The Problem of Evil

(see Faith and Reason by Peter Kreeft)

Fr. Andrew Wojtan—September 8, 2013

Logical Formulations of the Problem of Evil—It is logically impossible that all four of the following propositions are true:

If God exists, and is all-good, and is all-powerful, then evil cannot exist.

If God exists, and is all-good, and evil exists, then God is not all-powerful.

If God exists, and is all-powerful, and evil exists, then God is not all-good.

And if “God” means a being that is all-good and all-powerful, and yet evil exists, then God cannot exist.

Six Possibly Ambiguous Terms:

God—We have been arguing about God’s goodness and power, but we forgot a third attribute, His wisdom. It might be that he sees what we do not see. That answer is not satisfying but it explains why we can’t explain it.

Existence—Valid standards of true judgment don’t exist as stones and people exist. The theist can reply that there are no ill things, that all things are good, though not all of our actions and choices are good. Moral choices aren’t things at all, and God didn’t create them, we did.

Evil—We distin­guish two very different kinds of evil: moral evils, like the choice to murder, and physical evils, like suffering and death. Our worst sufferings are not caused by things, but by people, especially the one we see in the mirror.

How could a totally good God create a world with any physical evil in it? If He’s going to create a finite world at all, it’s got to have limits, limited physical goodness.

God did create a per­fect world, a Garden of Eden, but we messed it up. We will appreciate the perfect world of Heaven more if we experience imperfections here first. The perfect world can be perfectly ours only if we freely choose it, and that requires a free choice trial.

Goodness—How can God be good if he allows so many evils? The analogy of the parent might explain. It’s for love. When we love someone a lot, we put a very high value on his/her freedom. Look at the saints as the clearest examples of what religion is supposed to do for us. We see that they all suffer a lot, unjustly and willingly, out of their love and faith. They say it’s God’s design, to strengthen and toughen them against anything this world can throw at them. So suffering is not an accident; it is part of the Divine design.

Omnipotence—If God can do anything, then he can create a finite world with free will in it and guarantee that there will be no evil in it, can’t he? It’s a meaningless self-contradiction to create free choice and guarantee that no one will freely choose evil. God can perform miracles, but not contradictions. Most of us, even most atheists, are glad we have this world with free choices, rather than a world where everything is decided for us.

Happiness—If God is all-good, why aren’t we happy? Because we are in time, in a drama, a story, and we will be happier in the end if we go through some unhappiness now.

The Problem of the Unjust Distribution of Evil—Why does evil happen to those who don’t deserve it? The real problem is why so many good things happen to bad people. What standard do you use to judge human goodness? Should we judge saints by sinners’ standards, or sinners by saints' standards? The saints all say we are bad, and the saints are the best and the happiest people in the world. Are there people who are so perfect that they can’t be ennobled and made better by suffering?

Two Mysteries of Solidarity—The ideas of original sin and vicarious atonement. The basic idea is a human solidarity and interdependence, both in sin and in salvation. In this vision of life, there are no victimless crimes. When we save one per­son, we save the world, and when we harm anyone, we harm everyone. The innocent suffer for the guilty. Original sin is the bad news of that idea. Vicarious atonement is the good news of the same idea. Everyone contributes to the disease or to the health of the whole human family by every evil or good choice. Evil began as a problem and ended as a mystery.