The Existence of God and the Problem of Evil

A common argument against the existence of God (or at least the Christian God, or a benevolent God) is the presence of evil in the world. If God is benevolent and omnipotent how could He allow evil? That is, if God is good and all-powerful why is there evil? This leads to many questions – we know that evil is real, therefore if we assume God is real and good, then what does the the presence of evil say about God's omnipotence? Is He simply a God with good intentions but unable and incapable of stopping evil? Or, in a more horrifying situation, is God malevolent?

This problem begins with five assertians, assertians about the character of God (and God here is often defined in the Christian sense) and the presence of evil. The problem is that they can’t all be true because they contradict one another (which is a narrow way of thinking, often times in nature we see things we qualities A,B, and C that should by no logic exist, but they do!). The five assertians are 1) God exists, 2) God is perfectly good, 3) God is omniscient, 4) God is omnipotent, and 5) There are instances of evil in the world. Let’s take this apart piece by piece. It is my argument that they are not only incompatible but all true, even in paradoxically. In fact it makes less sense that less than all of these are true. Either they are all true or only one is true (number five).

The first assertian that is undisputably true is number 5: “There are instances of evil in the world”. Only a fool would argue otherwise. In a city like London all you have to do is turn on the news. So, with this one assumed as true, let’s move on to the other pieces, where philosophers begin to have problems.

The next important assertian is that God exists. Throughout human history the question of the supernatural has existed, it is still relevent today and (as far as I’m concerned) as long as we’re human it will be. What is meant by God? Many people from televangelists to men in clean shirts on bicycles going door-to-door would love to offer you an answer, but for now let’s define God by that definition that’s in our guts (the one we have when think of God), that is, the idea of a higher being who is much different than us. So, if we accept – for the sake of argument – that assertian number one is true, then we know two things: God is real, and there is evil in the world. Which leads us to the qualities of God.

“God is perfectly good” - this idea belongs to Judeo-Christian traditions and has not always been part of a culture’s conception of God (the Greek and Roman gods could hardly be called “perfectly good”, in fact, interestingly, they were as bad as humans). So now we are narrowing our definition of God, saying that He is not partly good, or not a cosmic mixture of good and evil, but all good. As in, there is no evil in Him. But an easy objection is raised: if this is true, how does that fit in with assertian number five (“There is evil”)? Assertian number five is undisputably true, it is the assertians that “God exists” and “God is perfectly good” that are a logical climbing further out on a tree limb. For now, let us continue along this tree limb and assume that somehow assertians one, two and five are all true (which is still concievably possible).

“God is omniscient.” To be omniscient is to be all-knowing, or infinitely knowing. In short, if God is omniscient He not only understands all things but is infinitely aware of them. If God is omniscient then He knows where I am as I write this sentence, and He also knows where a small pebble on the surface of Mars is, and what it’s doing (is it being blown upon by the wind?), but on top of that He’s also aware of information like how many pebbles and rocks there are on the whole planet of Mars, or how many neurons are in my brain and how they are sending commands to my fingers to type. If you think about it, there is a lot that could be known and a lot that could be observed. We are limited in both thought and observation, the moment we think of something we are excluding everything else we could be thinking of, the moment we observe something, say, the moment I fix my eye on Big Ben it makes it impossible for me to observe the Eiffel Tower (in fact, I can’t even observe all of Big Ben, but only one side or angle at a time out of an infinite number of sides or angles). But God, if He is omniscient, is both all-knowing and all-observing and conscience of everything in this universe, from this planet to the sun to the stars in the furthest galaxy.

If this is true, then God would be fully aware of every evil action in the world, in fact, He would be aware of every evil action ever. If we wanted a record of every evil thing ever done He could easily give us one. The alternative is that, assuming our previous assumptions are true, God isn’t omniscient. This is often an attempt to find an “easy” answer to evil and God by saying that if God exists and is good, He simply doesn’t know about it. This is comforting if we are trying to prevent ourselves from considering the idea that God is good and all-knowing of evil yet there is still evil. If God is God, aware of evil and benevolent, wouldn’t that mean that He would stop evil? This leads us to the final assertian.

“God is ominpotent”, He has unlimited power. Here all of our previous assertians come together and we can go one of two ways: we can believe that God is omnipotent, that all five assertians are true, even if they are at first glance difficult to reconcile, or we can believe that God is not omnipotent. This is what many philosophers argue. If God exists and is good and is omnipotent then there (according to their logic) would be no evil in the world. But there is evil in the world, so this undoes (for these philosophers) any notion that a an able, powerful, and benevolent God exists. But there is a flaw in this logic, in that it is logic.

Very often we find in nature things that should not, in a logical world, exist. Yet they do. For example, in chemistry there is a very logical order to the different states of matter: matter is (at any time) either a solid, a liquid, or a gas. They teach this very early on in school because it is highly logical and understandable, and its easy to understand the relationship between the three; if you increase an object’s temperature it will proceed from solid to liquid to finally a gas, and so on. But what doesn’t makes sense is the highly illogical but completely real nature of “triple point”. The “triple point” of a substance is when the “three phases [solid, liquid, gas] are in equilibrium” (Gold Book). For example, it is when H₂O is at the same time ice, water, and steam. I am told this is true and I believe it (because people much smarter than I believe it) but I can not for the life of me concieve of it. But this does not change its truth or its validity, it only means that I have a small mind and a small imagination.

To apply philosophical arguments on the existence of God based on the question of evil to an empircal discovery of something like “triple point”, it would seem impossible for something like “triple point” to exist, though it does. I do not pretend to know how it exists (logically), but I do know that it does. To argue against it would be against the human spirit of discovery, in fact, such phillistine attitudes are against all areas of discovery: they do not ask questions to seek the truth, they ask the questions to get better answers. If we applied such logic to all areas of discovery in biology, chemistry, and physics, or geology or space exploration we would never learn anything if our first assumption was that whatever we found must fit in with what we already know. Science is always contradicting itself as new discoveries are made that make no logical sense, but, do exist.

Now, to apply the “triple point” metaphor in a new way, we have the same paradox with these five basic assertains about God and evil, that some philosophers (with a small imagination) say cannot all be true. If all are true, that is, God exists, He is perfectly good, He is all-knowing and all-powerful, and there is evil in the world, how does evil exist? And if evil exists, does that mean God doesn’t? Philosophy says the discussion ends here, there are no logical alternatives, but what if we have another “triple point” on our hands? What if all five assertians are true, even though it may be hard to explain, even to comprehend?

Let us focus on Christianity, for the sake of simplicity and because it is the Christian notion of God (benevolent, omniscient, omnipotent) that is being discussed. Christianity believes in a God who created the universe, who is all powerful, who is all-knowing, and is all-loving, and who wants to call Him “Dad”. How does Christianity reconcile such a wonderful and hopeful portrait of God with the reality of evil, or suffering, or pain? First, Christianity’s response is that evil does not come from God, but it is still not outside of His control. He does not lose the quality of “perfect goodness” if He cannot twist evil for good, in fact, He loses His omnipotence if He cannot. In the Old Testement a man named Joseph says to his brothers who betrayed him: “As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good” (Genesis 50:20, ESV). Here is a profound theoligical claim of the Christian God: He is so powerful that evil is bent to His will and changed forever.

I would argue that if one were to inspect closely the claims of Jesus and the Christian God one would find the most satsifying answers of any philosophy in the world. The entire Bible is about the hope of hopes, a time in the future when God will return to earth and destroy evil forever, so that one day it will be a vague memory. In fact the promises of the Bible are that every evil ever done will be undone, because here is God’s true omnipotence, His power to undo every evil we have ever commited. We have ravaged the earth with deforestation and pollution, God will restore it in a new earth, we have destroyed our bodies through overeating, misuse and poor care, He will give us new bodies that will not wear out; we have blackened our hearts with evil actions and thoughts, God will give us a new heart and a new mind, one free from committing evil. If this is true, then this “triple point” is more exciting and hopeful than anything in the world, even if it is paradoxical. But sometimes that’s what’s needed to explain the truth: a paradox.

I’ll end my argument with the central paradox to Christianity: the image of Christ on the cross. Nothing could be more brutal and depressing, yet nothing is more hopeful. A symbol of death as well as life, a point at which evil seems victorious yet is sorely defeated. It really is fascinating to comprehend, and perhaps one of the greatest problems of philosophical thought today is a lack of imagination, a lack of considering the truth to be true in light of contradiction, nay, because of contradiction.

Man is Helpless (Ecclessiastes 9)

I think a theme of Ecclesiastes is man’s helplessness, which is a humbling thing to realize.

But we don't like to acknowledge it. Whether it be in the arts, society, architecture, infrastructure, government, or even war man loves to glorify man. Look at us! Look at what the human race accomplished, isn’t it incredible? Today we live in an age when arguably we have seen the most human achievement in the history of the planet. Sixty-six years after we figured out how to fly – something that has been attempted and dream of for thousands of years – we landed on the moon.

Certainly the human race is great. Look and see how there is virtually no situation man cannot become accustomed to (or bend to its will). The world is becoming increasingly under out control.

But is it? I would say that Solomon’s writing – nearly three thousand years old – is still true in a day and age where it appears that man is in control. In reality, we are as helpless as ever.

But all this I laid to heart, examining it all, how the righteous and the wise and their deeds are in the hand of God. (Ecc. 9:1)

If we were to label the “best” members of society it would be the righteous and the wise. That’s how we tend to categorize men and women. Mother Theresa is revered for her righteousness and compassion, Albert Einstein for his intelligence. I think we look at great men and women with admiration because we see in them the spark of greatness, something they have willed of themselves. Somehow they have a different discipline, a different ability or level of control, and they have been made great. The rest of us regularly feel Solomon’s helplessness, but we look up to great men and women because they seem to have things under control. What is their secret?

Simply put, they don’t. Even the righteous and the wise and their deeds are in the hands of God. All of us are in His hands.

It is the same for all, since the same event happens to the righteous and the wicked, to the good and the evil, to the clean and the unclean, to him who sacrifices and him who does not sacrifice… This is an evil that happens under the sun, that the same event happens to all. (Ecc. 9:2,3)

Once again Solomon presents to us the problems with the world. Is it this way because of death, and there is death because of sin. Truly this was not how God made the earth, because when He made it things were “good”. Now we see that everything is tainted and our lives – our greatest gift! – are burdens. We slave away day after day to sustain them, and in the end, we die. What’s words than that is being conscience of God and not only slaving to survive but slaving to be true to Him – only to see that you will die the same as those who don’t fear God.

Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and forever they have no more share in all that is done under the sun. (Ecc. 9:6)

This is all a bitter truth because of our rebellion and sinful nature towards God. Here Solomon echoes Genesis 6:5-6 (right before God floods the earth):

Also, the hearts of the children of man are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead. (Ecc. 9:3)

That truth is hard to hear and may will not admit it, but it’s true. Who do we tend to hope the opposite is true, that man is inherently good?

I can think of three reasons:

1) We are image-bearers of God. Before He made us, God said:

“Let us [Father, Son, and Holy Spirit] make man in our own image, and after our likeness.” (Gen. 1:26)

So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them. (Gen. 1:27)

What exactly does “image” and “likeness” mean? I think it means a variety of things. We bear the image of a perfect, holy, and righteous God. A God who loves, who knows joy, a God who delights in relationships. We can see many of these qualities “stamped” into us. Most every human being (on some level) loves, longs for joy over pain, and likes relationship. Humans need relationships.

Another way we bear God’s image is our mind. We are more intelligent than any other creature on earth, in fact, God gives them us to have dominion over the same way He has dominion over us. Leadership and authority are marks of God.

Also, we were made in the image and likeness of a good God. For this reason we have “morality” and conscience. We recognize good and evil. When we go to movies, the good guy usually wins, and that’s how we like it. So we are made in God’s image and we were made to be good. If there is good in us, it is because of God.

2) We like control. When we say “Man is inherently good” we are trying to say man is in control of being good or evil (and, at the core, is good). We love the idea that we can be in control of our goodness, but ever since Adam and Eve took control in rebellion against God we have not controlled the rebellion (of evil and sin) in us, it has controlled us. But we love to believe that we have freedom in this, we love to think being on the “Naughty” or “Nice” list is a choice or applied discipline.

Why do we love the idea of freedom to be good or evil? I think because if we can’t be good we don’t want the God-given despair that should come with that, instead we want to stay in “control”, rather than admit our helplessness. In short, we want to be God. We want to be the definition of good and evil rather than Him.

Ecclesiastes slices through our false notion of control and points out that even if we devoted ourselves to righteousness we would be unable to control sin within us:

Surely there is not a righteous man on earth who does good and never sins. (Ecc. 7:20)

The apostle Paul later echoes this:

For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. (Romans 3:23)

Once again, we see our helplessness. Just looking at the way in which we are controlled by sin reveals the falsehood in the phrase “Man is inherently good.”

3) I think the truth is too painful. The practical situation we often use the above phrase in is about a particular person. We apply it when someone does evil but we don’t want to accept it. Bill Clinton did what? But really he’s a good man, he just screwed up. Underneath he is a good man, he’s just made some mistakes.

The funny thing is we don’t apply this to everybody. Some people are just “evil”. If Adolf Hitler had a Clinton moment of infidelity, we wouldn’t be surprised and wouldn’t feel the need to defend him. We would not say “Underneath he’s a good man.” That sounds ridiculous to say about Adolf Hitler.

We constantly play this game of good guy/bad guy, labeling everyone we come into contact with white caps or black caps because the phrase “Man is inherently good” doesn’t carry over to everybody. We look at Hitler and say, Whoops, this premise seems out of whack. Some people are just plain evil, but man is still inherently good. Do you see what scares us? We see Hitler and see that he, too, was a human, like you and me. Could the same possibility for evil that was in Hitler live in you and me?

No, some people are just plain evil, but man is still inherently good. Right? What about Bill Clinton? He sinned, but he doesn’t seem totally evil like Hitler, in fact, he seems a lot like you or I. Maybe he’s good underneath. Man is still inherently good.

Your friend sins against you. You can’t believe it. But you’ve known them for ten years and it seems wrong to say they’re evil or that they’ve done evil. You love them! Surely love wouldn’t call something evil! How could you say that to your friend? Man is still inherently good.

You screw up. You do something deplorable, something you know is wrong but you couldn’t help yourself. You were helpless. Certainly you aren’t bad. Certainly you aren’t selfish and evil. You are a good person who had a strange fluke of character and made a mistake. For this reason the most you cling to the axiom, Man is inherently good.

Also, the hearts of the children of man are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead. (Ecc. 9:3)

No, I’m not evil! Maybe from your point of view, or your family’s point of view (or maybe not!), but in order to truly know we need a different perspective.

Jesus lived a perfect, sinless life. His opinion, therefore, is very valuable in determining if someone is good or evil. Surely the world is made up of good guys and bad guys, right Jesus? Of which, I, of course, am a good guy? Jesus Christ will shake His head to such questions. Jesus – God – can see everyone’s heart, and no matter how good you think you are, Jesus knows the honest truth.

John writes this about Jesus:

Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing. But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man. (John 2:23-25)

Jesus isn’t stupid or naïve. Never would He have said, “Man is inherently good. In fact, most of them are good people.” He’s the only one who knows the deepest parts of all humans, and He knows they’re rotten.

So this information frustrates us and ticks us off. What about me? I give to the poor, I smile at the elderly! I go through great pains not to look lustfully at women! What about me?

You too, Jesus says: I don’t trust you.

But the goodness of Jesus is that He tells us to trust Him. He takes sin and evil and tramples it underfoot on the cross, and He gives us a new nature in that we will be like Him rather than us. That’s what we need, a heart transplant, not rules to follow. Righteousness is given by grace through Jesus Christ, it is not attained.

Jesus reaches down in our helplessness and gives us control over sin, but at the same time makes us obedient to Him. Isn’t that funny? Man in all his greatness was made to serve something. If it will not be God, it will be sin. If God is not our master, sin is. But we have the illusion of control and being good and this blinds us to the truth. We get proud so it becomes painful to admit our need for God, for a new master.

But this master is infinitely easier than the old one – sin – which destroys, decays, leads to death, swallows up life. Sin leaves us in despair like Solomon – ‘life is pointless and headed to destruction.’ But through Christ we are made new, and his invitation is to us all. In His words:

“Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.” (Matthew 11:28)

9/28/09