The free will defense argues as follows (where "T" is a possible theodicy -- like "Evil results from the abuse of creaturely free will and could be eliminated only by taking away this free will -- which would result in a less-good universe"):
The free will defense argues as follows (where "T" is a possible theodicy -- like "Evil results from the abuse of creaturely free will and could be eliminated only by taking away this free will -- which would result in a less-good universe"):
To argue this way, we needn't hold that T is true or even plausible. We only have to claim that T is consistent with the existence of God and entails the existence of evil.
The free will defense argues as follows (where "T" is a possible theodicy -- like "Evil results from the abuse of creaturely free will and could be eliminated only by taking away this free will -- which would result in a less-good universe"):
This is how the free will defense goes.