Introduction
The issue of evil is an obvious and undeniable issue. The historical aspect of the discussion of the problem of evil has returned to Greek philosophy, and the first works of thought about this issue have survived from that era. However, since in the new era, philosophy has become oriented towards the analysis of language and concepts, the type of confrontation with religious thought has become logical and focused on the analysis of propositions. Plantinga is one of the thinkers who explained the problem of evil in the light of presenting rational arguments and criticizing atheistic views that used the problem of evil as an argument to deny the existence of God. He tried to show that evil is compatible with the existence of God and to explain evil as something consistent with the best system of creation. Shahid Motahhari also believes that the existence of good and evil is necessary in the world. According to him, in the general view, evil is necessary for a good system, and the origin of evil is man himself, as he/she does not have the ability to receive the forms of perfection. It is against God's justice to discriminate between creatures; rather, these distinctions are for the sake of difference, and evil is, in a sense, Divine Grace in the direction of cultivating the human soul. In this research, an attempt is made to compare the problem of evil from the perspective of Plantinga and Shahid Motahhari.
 
Methodology
In this article, a descriptive-analytical method is used to compare the views of Alvin Plantinga and Shahid Motahhari in response to the problem of evil.
 
Findings
From Plantinga's point of view, although evil may appear as a kind of loss to the world and man, there are good things hidden in the evil, and man can benefit from those good things. In this regard, he says: “A possible world could have existed, and in this possible world, some things could be described as evil, and of course, the existence of that evil has benefits for humanity” (Plantinga, 1995: 192-193). In fact, from Plantinga's point of view, evil is an existential affair, and its existence cannot be denied. However, the important issue is that this evil entity has a minimal role and is very small in comparison with existing good affairs, and this small and insignificant aspect of evil is also necessary to obtain good affairs (Kroon, 2004: 89). Therefore, evil, if it exists, has hidden benefits that a person may not be able to understand. Plantinga believes that in order to achieve a good such as free will, the existence of evil is necessary, and without it, free will cannot be imagined for humans; because until there is no ability to choose between good and evil, free will will not appear (Plantinga, 2004: 72; Adams, 1985: 92). According to Shahid Motahhari, in the inseparability of evil from good, these two issues should be pointed out: one is the necessity of a small amount of evil for a large amount of good, and the other is the inseparability of evil from the world. According to Shahid Motahhari, evil cannot be separated from good; because evil is of the type of negation, such as ignorance and poverty, etc., which exist in the system of creation. From the point of view of Shahid Motahhari, evil is not only the companion of good, but even some good is such that it cannot be obtained without the existence of evil (Motahhari, 2005: Vol. 1/141).
 
Discussion and Conclusion
Motahhari, as a philosopher and theologian, and Plantinga, as a God-believing philosopher, have each investigated the very important issue of evil with their own principles and theories. Motahhari has responded to the problem of evil according to principles such as the existence of good and the non-existence of evil, Omniscience, Omnipotence, and Wisdom of God, the goodness of the system of existence, the superiority of good over evil, the rejection of dualism, the inseparability of good and evil, and the defense of Divine Justice. According to reformed epistemology and some principles of Christian theology and anthropology, Plantinga proves that the logical problem of evil does not contradict the existence of God, using the description of possible worlds and the relationship between human free will and God's Absolute Power. The findings of the research show that both Plantinga and Shahid Motahhari share the belief in the existence of an Omniscient, Omnipotent, and Omnibenevolent God, as well as the acceptance of a small amount of evil in the world. However, they differ in the way they deal with and interpret the problem of moral and natural evil. By defending Divine Justice, Motahhari offered a solution to natural evil, while Plantinga focused on the issue of moral evil. Ultimately, the efforts of both thinkers were aimed at criticizing atheistic views and defending the existence of God.