Abstract

The study criticized the Theodicy and Omniscience of God. The problem of evil, or the problem of evil in relation to God (theodicy), takes place against the background of the reality and all too apparent suffering that has been synonymous with human life from time immemorial. Theodicy seeks to justify the ways of God to man, attempt to view human suffering from an overall metaphysical and/or theological perspective. Omniscience is the property of having complete or maximal knowledge. Along with omnipotence and perfect goodness, it is usually taken to be one of the central divine attributes. The main objective of the study was to examine and criticize theodicy and omniscience of God. The research method employed was a critical historical method with primary and secondary sources consulted. Findings from the study show that there is no direct evidence that any god(s) exist and there are no purely theoretical arguments that prove any gods either. The lack of reasons for a God's existence, the Argument from Incoherence holds that the very concept of god is self-contradictory and impossible, therefore, theism is false and atheism is true. Conclusively, God is not omniscience, if an omniscient being has chosen not to know something, then it may, or may not, know that it doesn't know. God does not know everything and is not omniscient. In fact, no being can know everything because no being, however creative or perfect, can verify that its own knowledge is complete. Therefore, the study recommended that traditional theistic God attributes should be revised for a weaker attributes to accommodate the gap between the belief and reality; and theists should alternatively abandon their belief in such a God.