Compare St. Augustine’s and John Hick’s Theodicy
Introduction
Theodicy is the attempt to justify God’s goodness despite the existence of evil in the world. Two major theodicies come from St. Augustine and John Hick. While both aim to solve the problem of evil, their approaches are very different in terms of assumptions, arguments, and implications.
St. Augustine’s Theodicy
- Based on Christian doctrine and the Bible.
- Argues that God created a perfect world without evil.
- All evil is the result of human free will, not God’s creation.
- Moral evil came through Adam and Eve’s original sin.
- Natural evil (like suffering) is a punishment for that sin.
- Believes in a fallen world that needs redemption through Jesus Christ.
Key Idea: Evil is not a thing but a lack of good (privatio boni). It is the corruption of good, not something God created.
John Hick’s Theodicy (Soul-Making Theodicy)
- Modern and influenced by Immanuel Kant and process theology.
- God allows evil to help human beings grow spiritually and morally.
- The world is a “vale of soul-making” — a place for development and maturity.
- Free will is essential, as love and moral growth must be chosen, not forced.
- God keeps a distance (epistemic distance) to preserve human freedom.
- Ultimate goal: humans become “children of God” through their life struggles.
Comparison
| Aspect | St. Augustine | John Hick |
|---|---|---|
| Origin of Evil | Human sin | Part of God’s plan for growth |
| World at Creation | Perfect, then corrupted | Created imperfect for soul-making |
| View of Suffering | Punishment for sin | Necessary for moral development |
| Free Will | Misused by humans | Given to enable growth |
| Role of God | Judge and Redeemer | Loving Creator and Trainer |
Conclusion
St. Augustine sees evil as a result of human failure in a perfect world, while John Hick sees evil as necessary for human growth in an imperfect but purposeful world. Both defend God’s goodness but from different theological and philosophical positions.