Abstract:
Metaphysical determinism argues that God divinely predetermines everything, including
human suffering. Contrary to metaphysical determinism, free will or libertarianism argues
that not everything is predetermined by God. Therefore, evil does not serve any divine
purpose. Libertarianism argues that metaphysical determinism is simply incoherent because it
holds that God can predetermine an action and, at the same time, holds that He could stop
such an action. This study seeks to find out which of these two views might be promising in
responding to the problem of suffering. Contrary to these two positions, this study argues that
suffering must be understood contextually. The above-stated responses do not always provide
viable answers to the problem of suffering because they are often generalised and conceived
from the God-eye view without considering the sufferers’ perspectives.
CONTRIBUTION : Although there are a plethora of publications on metaphysical determinism and
freewill, this study re-examined both and sheds a nuance for a further development of these
two competing views. The article argues that none of these two responses offers the best
response to the problem; rather, each has its strengths and weaknesses because they seem to
focus on God rather than the sufferer.
