Assignment Brief

HTH-505: Benchmark – The Problem of Evil and Theodicy Research Paper

Assignment Instructions

Assessment Description

The “Problem of Evil” remains one of the most significant theological and philosophical challenges to the Christian worldview. In this Benchmark assignment, you are required to compose a 1,250–1,500-word research paper that rigorously analyzes the logical and evidential aspects of the problem of evil and constructs a theological defense (theodicy) consistent with orthodox Christian doctrine.

Your objective is not merely to describe the problem but to evaluate the sufficiency of major theodicies (e.g., Free Will Defense, Soul-Making Theodicy) and articulate how a Christian understanding of God’s omnipotence, omniscience, and omnibenevolence remains coherent amidst the reality of suffering.

Paper Requirements

Your research paper must address the following components in detail:

1. Definition and Explication: Clearly define the “Logical Problem of Evil” (Mackie/Hume) and the “Evidential Problem of Evil” (Rowe). Explain why these arguments pose a threat to classical theism.
2. Critical Analysis of Theodicies: Select two major Christian theodicies (e.g., Augustine’s Privation View, Plantinga’s Free Will Defense, Hick’s Soul-Making, or Open Theism). Analyze the strengths and theological risks of each position.
3. Theological Synthesis: Construct a synthesized argument that defends the compatibility of God’s goodness and sovereignty with the existence of evil. You must integrate biblical theology (referencing Scripture) and systematic theology (referencing required course texts).
4. Practical Application: Briefly discuss how your proposed theodicy provides pastoral comfort to a believer experiencing suffering. Theoretical correctness must translate into pastoral utility.

Formatting and Research Guidelines

• Word Count: 1,250–1,500 words (excluding title page and references).
• Documentation: Use Turabian (or APA 7, depending on specific section) style for citations and the bibliography.
• Sources: You are required to use the Bible and a minimum of 5-7 scholarly sources published between 2018 and 2026. These must be peer-reviewed journal articles or academic texts; popular blogs or Wikipedia are not permitted.
• Submission: Submit your paper as a Word document (.docx) to the digital classroom (LMS) dropbox.

Grading Rubric Criteria (Highlights)

• Content (30%): The paper demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the logical vs. evidential problem of evil and accurately represents the chosen theodicies.
• Critical Thinking & Synthesis (30%): The argument is logically sound, avoids straw-man fallacies, and successfully synthesizes biblical data with philosophical reasoning.
• Research & Sources (20%): Use of at least 5 scholarly sources is evident; sources are integrated smoothly to support the argument.
• Mechanics & Formatting (20%): The paper is free of grammatical errors and strictly adheres to Turabian/APA formatting standards.

“The evidential problem of evil, as articulated by William Rowe, shifts the burden of proof from logical inconsistency to specific instances of intense suffering that appear gratuitous. However, Plantinga’s Free Will Defense successfully counters the logical problem by demonstrating that a world containing significantly free creatures is metaphysically incompatible with a guarantee of moral perfection. Consequently, if genuine love requires the possibility of rejection, God’s decision to actualize a world with the potential for moral evil is not a negation of His omnibenevolence but a necessary condition for the existence of relational good.”

2. Suggested References (2018–2026)
These are real, high-quality, peer-reviewed sources suitable for this assignment.

Loke, A. T. E. (2022). Evil, Sin, and Christian Theism. Routledge.

Context: A comprehensive modern defense of Christian theism against the problem of evil, specifically addressing original sin and the fall.

DOI/Link: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003255395

Sollereder, B. (2019). God, Evolution, and Animal Suffering: Theodicy without a Fall. Routledge.

Context: Addresses the specific problem of “natural evil” and animal suffering, a key component of the evidential argument.

DOI/Link: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429462791

Sterba, J. P. (2019). Is a Good God Logically Possible? Palgrave Macmillan.

Context: A rigorous philosophical challenge to the Free Will Defense, arguing that a good God is logically incompatible with the degree of evil in the world (useful for the “counter-argument” section).

DOI/Link: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05367-1

Ekstrom, L. W. (2021). God, Suffering, and the Value of Free Will. Oxford University Press.

Context: Re-evaluates the value of free will in theodicies, questioning if the cost of suffering is worth the freedom given.

DOI/Link: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197556562.001.0001

Lougheed, K. (2020). The Epistemic Benefits of Skeptical Theism. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 87(1), 31–51.

Context: A strong resource for defending the “Skeptical Theism” position (that humans are cognitively limited in understanding God’s reasons).

DOI/Link: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-019-09724-5