K
One thing I’ve noticed when the problem of evil is raised against Christians is that most believers go on defense in explaining why evil exists and how it does not negate the existence of God. There’s nothing wrong with this, but it’s an incomplete response.
We should be evaluating the proposed solutions to the problem of evil. In other words, let’s presuppose the existence of God. How would (or should) this God act, according to atheists? Put another way: what features would God have, concerning evil, if atheists could (from their perspective) will God into existence?
The atheist will say, for instance, that if God exists He would have to eradicate all evil. Okay, but this would destroy free will. Most people recognize free will is itself a virtue if for no other reason than that it allows us to do good, including to love. If God eliminates all human evil - and, with it, human free will - then He eliminates all good as well. Ironically, this act of eliminating evil would create more evil.
Automatons (which is exactly what humans would become) cannot do good, at least not out of some genuine desire to do it. They cannot love. This would be an act of evil.
But what about the really bad stuff, the atheist may say. Why can’t God eliminate the really terrible stuff like childhood cancer or brutal murders or years and years of abject suffering? Maybe this God, this figment of the atheist’s imagination, could just eliminate the really bad stuff and allow everything else.
First off, how do you draw the line between the really bad stuff and everything else? And second, if God were to eliminate SOME evil by intervening in human free will, then He would have to eliminate ALL evil (which gets back to the free will issue above).
God would have to eliminate even relatively benign evils like gossip, bad thoughts, forgetting to cover your mouth when you cough, etc.
If God were to draw an arbitrary line and allow some evil but eliminate others, isn’t that itself evil? Why prevent evil by divine fiat for some but not all? This solution is also evil.
Moreover, it would be a divine sort of discrimination. God would be treating some humans better than others by eliminating the suffering of some but not of all. All things being equal, treating people differently on purpose without a valid reason (and arbitrarily drawing a line between “unacceptable” and “acceptable” evil is certainly not valid) is discrimination, which is evil.
I suppose the ultimate solution would be for God to just snuff us all out. That’s one sure way to eliminate evil! Do I need to explain why this, also, is itself evil?
When you examine every possible solution put forth by atheists to the problem of evil, they are all themselves evil. Our only alternative is to seek explanations of why evil exists and how it is compatible with a loving and all-powerful God.
We should be evaluating the proposed solutions to the problem of evil. In other words, let’s presuppose the existence of God. How would (or should) this God act, according to atheists? Put another way: what features would God have, concerning evil, if atheists could (from their perspective) will God into existence?
The atheist will say, for instance, that if God exists He would have to eradicate all evil. Okay, but this would destroy free will. Most people recognize free will is itself a virtue if for no other reason than that it allows us to do good, including to love. If God eliminates all human evil - and, with it, human free will - then He eliminates all good as well. Ironically, this act of eliminating evil would create more evil.
Automatons (which is exactly what humans would become) cannot do good, at least not out of some genuine desire to do it. They cannot love. This would be an act of evil.
But what about the really bad stuff, the atheist may say. Why can’t God eliminate the really terrible stuff like childhood cancer or brutal murders or years and years of abject suffering? Maybe this God, this figment of the atheist’s imagination, could just eliminate the really bad stuff and allow everything else.
First off, how do you draw the line between the really bad stuff and everything else? And second, if God were to eliminate SOME evil by intervening in human free will, then He would have to eliminate ALL evil (which gets back to the free will issue above).
God would have to eliminate even relatively benign evils like gossip, bad thoughts, forgetting to cover your mouth when you cough, etc.
If God were to draw an arbitrary line and allow some evil but eliminate others, isn’t that itself evil? Why prevent evil by divine fiat for some but not all? This solution is also evil.
Moreover, it would be a divine sort of discrimination. God would be treating some humans better than others by eliminating the suffering of some but not of all. All things being equal, treating people differently on purpose without a valid reason (and arbitrarily drawing a line between “unacceptable” and “acceptable” evil is certainly not valid) is discrimination, which is evil.
I suppose the ultimate solution would be for God to just snuff us all out. That’s one sure way to eliminate evil! Do I need to explain why this, also, is itself evil?
When you examine every possible solution put forth by atheists to the problem of evil, they are all themselves evil. Our only alternative is to seek explanations of why evil exists and how it is compatible with a loving and all-powerful God.
- 3
- 1
- 1
- Show all