CLEARLY THE MOST PROLIFIC argument against the idea of a loving and righteous God is the persistence of evil in the world. Historically, the problem of evil has been raised in many forums, usually with the intention of diminishing or destroying the idea of God. For example, shortly after the terrorist attacks on America in 2001, Victor J. Stenger said, “Science flies you to the moon, religion flies you into buildings.” Because it is theoretically and theologically impossible to claim that God is limited in any way, something else must be going on here regarding evil. I am suggesting that not all adversity and misfortune is straight from the pit of hell. Mankind’s sinful and evil desires are the root cause of much adversity and misfortune.
Where does “evil” come from? Typically, we consider evil to be that which is morally wrong, sinful, or wicked, but the word evil can also refer to anything that causes harm, with or without a moral dimension. Admittedly, evil is a problem of both theological and philosophical interests, as well as arising in various world religions.
Alvin Plantinga expresses the typical argument about God and evil this way: “If God is as benevolent as Christian theists claim, He must be just as appalled as we are at all this evil. But if He is also as powerful as they claim, then presumably He is in a position to do something about it. So why does He permit it?”1 Of course, a lot hangs on what one means by the phrase “…then presumably.” Take, for example, the claim that if God is omniscient and omnipotent, then he can simply eliminate every evil state of affairs. Or can He? We were created as free moral agents. In other words, we have been endowed with freedom of choice. God does not want automatons, preprogrammed to act within prescribed parameters. Rather, He prefers that we serve Him sincerely and in truth (see Josh. 24:14). The desire to live in holiness and righteousness is as much an individual choice as choosing to live a sinful, self-centered life.
What about something bad that leads to something good? Plantinga tickles our brain by asking, “Under what conditions would an omnipotent [God] be unable to eliminate a certain evil without eliminating an outweighing good?”2 Great question. Consider my brain properly “tickled.” Suppose that evil is included in some good state of affairs that outweighs it. For example, the life of a young girl who needs a heart transplant depends on the death of a teenager who suffered a traumatic brain injury in a car accident. The parents of the decedent arraign to donate her heart and other viable organs. Suppose, further, that the tissue match is near-perfect and the young girl has only hours to live without a new heart. Clearly, the good of the young girl receiving a life-sustaining heart transplant depends on the death of the teenager. In this scenario, not even God could eliminate the evil of the teenager’s death without consequently eliminating the good of the heart transplant which saves the life of the young girl.
C.S. Lewis says of man’s bad behavior, “I am only trying to call attention to a fact; the fact that this year, or this month, or, more likely, this very day, we have failed to practise [sic] ourselves the kind of behaviour [sic] we expect from other people.”3 In other words, man chooses how to act. Mankind has come to rely on a standard or system” of justice that serves to reward good behavior and punish bad behavior relative to those choices. Lewis believes this idea of good vs. evil (right vs. wrong) is directly linked to the law of human nature. This is precisely what Paul meant when he wrote, “…I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate… for I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing” (Rom. 7:15, 19). This “law of human nature” is what Paul means when he said, “So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me” (Rom. 7:17).
Augustine’s approach to the so-called problem of evil is brilliant and practical; both intellectually rational and emotionally satisfying. In a very straightforward manner, Augustine argues against the premise that evil is a thing.4 Something created. He takes exception to the premise, if (i) God created all things; and (ii) evil is a thing; then (iii) God created evil. But, what if evil is not a “thing” in that sense? Then evil was not created per se. Augustine said if we believe in a good and righteous God, then our God would be incapable of creating evil. He also said God could not be good if He knowingly created evil. So, Augustine argued, if (i) all things that God created are good; and (ii) evil is not good; therefore, (iii) evil was not created by God. Yet, it came from somewhere. Augustine concluded the following: (i) God created every thing; (ii) God did not create evil; (iii) therefore, evil is not a thing. Augustine’s bottom line is this: Evil is the absence or lack of good.
As I noted above, theological interpretations about evil lack consensus. The same is true about the concept of sin. No doubt some of this lack comes from biblical terminology. For example, biblical words for sin include hamartia (missing the mark), parabasis (transgression), adikia (unrighteousness), asebeia (impiety), anomia (lawlessness), ponēria (depravity), and epithymia (evil desire). Looking at the list again, ask yourself which of these sins, if any, God commits? I hope you replied, None. Augustine teaches that sin is “…disordered desire, not desire itself. Sin is perverse love.” He adds that to live after the flesh is certainly evil, though the nature of flesh is not itself evil.5 Not everything we do “in the flesh” is evil. After all, we live in a fleshly body. Paul said the desires of the flesh are against the Spirit, and the desires of the Spirit are against the flesh, for these are opposed to each other (see Gal. 5:16). He was referring to works of the flesh that are against the character of God, such as “…sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these” (5:19-20).
Wayne Grudem defines sin as any failure to conform to the moral law of God in action, attitude, or nature.6 John writes, “sin is lawlessness” (1 John 3:4). The Doctrine of Sin helps us understand the radical difference between death and resurrection, portraying the life-and-death drama of redemption through the blood of Jesus. It is impossible, under our own power, do that which is right and not do that which is wrong. We have a sinful nature because of Adam’s sin. Accordingly, not only was sin transferred from Adam and Eve to mankind, it is transferred (albeit momentarily) from us to Jesus on the cross as He dies in our place. It is this plan for redemption, which God ordained before the foundation of the world, that gives mankind its only hope for deliverance. (See Eph. 1:3-6.)
The concept of evil is comprehensively explained in the Christian Doctrine of Sin. Kevin J. Vanhoozer describes the nature of doctrine as a dramatic proposal. He writes, “Doctrine directs the church to participate rightly in the drama of redemption, and it assumes that one can participate rightly only if one has an adequate understanding of what the drama is all about.”7 It is important to understand that every part of our being is affected by sin—intellect, emotions, desires, goals, motives, and physical health. Moreover, sin shapes life. It enslaves; dictates one’s direction; and, ultimately determines one’s eternal destiny. Sin is not passive. Rather, it is dynamic, progressive, and cumulative. It gains in speed and intensity, leading to greater iniquity. Sin has perverted life to its very core. No longer can we waist our time on sermons and lessons that soften the blow of judgment, downplay or ignore our innate sin nature, or hint that there no real consequences to how we choose to live our lives.
(Please see First Principles Part Two: Salvation From Our Sin Nature for further teaching on sin.)
Steven Barto BS Psy, ThM
Unless otherwise indicated, all Scripture references contained herein are from the English Standard Version (ESV).
References
1 Alvin Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1974), 9.
2 Ibid., 22.
3 C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity (New York, NY: HarperOne, 1952, 1980), 7.
4 Augustine of Hippo, Confessions, Edited by J.J. O’Donnell (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992) , 76.
5 Ibid.
6 Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2020), 619.
7 Kevin J. Vanhoozer, The Drama of Doctrine: A Canonical Linguistic Approach to Christian Theology (Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Publishers, 2005), 78.
letsmeetjesus.blog 