Does “Divine Hiddenness” Neutralize the Problem of Evil? Is Process Theodicy More Adequate? A Constructive Process Critique of Paul Moser’s Proposals

Abstract This article critically engages Paul Moser’s “Divine Hiddenness Response” to the problem of evil—an approach to have recently come out of traditional free-will theism. I begin with identifying the initial common ground between Moser’s thought and process theology that arguably coincides with what can be called the “Four Noble Truths of Christianity. “ However, when confronted with the problem of evil that threatens the credibility of these truths, Moser offers an epistemic strategy to address this threat without modifying the classical concept of omnipotence and without having a full-explanation theodicy. I will argue that, far from helping the situation, this approach exacerbates it and is therefore strongly undesirable. In addition, Moser’s assumption of the absence of an adequate theodicy is unjustified in light of the demonstrable merits of process theodicy in accomplishing what omnipotence-preserving approaches cannot do—defusing the defeaters to Christianity’s Four Noble Truths effectively. Thus, it is desirable and, in the absence of better options, epistemically obligatory that omnipotence be modified and replaced with a version of God’s perfect power that is more coherent and evidence-based, and is also in line with a significant strand within the Bible.