The Free Will DefenceAugustine and Irenaeus

Augustine argues that it was free will that led to the original sin of Adam and Eve

This resulted in their subsequent expulsion from paradise by God and the introduction of pain and suffering into their lives and the lives of their descendents

So Augustine maintains that although God created a perfect world, evil was introduced by the choices humans made, and thus it is the responsibility of humans not of God

Augustine

Irenaeus thought free will is necessary if we are to improve ourselves and the world, and to work towards spiritual maturity and noble actions

So evil is an unfortunate side effect of God granting us free will. But it is a price worth paying if there is also the possibility that human free will can lead to salvation and redemption

Irenaeus

Both the Augustinian and Irenaean ‘free will defences’ view moral evil as stemming from the free choices of humans

They also both view free will as a positive quality that is a gift from God to humans

So...

Do Irenaeus’ and Augustine’s Free Will Defences answer the problem of evil?

Discussion

Peter Vardy offers a summary of the free will defence:1. The highest good for humans is a loving

relationship with God2. Love must be freely chosen3. So God, who is all powerful and loving, gave

humans free will (in order to achieve 1)4. Genuine free will means that humans will

sometimes choose good, and sometimes evil5. Therefore evil exists in order that humans may

choose a loving relationship with God

Summary

Hick and Swinburne both point out that God does wish not to create a cosy ‘toy world’ for his human ‘pets’ to live in

So it’s a mistake to look at the world and wonder why it isn’t more pleasant for humans

A much greater good than pleasure is the relationship humans can have with God, and this can only be a genuine relationship if we have free will

Hick and Swinburne

What positives are there for the free will defence?

What criticisms can you think of for the free will defence?

What Do You Think?