Augustinian theodicy and the problem of Evil

The problem of evil is traditionally seen as the problem of a world in which an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving God exists and yet pain and suffering still exist.  Any response to this problem needs to explain two kinds of evil--human evil (murder, child abuse, theft) and natural disasters (tornado's, earthquakes, disease).

The logical form of this problem is...

1) If God is omniscient (all-knowing) then God knows about evil

2) If God is omnipotent (all-powerful) then God can destroy evil

3) If God is omni-benevolent (all-loving) then God would want to end evil

4) Evil exisits

------------------------------

TF: God either lacks one of the omni-  characteristics, or,God does not exist.

The main traditional response to the problem of evil was formulated by Augustine.  According to Augustine God is the highest good and is unchangeable.  In contrast to God, everything created by God is necessarily good, although the amount of goodness can vary between created being.  Created things are changeable in space and time, souls are changeable only in time.

According to Augustine, God did not create evil, rather evil is the absence, or corruption of something good.  Analogously--darkness is the absence of light, a hole in the ground, an eye being blind; darkness, blindness, holes in the ground are all real but there is nothing in them.

Augustine holds that evil always consists of the malfunctioning of something that is in itself good.  Evil came about through free will, the free will of angels and humans.  Some of the angels turned from the supreme good--which is God--to lesser goods, thereby rebelling against their creator.  They in turn tempted man.  This is the source of human evil.

The natural evils--disease, earthquakes, storms--are penal consequences of sin, because humanity was intended to be guardian of the earth and human sin has set nature awry.  For Augustine, "all evil is wither sin or punishment for sin."

Augustinian theodicy fulfills the intention of clearing the creator of any responsibility for the existence of evil.  My biggest problem with this solution--in a theological sense--falls in line with Schleirmacher who noted that the idea of a perfect creation spontaneously going wrong without cause is a self-contradiction which amounts to self creation of evil out of nothing.  A flawless creation would never go wrong and if the creation does go wrong the ultimate responsibility lies with the creator.  I believe accepting a fallible God, one that lacks one of the omni- characteristics is a better approach.  It allows an explanation that though may be unsettling to human intuition of the meaning of God, retains a solution which does not self contradict.