How Do You Make Sense of Evil?

[handy]

I have been trying to argue that there is a different and further sense in which God's hands might be tied - one where the limitations are not questions of logical coherence and consistency but are rather bound up in the intuition that created realities are self-limiting - they do not allow any conceivable state of affairs to exist.

I do understand what you are trying to get at here Drew. But, to the extent that I understand it, I respectfully disagree. I do agree with the fact that created realities are self-limiting, but not with the part of God's hands being tied. To me, following that train of thought to its logical conclusion would be to a: deny the miraculous and b: lead to an ultimately ineffectual God who would be wringing those tied hands crying out "I'm so sorry, I never meant for this to happen and now I can't do anything about it!" Just typing the words shows how ridiculous that is. Truly, you don't think for a moment that there is any situation that God cannot do anything about if He wanted to do so?

I can think of no better way to illustrate the point than the account of Jesus walking on the waters and calming the storms. God created this world with the reality that the forces of nature will act however they will. Water is one of the most powerful forces and once it gets going, it simply cannot be stopped. Yet, that is exactly what Christ did when He both walked upon the waves, breaking a basic law of gravity, and also calmed the storm with the spoken word, (an impossibilty).

God does limit Himself. Our free will is born out of the fact that we are created in His image and He has free will. Anyone with free will obviously limits themselves. But, God limiting Himself is not the same as His hands being tied.

 

[Drew]

Truly, you don't think for a moment that there is any situation that God cannot do anything about if He wanted to do so?

Strange as this may seem to many, I believe that indeed God cannot do anything He wants to do. Otherwise, there would be no evil.

Fact: God created the universe.
Fact: Evil exists.
Fact: God is good and loving
Assertion: God would not create evil unless He had no choice in order to make the best world
Conclusion: God did not "want" to create evil but had to.

 

[handy]

Fact: God created the universe.
Fact: Evil exists.
Fact: God is good and loving
Assertion: God would not create evil unless He had no choice in order to make the best world
Conclusion: God did not "want" to create evil but had to.

I see a jump to a conclusion here that might be based upon a misconception. The misconception being that God 'created' evil. As if evil is an entity, a creature that has its own intelligence and will.

This is not what evil is. Evil is what happens when free willed individuals rebel against God and His goodness, choosing to do what is bad instead. The only reason why we know what is evil is because God sets a standard of morality, of good behavior that He expects us all to adhere to. Expects, but does not force us to. The "fruit" of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, was not a tangible force or creation, it was nothing more nor less than knowledge. Knowledge gained by Adam's exercising his free will to do the opposite of what God told him to do.

This is why to us humans, evil is totally subjective. We disagree with each other all the time about what should be called evil. There are very few things, perhaps nothing at all, that one would define as evil, that you couldn't find someone else on this planet that would call it good. I could say that I know homosexuality is evil, and there would be hundreds if not thousands lined up to tell me how wrong I am. Ultimately the Christian grants God the Final Arbitrator as to what is good and what is evil. We can see certain behaviors or thoughts and think that it's evil, only God can look right into the heart of man and make the final determination.

Evil is a by-product of God's choosing to allow free will in the beings He created. It is not a 'created' thing in of itself.

 

[TanNinety]

Evil is a by-product of God's choosing to allow free will in the beings He created. It is not a 'created' thing in of itself.

I heartily agree with the above view. But may be I can elaborate on Drew's point so you can see where the disagreement actually lies.

I do not think that Drew would especially disagree that evil is a by-product of our "current" creation. His assertion is that a creation is possible where the evil by-product could have been done away with. Such a different creation wasn't the "best possible world", hence God had to allow the by-product of evil in order to create our creation the way it is.

For example, there could have been a world where there is no reflex of pain and all our body parts were made of the toughest mixture of metals that we didn't break easy or did not need blood and oxygen or food for survival. Or let's just say we were all made "superman" who can even take a bullet in the eye and there was no creation of kryptonite. Being God, I am pretty sure He can think of a world in which there are free-will agents and where the exercise of this free-will does not result in the by-product of evil. So at this point, what Drew is stating is that this world where no by-product of evil is allowed was not the "best possible world" for what God had in mind.

Hope I was a little successful in conveying what I understand Drew is saying. If not please correct me Drew!

Edit: On second thought, I do see what handy is trying to say. "Evil" is an unavoidable by-product of "Free-will". So there is logically no way to construct a world where there is free-will and no evil.

So Drew, according to handy, a setting of the 'dial' where free-will is 100% and evil is 0% will not even result in a world to be considered. As soon as you implement free-will, evil exists!

 

[Drew]

I do not think that Drew would especially disagree that evil is a by-product of our "current" creation. His assertion is that a creation is possible where the evil by-product could have been done away with. Such a different creation wasn't the "best possible world", hence God had to allow the by-product of evil in order to create our creation the way it is.

Well I guess one can be understood in one's own lifetime.......

Tan does indeed correctly understand what I am attempting to communicate.

 

[Drew]

Edit: On second thought, I do see what handy is trying to say. "Evil" is an unavoidable by-product of "Free-will". So there is logically no way to construct a world where there is free-will and no evil.

So Drew, according to handy, a setting of the 'dial' where free-will is 100% and evil is 0% will not even result in a world to be considered. As soon as you implement free-will, evil exists!

I'll go along with this. To the extent that you understand handy's position, I see her position as being a more specific version of the same claim that I am making.

 

[handy]

Tan, good analysis of my POV. I agree, no matter how many times the dial is set to "Evil 0", if one allows for free will, there will be evil as a result. No other way about it.

The ONLY way that God could have created a universe without evil would be to not allow any free will in any of His creation, anywhere.

 

[Voyageur]

...the free will He has given us isn't non-sensical as well. I know, nobody has said that free will is nonsense, but many who get involved in these never ending discussions of the 'paradox' of good and evil seem to think that it is, or that it is something that we can just leave out of the equation. Your question is clearly answered by the Judeo-Chrisitan God in the Bible starting with Genesis 3. I'm not saying that one has to agree with the answer (that free will thing again) but it is answered.

Free Will is another matter altogether (which would be a great discussion, by the way).

I don't see Free Will as being a totally sufficient answer (with regard to evil), although it brings a very interesting dynamic to the discussion. One certainly worth pursuing I think.

What I think you're saying--if I'm understanding you correctly--is that evil is a consequence of Free Will. And, if Evil is a consequence of Free Will, then Goodness is also a consequence of Free Will. If God gives us Free Will (and he is omniscient), then surely God knew that Free Will would result in the good and the bad. God would then seem to share in some of what has become of his creation, whether good or bad.

*Later tonight I'll address some of the other posts.

 

[handy]

As I mentioned in the other threads, free will, rather than being another matter altogether, is in reality the key to the concept of evil.

Again, I think many make the mistake of thinking of evil and good as though they are some kind of force or personality. They are not. They are aspects of thoughts and behaviors. The Christian believes that God is the arbiter of what is good and what is evil, but, given that this is a philosophical discussion, I'll be willing to conceed, for the purposes of discussion that society is the arbiter of what is good and what is evil. Society as a whole frowns upon murder because murder makes individuals vulnerable to death, fear and pain. Therefore murdering someone is an act of evil. Society as a whole benefits through acts of charity. Therefore charitable acts are considered good. The key here is that 'evil' and 'good' are adjectives of behaviors, or a noun based upon behavior. 'evil' and 'good' are not in of themselves anything. There is no outside 'force' of either evil or good influencing behavior. No little angel in white and demon in red sitting upon one's shoulder.

And, because it is behavior that is either evil or good, it is then the free will to behave in whatever manner one chooses that drives the created to be evil or good. Free will cannot be separated from the subject of either good or evil.

If God gives us Free Will (and his is omniscient), then surely God knew that Free Will would result in the good and the bad. God would then seem to share in some of what has become of his creation, whether good or bad.

Naturally God shares in what has become of His creation. God even made the ultimate sacrifice Himself to restore His creation to the state of being all good. But, as I said before, if there is no free will, then we would all have to be either slaves or robots.

 

[Voyageur]

God ceated evil, God governs evil, and God uses evil in such a way that in the end of the age when He comes in His glory the glory of His justice and His goodness and His righteousness and His holiness will be made manifest perfectly because He ordered and governed the evil in such a way that He will be magnified perfectly over it and in contrast to it. If evil didn't exist we wouldn't see His perfect justice in action and therefore we would be missing out on one of the wonderful pleasures in eternity, God's perfect justice. God is going to manifest His perfection perfectly and every aspect of it, and some parts of His glory wouldn't be made manifest without the existence of evil.

This makes humanity seem rather like an accessory, or an ornament. If God, in his omniscience, knows the end, then Free Will is an illusion. Humans are thus mere pawns in a cosmic game that they cannot possibly control. I think it is difficult to square God's omniscience with human Free Will.

There would have been no redeemed, and therefore nobody to adore Him to the praise of His grace and glory for all eternity in the same way we will.

This begs the question: does God need adoration and glorification? It seems to me that an all-powerful and perfect God, a God capable of creating a universe, would not need anything.

 

[Voyageur]

Naturally God shares in what has become of His creation. God even made the ultimate sacrifice Himself to restore His creation to the state of being all good. But, as I said before, if there is no free will, then we would all have to be either slaves or robots.

Well, if you are going to use Free Will to account for the existence of good and evil, then you have to address what I see as a paradox. I would argue that Free Will cannot exist in an universe governed by an omniscient God who has already given a revelation as to what will happen.

 

[Voyageur]

Only in this good/evil universe will both the goodness of God, and the justice of God be manifest. I fully know that such a view will be rejected by those who do not want a God that judges.

See, I disagree with this whole line of thinking. If we assume that God is good (the source and embodiment of a universal moral truth), then we also have to assume that God has always been good. And, if God has always been good, that necessarily means that God was good before anyone was there to observe his goodness. And if this is assumed, this argument that the moral duality (good and evil) somehow makes God's goodness manifest falls apart. Why? God's goodness was always manifest.

 

[Voyageur]

The tension is can God be both good, and just.

No, I don't believe this is what we're addressing in the discussion.

Does the existance of evil mean that God also is evil (since he is creator)? Of course the Christian response is that God did not create evil.

The charge isn't that God is evil, it is that God created a system, a universe, where evil exists. As such, God indirectly created evil. Liken it, if you will, to the succession of physicists who developed procedures for nuclear fission and thus nuclear bombs. Regardless of all the positive acts the physicists did before and after their efforts to develop a nuclear weapon, they will always share in the responsibility of creating something that is rather evil. Even if it is someone else utilizing the weapon.

 

[handy]

Naturally God shares in what has become of His creation. God even made the ultimate sacrifice Himself to restore His creation to the state of being all good. But, as I said before, if there is no free will, then we would all have to be either slaves or robots.

Well, if you are going to use Free Will to account for the existence of good and evil, then you have to address what I see as a paradox. I would argue that Free Will cannot exist in an universe governed by an omniscient God who has already given a revelation as to what will happen.

Certainly an omniscient God can govern a universe in which free will exists. And, as said before there is a difference between foreknowledge and fate.

God can, and on occasion does, impose His will upon certain humans. Pharaoh comes to mind, when after he ignored God so many times, God imposed His will upon Pharaoh and hardened his heart yet again. But, that's fairly rare. For the most part, yes, God knows the both the good and evil men will do, but He isn't making them do it.

Consider Judas Iscariot and Peter on the night of Jesus' arrest. Jesus knew Judas was going to betray Him and that Peter was going to deny Him. But, He didn't force either of these men to do the things they did as though they were puppets that He was jerking about on strings. Either man had the ability to choose to act differently. His knowing beforehand what they were going to do, is not the same as His making them do it. A very famous, often memorized text is "For God causes all things to work together to the good of those who love Him and are called according to His purposes." This text isn't saying that God is causing the all things to happen, just that He works it all together so that it becomes good for those who love Him and are working towards His purposes. God did not cause Judas to betray Jesus that night. But He did work it out so that what Judas did benefited mankind. Keep in mind that Judas himself could have benefitted from it as well. There was absolutely nothing to prevent Judas from repenting of his actions and crying out for forgiveness. Apparently he didn't, but he was free to do so. Judas has nobody to blame but himself for the way things worked out. By the same token, Peter could have gone out and committed suicide as well, after denying Christ not once, but three times. Jesus had said that anyone who denied him, would be denied before the Father. But, Peter didn't do that. He wept bitterly at what he had done, then he went right back and stuck it out, and was placed as pastor of the church. And, was probably a better pastor, for having been through the experience. The bottom line is that Peter loved Jesus with all his heart and rose to his calling. There is no evidence at all that Judas loved Jesus.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Certainly an omniscient God can govern a universe in which free will exists. And, as said before there is a difference between foreknowledge and fate....

You're the only other person I've ever heard say that besides me (except in books or on EWTN). Well said. I have never seen a conflict between free will and God knowing what choices you will make.

 

[Drew]

Well, if you are going to use Free Will to account for the existence of good and evil, then you have to address what I see as a paradox. I would argue that Free Will cannot exist in an universe governed by an omniscient God who has already given a revelation as to what will happen.

I used to believe this but I think that a convincing "proof" exists to the effect that God can know everything that will happen without in any way restricting free will. The proof is rather complex and I am not willing to do the leg work to dredge it up right now. I suspect that I was adamant as you may be about how God's foreknowledge takes away our free will. When the proof was presented to me - the proof I read was from a University philosophy professor who made no appeal to relgious dogma - I had to recognize that I was in the wrong. The two can indeed co-exist.

 

[handy]

Well, if you are going to use Free Will to account for the existence of good and evil, then you have to address what I see as a paradox. I would argue that Free Will cannot exist in an universe governed by an omniscient God who has already given a revelation as to what will happen.

I was shopping with my m-i-l and daughter yesterday and I was reminded of this statement. My daughter brought her own money along yesterday, made her own choices regarding what to buy and came home happy with her purchases and $10 to put in her savings account.

Last fall, our school had a carnival/auction. At that time, we were really struggling with the fact that my daughter was turning into quite the little spendthrift. She had $20 and we warned her not to take it all or spend it all on junk. Her father and I had a discussion regarding her taking this much money. You see, we know our daughter and we knew, before she did it, we knew she was going to blow $20 if she took it with her. Well, we decided to go ahead and let her take it. And, sure enough, she wound up playing a lot of games, and then when the auction rolled around she started bidding on pretty much anything that was for a girl her age. Knowing full well that she was overspending, her father and I kept warning her not to spend too more than what she had. She was, but wasn't realizing it. And, although her father and I knew she was, we let her continue doing so. I told her that I would pay the auctioneer and she could pay me what she owed when she got home. When we did get home, and I told her how much she owed me, she turned kind of pale. She gave me all money she had left, but I told her she still owed me $11.10.

Now, Steve and I aren't God, and our foreknowledge wasn't based on omniscience, just a really good knowledge and understanding of our daughter's thought processes and behavior. We did know that she was going to get herself into debt that night, and we chose to let her go ahead and do it. BUT, we didn't MAKE her do it. She had the free will to either listen to us, or to be careless and wind up in debt.

Hopefully, this can illustrate the difference between foreknowledge and fate. In no way did our foreknowledge of our daughter's spending spree force her to get into debt.

 

[mondar]

Only in this good/evil universe will both the goodness of God, and the justice of God be manifest. I fully know that such a view will be rejected by those who do not want a God that judges.

See, I disagree with this whole line of thinking. If we assume that God is good (the source and embodiment of a universal moral truth), then we also have to assume that God has always been good. And, if God has always been good, that necessarily means that God was good before anyone was there to observe his goodness. And if this is assumed, this argument that the moral duality (good and evil) somehow makes God's goodness manifest falls apart. Why? God's goodness was always manifest.

Communication is tough.

You said...
"And, if God has always been good, that necessarily means that God was good before anyone was there to observe his goodness."
I dont see a problem with that statement. What I dont understand is how that demonstrates why my whole line of thinking is wrong.

You also said...
"And if this is assumed, this argument that the moral duality (good and evil) somehow makes God's goodness manifest falls apart."
I did suggest that we could not know Gods justice unless he allowed Evil to manifest itself and then judge it. Does this mean that God has a need? I dont see the need on Gods part, but I do see the need on our part.

What does God need? Did God create anything because he "needed" something?

 

[mondar]

Certainly an omniscient God can govern a universe in which free will exists. And, as said before there is a difference between foreknowledge and fate.

There might be differences in meaning between the two terms, but for the puproses of "making sense of Evil, I dont see any practicle differences.

I once watched a movie about this guy that could see all events 2 minutes ahead of time. He stopped at a resteraunt, and played out 20 quick scenarios on how he could make a pass at this waitress. There were all sorts of cute lines he used to get a date. He could also foresee if they worked or not by her responce within the 2 minutes.

Finally at the end of the movie he walked through this warehouse with all these boobie traps. With his 2 minute foresight, he could avoid every boobie trap. He could acheive the outcome he desired with just 2 minutes foresight. Just think of Gods omniscient foresight. Did God preknow every act and thought of man before it happened and its outcome during his initial act of creation?

If you follow the analogy, I dont see the practice difference between preknowledge and fate.

God can, and on occasion does, impose His will upon certain humans. Pharaoh comes to mind, when after he ignored God so many times, God imposed His will upon Pharaoh and hardened his heart yet again. But, that's fairly rare. For the most part, yes, God knows the both the good and evil men will do, but He isn't making them do it.

Ahh, now we can go exegetical and biblical. Certainly this concept is found in the bible in Romans 9. I think you picked a wonderful illustration of the sovereignty of God. I am not sure if I am going to disagree with you, but i would like to elaborate, or add to what you said. (Maybe it is different, you can be the judge of that.)

What did God do to harden Pharoah's heart? I think Romans 9 tells us. God did not make Pharoah sin. Pharoah already came with a sin nature. Neither did God did make Pharoahs sin nature worse then anyone elses. There is only one action in Romans 9 that seems to infer direct intervention. God "raised him up." God sovereignly selected Pharoah and then lift him up to power. Was that an evil act on the part of God? No, giving political power is not innately wrong. On the other hand, God knew the outcome. God gave him his position, and then judged him for using it in an evil fashion, knowing what was to come to pass. God could have restrained Pharoah by making him be born in Outer Mongolia in the stone age. He could have given Pharoahs evil rebellious nature less chance to rebel, but he didn't. He gave Pharoahs evil nature the chance to rule and rebel. "Who is this God that I should obey his voice."

This thinking can be applied over and over again. Why did God give Adolf Hitler power? Why Joseph Stalin? Why does evil happen? God can prevent it. The only possible theistic argument is that God has a purpose for the existance of evil. He judges it. As has been said, God receives no benefit in judging evil, but wishes all to come to repentance. But while Gods desire is for all good, he decreed evil to happen (or allows it to happen--its all the same because God foreknows all people and preknows all events). Who does this benefit? It benefits those whom God loves, for then we know the greatness and glory of our God.

 

[mondar]

This is a common answer to the question but it seems to have a big problem. You seem to take if for granted that "justice" is something that would need to be demonstrated in order for the universe to fully demonstrate the character of God. This seems a little strange since this line of thinking could lead one to say things like God's goodness would be more manifest in a universe where all people live in great pain for the first 10 years of their lives and are then miraculously healed by God. It is true that such a state of affairs would demonstrate something good about God in his capacity as healer but it leaves open the question: "Why the pain in the first place"?

"Why the pain in the first place"? Sin, rebellion, and hating God.

Drew, I dont think our views of man can possibly be reconsiled. I think this is one of the differences between you and me. I see man as a rebel sinner, you do not. I see man as natured so that he is irreconsilibly and naturally rebelous agaist God, you do not. You might think my view of man is too poor, and I think you have to high a view of man.

Just look at your analogy. I would make the analogy to be that a rebelious sinful universe that hearts of murder, and hatred. They hate each other, and most of all they hate God with passion. Everyone deserved to die, but God waited and wished for repentance. While all deserved to die when a painful plague of 10 years came alone, God changed the nature of some of these rebel sinners so that they became his friends, and he healed them of their plague.

I dont wag my head and blame God for the suffering. I drop my mouth and am amazed that he loves anyone, including me.