LYCOS RETRIEVER 
Theodicy: Evil
built 634 days ago
In their ”Introduction,” Antti Laato and Johannes De Moor briefly trace the discussion of ‘theodicy’ from its theological beginnings to its much broader philosophical and sociological discourse. They note that the term, after Leibniz, has come to indicate ‘different existential problems when people have to confront evil and suffering’ (p. xi). Considering theodicy in this wider sense, this volume aims to ‘trace back the theodicy problem to its earliest roots in the polytheistic religions of the ancient Near East and pursue its further development through the Bible and ancient Judaism’ (p. xi). The project is limited to written sources that tackle the issue.
Source:
For Betz, the sixth petition is nothing less than a capsule theodicy, summoning God to remove the evil which causes temptation. It compels God to choose between "becoming entangled in evil" by permitting it to continue, or to "take seriously his obligation to be the guarantor and preserver of righteousness" by putting an end to evil. In other words, the Lord's Prayer, like some forms of post-Holocaust Judaism (though Betz does not draw this parallel), "stops just short of reprimanding God." But, precisely because the petitioners are at their wits' end, they must appeal to God, for there is none other who can help them. They are "people waiting who know that, in some way and at some time, God will accomplish one thing most certainly, the final conquest and elimination of evil."
Source:
A theodicy is an argument for the justice of God in the face of evil and suffering in the world. The word theodicy is derived from the Greek words theos (god) and dike (justice). It was first used by the philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) in the early eighteenth century. It is common to talk about the theodicy problem, or the problem of evil, as created by the tension, found mainly in monotheistic religions, between the belief that the world is created by a God who is omnipotent, omniscient, and wholly good, and the observation that there exists immense evil and suffering in the world. Critics argue that such a religious belief is either contradictory or morally unacceptable, and, consequently, can not be true.
Source:
The fierce resistance to a theodicy rooted in God's abusiveness stems from the set of commonsensical questions: Who wants a God Who is abusive?! Who wants to know that the Ground of all reality is evil?! If God is truly abusive, who wants to have a relationship with such a God?! If the Ground of all reality is really evil, who wants to worship such a Being?! Diane has put it very well:[16]
Source:
Maltheist theodicy answers this question by noting that the "problem of evil" is not a problem at all�the initial question has a simple answer, there is no way that a benevolent omnipotent God would allow evil in the world. Therefore, they reason, God is either not benevolent or not omnipotent. Both of these are... anathema to to orthodox Christian theology.
Source:
A theodicy is a theory about why an omnipotent God allows evil to exist in the world. In other words, a theodicy contains speculations about God's actual purposes in allowing evil to exist in the world. A theodicy is required to explain how an omnibenevolent, omnipotent and omniscient God can have allowed terrible evil to occur, as these three attributes appear to be in opposition to each other. A theodicy is not required if God is not held to be either omnipotent, or omniscient, or omnibenevolent.
Source:
MORE ABOUT
Evil