Page "Theodicy" Paragraph 12

Dr Philip Irving Mitchell of the Dallas Baptist University notes that some philosophers have cast the pursuit of theodicy as a modern one, as earlier scholars used the problem of evil to support the existence of one particular god over another, explain wisdom, or explain a conversion, rather than to justify God's goodness.

Professor Sarah Iles Johnston argues that ancient civilizations, such as the ancient Mesopotamians, Greeks, Romans, and Egyptians held polytheistic beliefs that may have enabled them to deal with the concept of theodicy differently.

These religions taught the existence of many gods and goddesses who controlled various aspects of daily life.

These early religions may have avoided the question of theodicy by endowing their deities with the same flaws and jealousies that plagued humanity.

No one god or goddess was fundamentally good or evil ; this explained that bad things could happen to good people if they angered a deity because the gods could exercise the same free will that humankind possesses.

Such religions taught that some gods were more inclined to be helpful and benevolent, while others were more likely to be spiteful and aggressive.

In this sense, the evil gods could be blamed for misfortune, while the good gods could be petitioned with prayer and sacrifices to make things right.

There was still a sense of justice in that individuals that were right with the gods could avoid punishment.