All-Powerful, Good God in a world with Evil - Is it consistent?

            Natural disasters, wars, and disease are nearly universally recognized as evil and must be reconciled logically if we are to accept the very existence of an all powerful loving God. At face value the problems of moral and physical evil in the world appear to directly conflict with the idea of an all-powerful, good, Creator, yet they are reconcilable.

            First of all, in recognizing evil we must presume that there is a moral standard on which to weigh our viewpoint of the world. If all we know is that of natural process divorced from contingency on a necessary being, then evil is only imaginative or at best an unfounded dogmatic assertion. In fact I would be justified in saying that disasters, wars, and disease are all good because they are part of nature, the highest power, and thus the highest authority. However, if we recognize the presence of such things as evil, then we may continue to search for the source of such a standard by which we judge. Frankly, I can only infer why God permits evil within the confines of man’s willful decisions. The late English preacher Charles Spurgeon stated, “I cannot tell you why God permits moral evil, neither can the ablest philosopher on earth, nor the highest angel in heaven.” However, aside from the question why, we can ask, how can God, being all powerful, and all loving, permit evil? This is the nature of the problem, how can these facts logically coexist?

            We should separate two distinct evils addressed in your question. Moral evil simply yet not equivocally understood as sin should be addressed first as it is a predecessor of natural evil. Moral evil can be defined as “evil produced by the activities of moral agents.”[1] Rape, child abuse, lying, cheating - the list of moral evils cannot perhaps be contained in the binding of a single book. In light of Biblical revelation the potential of moral evil was available to the first moral agents on earth, Adam and Eve, made aware if not for the first time by a serpent, a mere instrument of the fallen angel, Lucifer, who by his own pride transgressed his position in God’s created order. (Eze 28:16, Gen 3:1, Rev 20:2) Evil officially entered the world at a finite time through the first man, Adam, bringing death to mankind and a curse to the creation. (Rom 5:12, Rom 8:22, Gen 3:17) It is also important to understand that in order to measure qualitatively there must be a standard and that in the beginning God measured the world and declared it “very good”. (Gen 1:31) The first moral violation on earth came when Adam disobeyed the standard spoken by God regarding the eating of fruit that God specifically forbade him to eat. The violation of God’s moral standard brought punitive results. In the time of Noah God once again put an end to rampant moral evil by destroying the earth with a flood. (Gen 6:11-13) God gave mankind autonomy in moral reasoning, and yet He requires trust and obedience to those created from nothing, yet in His likeness; Adam failed followed by all mankind. (Gen 1:27, Rom 3:23) One theologian compares the fall of man with the initial splash of a rock thrown in a quiet pond which is “followed by a continuous sequence of ripples,” the ripples are an inevitable succession.[2] Moral evil is explicitly caused by moral agents outside of the perfect will of God, albeit permitted by God for a certain time (2 Tim 4:1, Psalm 9:8, Rom 2:15-16) The groaning of our cursed earth and the disruption of the natural order will one day be fixed, but for now it is a constant reminder of the consequence of sin. (Romans 8:22) It is important not to confuse patience of a just God in judging sin with the nonexistence of a loving God due to sin’s presence. (Rom 2:4)

            The natural evil in the world is present because of sin. The creation “became the recipient of divine judgment” through mankind’s rebellion.[3] We see the effects everywhere. Natural evil could be described as “evil that occurs in the process of the functioning of the natural order.”[4] It is important to not attempt to affix all apparent evils to God’s just judgment on sin. For example, forest fires can cleanse from disease and blight, blizzards can provide necessary precipitation to maintain sufficient water levels, and often times the loss of life is caused by discernible dangers overlooked by the choices of man. (Chambers) Also, obedience to God’s law can prevent natural evils. For example if every person on earth would adhere to the Biblical standard of one man and one woman for marriage, sexually transmitted diseases could be theoretically eliminated in only a few generations. Another interesting example of moral adherence to Divine law negating natural suffering can be found in the accounts of The Bubonic Plague. Jewish communities suffered significantly lower death rates during the ordeal because of their geographical separation and also because of their adherence to Levitical sanitation laws, which drastically lowered the population of rats carrying lice infected with the disease.[5]

            The basic understanding of three premises: God is good, all powerful, and evil is permitted does logically direct us in one avenue. God in His chosen creation cannot logically remove all evil for a specific reason. The two most theologically warranted viewpoints of evil’s presence are of God’s allowance of evil as a “benign” albeit logically irreducible side effect of free will or more finitely the freedom for moral reasoning in man.[6] The second parallels the Apostle Paul in God’s “twofold purpose of evil” that men should freely act rightly toward another and for awareness of the absence of relationship with God.[7] Pessimistic philosophical viewpoints ultimately usurp God’s goodness by having it succumb to His power, while optimists or Universalists subvert God’s justice to His love, ultimately failing to ratify essential attributes of God. Any test of the validity of one’s theodicy is that system’s internal consistency.[8] Simply stating premises from a contradicting system of belief does not disprove that system; however a logically inconsistent system of belief is disproved already. Likewise, while I disagree with the theology of these other systems, they can be presented with a degree logical consistency. According to the Theocentric (opposed to an anthrocentric) testimony of Scripture, I hold that the two- fold purpose of evil is essential in understanding God’s deserved glory and His permission of evil in our world. Pastor and author John MacArthur asserts that God “has allowed evil and sin within His sovereign purposes so that His holiness and grace might be put on display.” (MacArthur 2009) As a necessary being, it is not logically fitting that God should look outside of his own attributes to act, and thus His highest priority of action is that of His own nature. Without evil, mankind cannot know God’s mercy in reconciliation, and without free moral reasoning, man cannot actively love His Creator-Redeemer.

            Aside from these philosophical quandaries lies a more personal aspect of evil contained in the religious problem of evil, namely in the experience of pain wrought by the effects. Pain is most often referred to as “physical sensation of ill feeling” or “emotional or mental stress” and it touches everyone on earth.[9] Perhaps pain or anguish in our life on this earth can best be reconciled in the act of the cross whereby God came into humanity in order to purchase back his bride from a fallen, cursed world. It becomes more evident that God patiently endures sin in order to work out His purposes of redemption for the sake of His own deserved glory. (Rom 9:22) However, God did not remove Himself so far as to not subject His only begotten Son to a most repugnant and undeserving death. This reality may be realized as He prayed to His Father in the Garden of Gethsemane. (Luke 22:44) “And being in anguish, he [Jesus] prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground. (Luke 22:44) The condition of Hematohidrosis is a testimony to the anguish endured in expectation of the agony of the cross.[10] Jesus Christ, fully God and fully man with no mixture of essence persevered being falsely accused, beaten, and crucified on a Roman cross, perhaps the most brutal execution in any time. The reality of the atoning blood shed by Jesus Christ was purposed in the Father’s mind before the foundation of the World. (1 Pet 1:20; Rev 13:8) And so we have a High Priest in Jesus who is able to sympathize with our human nature and the suffering of pain. (Heb 4:15) God has solved the problem of pain, though it is through faith in Christ and His atoning work according to His Word, and we who believe will one day be separated from all evil, pain, and even the memory of such existence (Rev 21:4).

             It is most certainly possible to honestly question and seek truth in relation to God without attacking Him. Yet, one must likewise honestly pursue truth in the Lord Jesus Christ, because “without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. (Heb 11:6)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lester, Rob. Jewish Sanitary Laws Came from God. Creation Faith Facts.http://preachrr.wordpress.com/2010/04/17/jewish-sanitary-laws-came-from-god/ (accessed March 30, 2012).

Taylor, Paul. “Did Jesus Really Sweat Drops of Blood?” www.ChristianAnswers.net.http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t018.html (accessed March 30, 2012).

Towns, Elmer L. Theology For Today. 2nd ed. Mason, Ohio, USA: Cengage Learning, 2008.

Chambers, Aaron. “Http: //mylordandmyblog.wOrdpress.cOm/2011/06/02/moral-and-natural-evil/.” My Lord and My Blog. Entry posted June 2, 2011 .http://mylordandmyblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/moral-and-natural-evil/ (accessed March 28, 2012).

Elwell, Walter A., ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001.

Lester, Rob. “Jewish Sanitary Laws Came from God.” Creation Faith Facts.http://preachrr.wordpress.com/2010/04/17/jewish-sanitary-laws-came-from-god/ (accessed March 30, 2012).

Vermeer, Paul. Learning Theodicy: the Problem of Evil and the Praxis of Religious Education. Boston: Brill Academic Pub, 1999.

Aaron Chambers, “Http: //mylordandmyblog.wOrdpress.cOm/2011/06/02/moral-and-natural-evil/,” My Lord and My Blog, entry posted June 2, 2011.  http://mylordandmyblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/moral-and-natural-evil/(accessed March 28, 2012).

MacArthur, John. Comment on “Macarthur On Theodicy.” Baa Baa Blog. Comment posted March 9, 2009.http://baasheepbaa.blogspot.com/2009/03/macarthur-on-theodicy.html (accessed March 31, 2012).

---

[1] Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001), 414.

[2] Elmer L. Towns, Theology For Today, 2nd ed. (Mason, Ohio, USA: Cengage Learning, 2008), 504.

[3] Ibid., 505.

[4] Walter A. Elwell, ed., one Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001), 414.

[5] Rob Lester, “Jewish Sanitary Laws Came from God,” Creation Faith Facts,http://preachrr.wordpress.com/2010/04/17/jewish-sanitary-laws-came-from-god/ (accessed March 30, 2012).

[6] Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001), 412.

[7] Paul Vermeer, Learning Theodicy: the Problem of Evil and the Praxis of Religious Education (Boston: Brill Academic Pub, 1999), 33.

[8] Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001), 414.

[9] Ibid.,  882.

[10] Paul Taylor, “Did Jesus Really Sweat Drops of Blood?” www.ChristianAnswers.net, http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t018.html (accessed March 30, 2012).