The problem of evil
Offline Atheist: If God exists, why does he allow evil to happen?
Theist: Why shouldn't He?
A: He is supposed to be an eternally loving God isn't he? Why would he allow innocent people to suffer?
T: Due to original sin, we live in a fallen creation. God created people in His image. In order to do that, he had to allow mankind to have a will. But by logical necessity, man could not be perfect, otherwise, man would be identical to God himself. Therefore, mankind had the capacity to fall short of God's glory and choose to go against Him. Mankind chose to do that and introduced evil into the world. Today, we are part of a species that has an inherent propensity to disobey God.
A: But if God created us, and God is all-knowing, he would have known that we were going to disobey him. Why would he allow original sin to happen if he is such a good God?
T: God created a universe that was distinct from Him. By logical necessity, it must be imperfect or it would be identical to God himself. It is not reasonable to ask a theist what God's motives are, as we cannot guess God's motives anymore than we can objectively judge the motives of any other person. But even without original sin, the world is imperfect.
A: The world is imperfect, but it could still do without things like the Holocaust, or the Fall, earthquakes, floods, etc. Why would an all-loving God not intervene on such things?
T: Maybe he does. Maybe there are worse things that could happen which God prevented from happening. You have no way of knowing either way. But we are also observing wicked things from the perspective of a finite being. A little kid who drops his ice cream will become upset like his whole world was about to end. Only when he becomes an adult does he realize how frivolous the issue was. Perhaps what we find horrific means very little in the context of eternity. Live your life in this world for something even greater, only then will you find objective meaning to your existence here.
A: Are you telling me that we should just turn a blind eye to evil because our existence here is meaningless?
T: Not at all. I'm saying that we must not view God from the perspective of a finite human being. We have a desire to prevent things like the Holocaust. We will do all we can to prevent such an evil. As well we should. But an eternal being such as God may have bigger fish to fry. We must remember that foresight is not causation and allowing something does not necessitate that someone is okay with it. God permits sin. But from that it does not follow that he is okay with it nor does it follow that he causes it.
A: Well if I created something that was going to cause destruction, knew that it would, and then allowed it, I would be evil.
T: God created people with free choice. If you have free choice, you are automatically responsible for what you do. If you created something that you knew would choose to cause destruction, then you wouldn't be considered responsible. And God may be doing something about it right now. You don't know. This is why faith is necessary.. because we cannot have an exhaustive understanding of his nature. We can only trust Him in the face of uncertainty, using what He has revealed to us as our fundamental basis. You must also realize that God is timeless, and he does not view things in the context of future events. He does not see things before they happen. He witnesses everything in one present moment.
A: Well I think your God is evil. He should not have created the world if he knew that it was going to be this bad for people.
T: It is also very good for a lot of people. Put your trust in God and then you may have redemption from the evil of the world with the chance for everlasting life in a place where no evil exists. Live only for this world and you'll be lost. Put this world in the proper perspective and only then will it have objective meaning.
- Login to post comments
OK, I'm back to address the issue raised by pauljohntheskeptic.
Before I begin, I must reiterate that I am not a theologian, so the following will lack the strength of an objection.
Firstly, a rather minor issue - "(god) is very clear...". Incorrect, the translation of the word "Evil" from whatever language the bible was originally written in; has more than 300 interpretations.
Seconldly, with the above aside, after much thought and consideration, I found that the word "peace" is actually negatively defined. Any attempt at an honest definition of "peace" (and not one that avoids the issue) requires the negation of calamity or war. That is, a logical component of "peace" are things that are not peaceful - "not-peace". All that is needed to eliminate the contradiction between God's action of creating "Evil" and his omnibenevolence is proving that humans are indeed better off with the possibility of "peace" rather than without it (which is different to the opposite of peace). IF this is so, then the creation (of the possibility of) "Evil" was a logical requirement of "peace". Hence, if God creates peace, then He also creates "not-peace", and this is indeed one of the 300+ translations of the word "Evil" in this context. This does not solve the problem yet.
This is where the contention resides. Linguistically, there is more than one interpretation for certain words in english. Take for example, the word "can". It has two very distinct meanings. If I say I can do something, it may very well mean I cannot. I can speak French relative to a dog. But I cannot actually speak French relative to someone who does speak french. Hence, I both can and can't speak French depending on the context of how I am using the word - and this poses no contradiction.
Similarly, "creating" something may not mean you actually created it. For example, if I created the the possibility of peace and war, I have created neither peace nor war. Logically, it is human beings that choose to be either peaceful, or war mongering - by the definition of the word.
To say that God creates any given evil (for example, war), is to say that people do not have a choice between peace and not-peace.
Thus, I disagree with your consideration that God is taking responsibility for any evil at all.
This may be a very unsatisfying response. I see it as hair-splitting. Nevertheless, satisfaction has very little - if anything at all - to do with truth. I could list the presuppositions I made above, but no doubt, you will do that for me. For the moment, my conjecture still stands:
One more thing:
Did you mean evolution? If not, I have no idea what you are referring to...
It's rare to hear a theist own up to the potential ambiguities of language and the impact this must have on interpretation of the bible. Are you my big brother, David?
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck