Assignment 2: The Theology of Suffering and Evil
Course:
THEO 340 – Christian Doctrines II (Liberty University / Durham University TRS3021 Equivalent)
Assignment Overview
Compose a 1,200–1,500-word analytical essay exploring how Christian theology responds to the enduring question of suffering and evil. Engage with classical and contemporary theological arguments concerning divine goodness, omnipotence, and human freedom. Students should demonstrate critical understanding of historical and modern theodicies and assess their coherence in light of Scripture and contemporary moral challenges.
✅
Complex assessment task? We know what markers reward.
Our assessment specialists decode your marking rubric and deliver model answers targeting distinction criteria — written, practical, and portfolio assessments at US, UK, Australian, and Canadian universities.
✓ Plagiarism-free · ✓ 100% human-written · ✓ Free revisions · ✓ Confidential
🔒 No payment to start · From $11/page
Assignment Instructions
- Essay Focus: Evaluate the theological implications of suffering and evil for Christian faith. Address the tension between divine sovereignty and human suffering, using at least two theologians (e.g., Augustine, Irenaeus, Moltmann, Plantinga, Hick, or Barth).
- Structure:
- Introduction – Define the “problem of evil” and its theological significance (150–200 words)
- Section 1 – Historical Theodicies (400–500 words)
- Section 2 – Contemporary Responses (400–500 words)
- Section 3 – Personal Theological Reflection (250–300 words)
- Conclusion – Summarize the argument and theological insight gained (100–150 words)
- Sources: Use a minimum of five peer-reviewed scholarly sources published between 2018 and 2026, following Harvard referencing style.
- Formatting: Times New Roman, 12 pt font, double-spaced, 1-inch margins.
- Submission: Upload to the Learning Management System (LMS) under Week 6 Assignment by 11:59 PM Sunday (local time).
Assessment Criteria (Marking Rubric)
| Criteria | Excellent (A) | Proficient (B–C) | Needs Improvement (D–F) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Understanding of Theological Issues (30%) | Demonstrates comprehensive, critical engagement with theological positions; integrates sources seamlessly. | Shows general understanding with limited depth or synthesis. | Lacks clarity or misrepresents theological arguments. |
| Analytical Depth (25%) | Offers nuanced critique of differing theodicies; balances philosophical and theological reasoning. | Partial analysis; descriptive rather than evaluative. | Minimal or inconsistent analysis. |
| Integration of Sources (20%) | Skillfully incorporates scholarly literature; citations accurate and relevant. | Uses limited or partially relevant sources. | Sources absent, outdated, or poorly integrated. |
| Writing Quality (15%) | Clear, coherent, academic writing style with logical flow. | Readable but inconsistent or repetitive. | Frequent grammatical and structural issues. |
| Referencing Accuracy (10%) | Fully compliant with Harvard style. | Minor errors in formatting. | Major referencing inconsistencies. |
Evil and suffering compel theology to face its most pressing paradox—the coexistence of divine love and human pain. Augustine’s privation theory interprets evil as a corruption of good rather than a substantive force, while Irenaeus envisions suffering as formative, shaping moral and spiritual maturity. Contemporary voices such as Moltmann reframe suffering within divine participation rather than distance, affirming a God who suffers with humanity.
Services that cover every part of your degree
All subjects · All levels · All deadlines
Learning Materials / References
- Hick, J. (2019). Evil and the God of Love. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-15249-4
- Plantinga, A. (2020). God, Freedom, and Evil. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing.
- Moltmann, J. (2021). The Crucified God: Theology of the Cross. SCM Press.
- Southgate, C. (2022). The Groaning of Creation: God, Evolution, and the Problem of Evil. Westminster John Knox Press.
- Volf, M. (2023). “Divine Suffering and Human Flourishing.” Modern Theology, 39(3), 415–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/moth.12821
