Criticisms of Augustine's theodicy

?

1. Augustine depends on a very literal reading of the Bible. He treats the Genesis as historical fact. Not only that but he also thinks that tiny people reside in men’s testicles – which is how we were all seminally present during the Original Sin. Science has now debunked this belief, so this theodicy is undermined scientifically. Even if this belief wasn’t debunked, it’s unjust to blame anyone else other than Adam and Eve because they were the actual perpetrators. God wouldn't punish like this if he were loving and just. Modern theologians and liberal Christians reject the literal view of the Genesis and instead claim it’s the inclination to do the wrong thing.

2. Creation wouldn’t go wrong if it were perfect. Surely, perfection entails the inability to go wrong. If God created Hell, then he created a place of eternal suffering.

3. What does it mean to say a stone is good? A stone is good for something, beautiful or even useful but these are all the opinions of another person. A stone may just exist for the sake of existing. Augustine points to the Genesis creation story where God is explicitly described as calling his creation good, however, this is God’s opinion rather than pointing towards any intrinsic value. Can goodness be measured? Is a horse more good than a stone? The term good itself has more than one meaning when comparing different things. A horse is good if it functions…

Comments

No comments have yet been made