Jake Bishop

Feb 2, 2001

Soul-Making Theodicy

John Hick

John Hick concludes his soul-making defense for God by making two statements. For the utmost good to come of our soul-making world first an afterlife must exist to finish the process, and then second in this afterlife all souls would be eventually “drawn” towards God.

This second statement contradicts the key basis for his argument; the value system that states that goodness gained by free choice is more valuable than goodness gained by the effect of some outside force.

In the basic nature of his argument this “drawing force” should not exist; humans, in their free choice, have the ability to choose to completely turn their backs on God forever, either in this life or in the next. This is important; for if this were not so, then the value of us fully choosing God and his goodness would be less. If life-after-death is necessary to finish and to give purpose to our free-will process, then it is necessary to recognize that if some souls can accept God and his goodness completely out of free-will in eternity, the possibility must exist for souls to turn away from Him eternally also. This implies that for the first statement to be true and the most valuable goodness be generated, the second statement cannot be true.