas of the process theodicy in relation to the problem of evil and suffering. (8)
1. Explore the idea that God is not responsible for evil and suffering, but he is co-sufferer and cannot coerce the free will of human agents. (8)
2. Assess the strengths and weaknesses of solutions to the problem of evil and suffering. (12)
2. Assess Augustine’s theodicy. (12)
2. Assess Irenaeus’ theodicy. (12)
2. Assess Hick’s reworking of the Irenaean theodicy. (12)
2 Assess the view that Irenaeus solution offers a better response to the problem of evil than Augustine. (12)
2 Assess the extent to which the Augustinian theodicy means the problem of suffering signifies little to a religious believer. (12)
2. Assess Process theodicy. (12)
2. Assess the claim that God is not responsible for evil and suffering. (12)
2. Assess the claim that God is not responsible for evil and suffering, but he is co-sufferer and cannot coerce the free will of human agents. (12)
2. Assess the importance of the view that creation was good and that evil and suffering is a privation of good due to the fall of the angels and man because of the misuse of free will. (12)
2 Assess the strenghts of Augustine’s theodicy. (12)
2. Assess the credibility of the claim 'monotheism can be defended in the face of evil'. (12)
2 Assess Hick’s soul making theodicy. (12)
2 Assess the strengths of claim that Augustine’s use of original perfection and the Fall solves the problem of evil. (12)
2 Assess the importance of claim the modern free will defense is successful in rebutting the logical problem of evil. (12)
2 Assess the strengths of claim that creation is a mix of good and evil and this world is the vale of soul making. (12)
2 Assess the significance of the compatibility or otherwise of Augustines theodicy with modern views about origins of life. (12)
2 Assess how it is the case that this is the best of all possible worlds. (12)
2 Assess the credibility of Hicks claim that God must remain at an epistemic distance and that eschatological justification is successful. (12)
2 Assess the weaknesses of claim that God is not responsible for evil and suffering, but he is co-sufferer and cannot coerce the free will of human agents. (12)
2 Assess the strengths of Process theodicy. (12) 2017 AS Q
2 Assess how far it is the case that the innocent suffering undermines the nature of God and given the hypothesis of life after death. (12)
2 Assess how far it is the case that 'An omnibenevolent God would not allow evil and suffering to exist in the world'. (12)
3b Analyse TWO solutions to this problem and comment on their success. (20)
3b Analyse the significance of the Augustinian theodicy . (20)
3b Analyse the view that no satisfactory solutions can be found to the problem of evil and suffering. (20) 2020
3b Analyse the credibility of the view that it is possible to defend monotheism in the face of the existence of evil. (20)
3b Analyse which logical or evidential aspects of the problem of evil pose the greatest challenge to belief. (20)
3b Analyse the success of Augustine in resolving the problem of evil. (20)
3b Analyse the weaknesses of the claim that 'Hick’s reworking of the Irenaean theodicy successfully responds to the problem of evil' (20)
3b Analyse the strengths of Hick’s soul making theodicy. (20)
3b Analyse the value of the free will defense in debates about the problem of evil. (20)
3b Analyse the extent to which it can be argued that the free will defense is successful in responding to the evidential problem of evil. (20)
3b Analyse the significance of Leibniz's argument that 'this is the best of all possible worlds.' (20)
3b Analyse the success of Leibniz's argument that this is the best of all possible worlds. (20)
3b Analyse the view that Hick’s use of epistemic distance and eschatological justification fail to justify Gods nature. (20)
3b) Analayse the success of John Hick’s argument for soul-making as a development of Irenaeus’ theodicy. (20)
3b Analyse the strenghs and weakness of the view God must remain at an epistemic distance and that eschatological justification is successful. (20)
3b Analyse the significance of Process theodicy. (20)
3b Analyse the claim the Process theodicy is better than the Free Will defence. (20)
3b Analyse the relevance of claim that God is not responsible for evil and suffering, but he is co-sufferer and cannot coerce the free will of human agents. (20)
3b Analyse the relevance of claim that Augustine’s use of original perfection and the Fall solves the problem of evil . (20)
3b Analyse the strengths and weakness of the view that the modern free will defense is unsuccessful in rebutting the evidential problem of evil. (20)
3b Analyse the extent to which it can be argued it is the case that the suffering of the innocent undermines the nature of God even given the hypothesis of life after death. (20)
4. Evaluate two solutions and critically comment of their success. (30)
4 Evaluate the success or otherwise of any two theodicies. (30)
4. Evaluate the meaning and significance of the claim that 'Augustine solves the logical problem of evil’. (30)
4 Evaluate the opinion that 'Hick cannot solve the evidential problem of evil'. (30)
4 Evaluate the claim that 'natural evil enables human beings to reach divine likeness'. (30)
4 Evaluate to what extent does Augustine’s theodicy succeed in defending God against the charge of allowing evil and the suffering it causes . (30)
4 Evaluate the extent to which it can be argued that the free will defense is successful in responding to the evidential problem of evil. (30)
4 Evaluate the relative importance of the question 'Why would a perfect God need to put people through a ‘vale of soul-making?’ (30)
4 Evaluate to what extent is the evidential problem of evil a greater challenge to Classical Theism than the logical problem of evil?’ (30)
4 Evaluate the significance of Leibniz's argument that 'this is the best of all possible worlds in resolving the problem of evil.' (30)
4. Evaluate the meaning and significance of Hick’s use of epistemic distance and eschatological justification in justifying Gods nature and existence. (30)
4 Evaluate the claim that 'it possible to successfully defend monotheism in the face of evil.’ (30)
4 Evaluate the claim 'There is no solution to the problem of evil and suffering.' (30)
4 Evaluate the strengths and weakness of the view that God is not responsible for evil and suffering, but he is co-sufferer and cannot coerce the free will of human agents. . (30)
4 Evaluate the Process rather than Augustinian theodicy is a better response to the problem of evil. (30)
4 Evaluate the importance of the modern free will defense in rebutting the problem of evil. (30)
4 Evaluate the extent to which it can be argued that the suffering of the innocent undermines the nature of God even given the hypothesis of life after death. (30)
4 Evaluate the claim ‘No theodicy or solution justifies the presence of evil and suffering’. (30)