EVIL

DISCLAIMER: This is not my definitive theodicy. Theodicy should be lived, not just thought, so my theodicy is constantly being updated and refined according to my human experience. This is merely a record of my theodicy as it was when I was 17 years old. It is expanded from a set of notes for a talk I gave at my school's Philosophy Society entitiled "Does Western Civilisation Really Exist? -A Fresh Look at the Problem of Evil.

***

- Philosophers divide evil into two sorts: Moral evil, evil done by man, and natural evil, evil that lies outside of man’s influence. It has been said that the twentieth century showed us the most horrific moral evil, witnessing the Holocaust, the Communist regime and Rwandan genocide amongst many other atrocities. It seems as if the twenty-first century will return our attention to natural evil: We have already seen a Tsunami, a Hurricane and most recently an Earthquake reeking havoc. But moral evil still persists, as we see from the twin towers, Chechnya, the London Bombings and so on.

-As a theodicist, it is my job to show why God can still exist, despite this evil. Note I am not trying to prove to you that God exists, I am merely trying to demonstrate that my viewpoint is internally coherent.

-I would like to start with an analogy. Consider the following propositions:

[1] Western civilisation is able to end poverty in the Third World.

[2] Western civilisation is willing to end poverty in the Third World.

[3] Poverty is rife in the third world.

Now, if you accept any two of these propositions, you must reject the other. There is a problem if you assert all three of them. Our solution to this problem, however, is not to simply conclude “Western Civilisation does not exist”. A flaw must be found with one of the propositions, usually [1] or [2]; I would suggest the latter, for the following reasons:

(This is the only time I will quote statistics, they come from globalissues.org)

-3 billion people live on less than two dollars a day.

-The combined wealth of the world’s 200 richest people is 1 trillion.

-The richest 1% of the world’s population has as much wealth as the poorest 57%.

Again, I assert, Western Civilisation is able, but not willing, to end Third World Poverty.

-Now let us consider what has been dubbed the Problem of Evil:

[1] God is able to eradicate evil.

[2] God is willing to eradicate evil.

[3] Evil exists.

Is this not similar to the previous trio of propositions?

-Of course I am not proposing that the two sets of statements are completely analogous, for Western Civilisation is neither all powerful nor all loving. I only draw the parallel for two reasons: The first is to expose the apathy of the West, but I will come back to that at the end. The second is to try and illustrate that to conclude that God cannot exist because of the Problem of Evil is only one solution to it, the atheist must give a reason why he has chosen this option over a remedying, or a reformed understanding, of the first two statements.

-And that is what I am going to try and do: Alter your understanding of God’s willingness and ability to eradicate evil to solve the apparent Problem. In fact, in my view it is not a problem at all, and with any luck I will have convinced you of this too by the end.

-I am not going to propagate any nonsense about how God has to create evil in order to create the best possible world. I believe that God chooses to create evil. I am well aware that not everybody wants a massive theological exposition, so I will outline only the philosophical trend in my argument here, but I will make the theology which ultimately justifies it available to those who want it.

-So what I must endeavour to show is why God chooses to allow Evil to be a part of his creating. My choice of word here is extremely important. It is essential to this theodicy that creation is not something that has finished; it is something that is happening right now, as we speak, this very moment. Creation will only be finished when it is perfected, at the end of time.

(By the way, this is an important criticism of Augustinian theodicy for all you L6th philosophers: If the world was apparently created perfect at its start, why did it go wrong? If the answer is because of free will, who’s to say we won’t sin in Heaven? Surely the perfection in Heaven must exceed the goodness which the Earth was originally made with…)

-Another thing that must crucially be established for this theodicy is the definition of exactly what evil is: Now remember, I am not arguing for what evil must be, I am just trying to demonstrate that this viewpoint is internally coherent. From this viewpoint, evil is defined as anything that goes against God’s intended perfecting of humanity. In the Bible it says that in Heaven there will be no suffering, bloodshed, tears etc. so we call these things, or the things that are directly linked to them, evil -they are not part of God’s intended eventual perfection.

-Now, if we go back to the Problem, we see that it is usually phrased in terms of God being willing and able to get rid of evil, but you may have noticed I am taking it back a step, asking “why did God create evil in the first place?”

-My answer is, simply, that evil fits into God’s plan. Creation is something that is happening until it is finished, when time ends. Until then, God allows things to exist within his creation that are opposed to its intended perfection, but he always uses them to push creation towards that final destination of perfection. I will again use an analogy, not to prove my point but illustrate it. In order for a car to move forwards there must be resistance from the road. If the road is, say, very icy, then the road does not provide any resistance for the tires to grip against so there is no forward motion. This is an Iranean idea; evil is used for good. In the case of moral evil God allows us the opportunity to sin and do wrong in order to facilitate our spiritual growth. Natural evil is also used in such a way as to move creation towards total goodness.

-Now, I am not going to pretend that I know how every instance of evil is used for good, if anything because I am not omnipotent. I am just as outraged and shocked by Auschwitz as anyone else -I think it of paramount importance that the theodicist does not become disconnected with the suffering he is arguing about. But remember -and I will keep saying this- I am only trying to put forward an internally coherent viewpoint. The system of thought that I am defending holds God as both omniscient and omnipotent. We have to assume that he knows best, that his plan is completely perfect. After all, he’s God. I believe that while we can only have faith that the plan is perfect as a whole, occasionally God shows us how in a particular instance he uses evil to play a part in the music of his creation.

-But how can we maintain this, I have found comes the most common retort, when so many that die because of natural evil have not had the chance to become Christians? Surely I would say that these people are going to hell? The same goes for those who live “good” lives but are not Christians.

-This objection basically arises because of our American friends taking a slightly simplistic approach to eschatology. The current trend in North American theology is to stress fiery destination of unbelievers. Consequently, America evangelism can quite commonly consist of literally telling people that if they do not repent of their sins and submit to God right here and right now on Earth then they will burn in Hell for all eternity. As I took great pains to try and explain to my Philosophy class, this is a very simplistic way of looking at the Bible. I must be careful here, as many people would accuse me of propounding a heresy, but I believe that this American understanding is completely flawed. In the Bible, more than we are told about Heaven or Hell, more than we are told about God’s anger, more than we are even told about spreading the Gospel, we are repeatedly told that God is fair, and that his ways are just and true. This is the chief principle to acknowledge: God is fair, God is fair, God is fair. One more time? God is fair. With respect to those who die without hearing the Gospel, the Bible also says “each will be judged according to the law that he has known”.

-And yet, you might object, a problem still presents itself. Even if evil is used for good, it is still an injustice that the evil has been allowed to exist at all. Why not just create instant perfection, with no need for evil? This is what I feel the Problem of Evil must inevitably be reduced to, and I would even argue that it is a more serious problem than the one originally outlined. Again I must stress that the Christian who claims to know every reason for why things are the way they are and to fully comprehend the divine plan is not only extremely arrogant but also a fool. However, there are two points I can make in response to this objection.

-The first is to highlight that Christianity is unique amongst the religions of the world in that it teaches that GOD SUFFERS. God suffers, but not just in the abstract disconnected sense of longing for us to turn to him: God actually becomes man and suffers the same pains that we do, and indeed worse pains. In fact Christians believe that Christ suffered more than any one else on Earth ever has or will, not only because he endured one of the most brutally tortuous modes of execution, but also because he suffered in Spirit, bearing the punishment of all of our sins. In our suffering we actually share in Christ’s pain, and we know him more intimately because of it.

-The second point goes the most distance towards consoling us about evil being allowed to exist. Remember -I’ll say it one more time- I’m only trying to show that this approach is internally coherent, not make you believe in any of the religious beliefs it relies on. The point is expressed particularly well in the work of Karl Barth (if you want to pigeonhole this theodicy, you can call it a neo-Iraneo-Barthian approach). Basically, though Christians join with the rest of humanity in crying out in protest against the suffering they endure, the Christians also have the future of perfection in Heaven to look forward to. This is not just a vague hope in some “happily ever after”. Let us examine what Heaven really means to the Christian.

-Heaven is that intended perfection of which I have been speaking that all of creation is heading towards. Heaven is fully realised at the end of time and the end of space, when creation is finished, and when creation joins with Christ through the power of what he has done on the Cross. Heaven is a concept not fully comprehendible to the human mind. Heaven so brilliant, so wonderful, so PERFECT that it will not only make us forget the suffering we endured on Earth, it will remove all its scars and effects to the extent that it will be as if it has never happened. This is an enormous concept, but one must try and grasp it as much as one can. The Bible says that in Heaven the Church will be joined with Christ as a bride to a bridegroom -we will become completely unified with God in the totality of our beings. If God is perfect, there can be no iniquity, pain, anguish, or anything negative in him. We will be transformed to the extent that our memory and experience of suffering will be completely overcome in God’s goodness.

-And yet still you might argue that because suffering has still happened on Earth, even if it’s pain is completely dealt with in Heaven, an injustice is done. In Dostoevsky’s The Brothers Karamazov, one of the brothers asserts that even if there has only been on instance of pointless suffering in the whole of the history of the world, God is unjust. But remember, I have endeavoured to explain how, though we don’t always see how, evil always serves a purpose. Furthermore, we must again remind ourselves of what Heaven is. The Bible says our true nature is eternal. Our existence in Heaven is eternal, not infinite, but eternal. This means that our ecstasy in Heaven will not be infinitely more marvellous than anything experienced on Earth, Heaven is not just Earthly pleasure multiplied manifold, Heaven is only a completely different scale, indeed it transcends all scales, beyond our comprehension. I believe that this will not only compensate for our comparatively miniscule sufferings on Earth, it will change us to the effect that those sufferings will have never have taken place.