trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

John Hick's reform of Irenaean theodicy differs significantly from the original

the verdict
COMMON KNOWLEDGE
Legacy classification; evidence review pending
Recorded sources
no sources on either side

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that John Hick's reform of Irenaean theodicy differs significantly from the original?

John Hick's modern formulation of the Irenaean theodicy in 'Evil and the God of Love' adapts and significantly develops the embryonic soul-making concepts found in the early church father Irenaeus.

Verdict: COMMON KNOWLEDGE · 0 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

The analysis

The claim that John Hick's modern formulation differs significantly from the original theology of Irenaeus is a standard scholarly observation regarding his historical reconstruction and development of the soul-making theodicy, representing common knowledge in the philosophy of religion. Therefore, no citation of empirical papers is required.

What does the evidence say?

The claim that John Hick's modern formulation differs significantly from the original theology of Irenaeus is a standard scholarly observation regarding his historical reconstruction and development of the soul-making theodicy, representing common knowledge in the philosophy of religion. Therefore, no citation of empirical papers is required.

Receipt History
first checked04 Aug 2026
judged → COMMON KNOWLEDGE · 9504 Aug 2026
Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work