THE PROBLEM OF EVIL

The problem of evil is an atheistic argument which
attempts to show that traditional western theism is
contradictory because it asserts the three
following statements are true:

1. God is omnipotent
2. God is good
3. There is evil

But if God is omnipotent, it seems that he'd be
able to prevent evil, and if God is good, then it
seems tha he'd want to prevent evil. Yet evil
exists. Since each of these beliefs is essential to
belief in God but all of them cannot be true, God
cannot exist.


Some theists attempt to escape the problem of
evil by denying at least one of these three
statements. Process Theology suggests that God
is good, evil exists, but he is not omnipotent. God
wants to prevent evil, but is unable to do so. The
most he can do is be there to comfort us during
times of suffering. Eastern religions such as
Hinduism often deny that God is good. They claim
that God is either both good and evil or beyond
good and evil, which are thought of as not real
qualities, but merely human attitudes towards
certain experiences and behaviors. Ancient Greek
Gnosticism and Christian Science (as well as
some strains of Hinduism) deny the reality of evil.
They claim that the material world is an illusion
and that evil and suffering come from ignorance of
this fact.

Much more satisfactory answers to the problem
involve constructing a theodicy. A theodicy is an
attempt to solve the problem of evil without
denying any of the three statements which
produce it. Here are several examples:

(1) The Free Will Theodicy says that giving human
beings free will logically implies the possibility
that they will do evil. God could have created us
as robots, but value of human freedom outweighs
the suffering which it inevitably causes. Most
theists also believe that God will "even the score"
in the end, rewarding those who suffered unjustly
and punishing those who caused the suffering.

(2) The Spiritual Development Theodicy says that
suffering builds character and that particular kinds
of evil are necessary in order for us to learn
certain lessons. For instance, lessons of having
faith in God in trying times or developing courage
in the face of danger, moral virtue in the face of
temptation, and so on.

(3) The Human Ignorance Theodicy says that
human minds cannot hope to understand the
ways of God and that we ought to simply trust that
he has a morally sufficient reason for allowing
evil. This is essentially the message of the Biblical
book of Job. In the book, Job, a righteous man,
suffers terribly and wonders why God has allowed
this suffering to occur. At the end of the book, God
appears in a whirlwind and berates Job for not
knowing his place and questioning his wisdom
and authority, but nevertheless rewards him for
his faithfulness. The message, again, seems to be
to trust God and not ask too many questions and
everything will work out in the end.

Do any of these theodicies do a good job of
solving the problem of evil? What might be some
shortcomings of the arguments? Are there some
kinds of evil which are not explainable in terms of
the Free Will Theodicy?

Prof. Borrowdale
borrowdalej@lanecc.edu