Solving the problem of evil

Religious Studies

Evil and suffering pose arduous puzzles. That evil and suffering prevail in the world is undeniable, but the reason for their ubiquity, the pattern, if any, of their distribution across the world and among the great diversity of people, their impact on individual and societal well-being, and the means to confront them are by no means easily explicable. Calling a deity (or deities) into view, rather than providing a reassuring explanation, engenders a host of perplexing and mind-blowing matters. The vast and apparently planless presence of evil and suffering in the world opens belief in any form of a caring deity to all sorts of inquiries, let alone ridicule. Why would a sufferer hold a belief that there exists a deity, one that is barely responsive? More baffling is the attitude of some believers when distress and pain turn them to supplication, devotion, tranquil acceptance, and even expression of gratitude, instead of doubt, disbelief, or atheism. The belief that there is a deity never vanished, despite the enormity and outrageousness of evil and suffering, and just as this belief continues, its problematic dimensions perpetuate and grow more daunting. For some, such a belief seems to be delusional. Theists hold onto groundless, if not false, beliefs and a devotional attitude to a fictional deity. Yet perhaps theists are not selfdeluded; they may have rational, not solely psychological or religious, reasons to retain theistic beliefs. 1 Far from being solely a challenge to theism, the omnipresence of evil and suffering in the world constitutes an obstinate problem to intellectuals of all stripesatheists are no exception as some versions of the problem raise difficulties to theists and atheists alike (Nagasawa (2018))and religious orientations. It is a problem of multiple existential, epistemological, and ethical faces. In philosophy and theology, these surface mostly in debates about the very existence and nature of evil, its causes (whether natural, supernatural, or self-inflicted), the ability of human reason to fathom factors involved in appalling evil occurrences, and the compatibility of such occurrences with fundamental propositions about the divine. In the case of theism, the problem of evil and suffering poses so formidable a challenge that it became widely described as 'the rock of atheism' (Küng (1976), 431). Theists espouse multiple interpretations of the conception of the deity, but thinking of God in metaphysical terms (e.g. as the ultimate uncaused cause and the ground of being) is the most shared characteristic. In classical Perfect Being Theism, conceivably the most dominant form of theism, God is perceived to be the being 'than which a greater cannot be thought'. This conception entails the 'great-making properties', including omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence (Rogers (2000), 12). Yet these very properties that

NoFo. An Interdisciplinary Journal of Law and Justice., No. 4, 2007.

The South African Baptist Journal of Theology 1&2 Peter Vol.13 pp. 214-230., 2004

In 1 Peter 1:3-7 we read that the Christians were facing persecution because of their faith and the author reminds them that every trial is a test of their faith. The trials and consequential suffering can be withstood because they are able to look forward to an inheritance – eternal life with God. Christians can endure all trials and suffering because of the hope of glory and ultimate joy. There is a grace afforded by God in the presence to match whatever trial or suffering they might face. Thus it appears that there is both a purpose – one being the testing, transforming and purifying of one’s faith and a great prize for those who endure suffering – the Lord himself rewarding us. It is with this thought I will end this essay - with this belief of an inheritance, a resurrection and the gift of immortality. However, I will not shun asking the difficult questions, nor will I avoid critical reflection and analysis of a number of the contradictory or unpleasant answers. I will not eschew the lack of answers relating to evil and suffering – the pains of the scourges of poverty, persecution and oppression, the ravages of war and natural disasters, and all the inequity and injustice that has fallen throughout history – often on the innocent. This wickedness and agony that has throughout history indiscriminately befallen Christians and non-believers alike, has initiated great dismay, depression and consternation for many and some have even rejected the concept of God and the Gospel because of the malevolence and affliction they have been subjected to. The horrendous profundity and extent of human suffering and the history of the inhumanity of people makes the idea of a loving Creator seem quite implausible and predisposes many to accept a naturalistic theory of religion. At the end of this essay I will attempt to show that the declarations that the writer of 1 Peter makes concerning the Christian’s inheritance and suffering proffers some expectation for those who are faced with the quandary of evil and offer some hope now to enable them to endure whatever life has thrown onto their journey. Whilst I will with candour endeavour to query the issues and questions relating to evil I am conscious of the fact that many books and essays have been written by vastly more erudite authors. Consequently I acknowledge that what I have to say is ultimately nothing more than the personal reflection birthed in my own life’s experiences and learning. This paper will explore some of the issues and arguments and offer some critical reflection on the ideas and ways that people have proposed to overcome or uphold the dilemma or conflict between the existence of the God of classical theism and evil and the consequence of evil - suffering. I seek explanation of the plain fact of evil and suffering but I do not seek it in the arrogant belief that I can explain evil away. My Christian faith is not meant to provide complete answers and understanding to all life’s vexing questions. The purpose of my faith is to become aware and share in the life of the infinite and unlimited creator God. My belief provides strength and wisdom to live all of life but does not provide the perfect philosophical apologetic. My faith leaves me with much unsolved mystery and perplexing puzzle, often my faith is accompanied by doubt and existential pain and anxiety. Evil is not a theoretical problem but an existential problem. In the face of evil we are challenged to examine who we are and what we value as well as seeking a deeper insight into the nature and purposes of God. And sometimes what we see frightens us into denial or we respond wrongly to our finite understanding and experience of the infinite God. It is then that we feel compelled to provide a philosophical theory or theological dogma that explains it all and allows us to live – but with blinkers as we are often not willing to see the inconsistency, contradictions and sometimes falseness of our dogma.

Philosophia, 1984

I argue that the creation and freely chosen salvation and everlasting bliss of even just one person is a greater good than any finite amount of evil and suffering. Since it is extremely likely (if not certain) that, out of all possible individuals that could exist, some (or at least one) would only be freely saved through the contemplation and experience of evil and suffering, then God would be justified in creating a world with evil and suffering to allow for the salvation of such individuals, so long as no one else freely lost their salvation who otherwise would not have lost it because of the evil and suffering. Thus, the problem of evil dissipates, as a world with evil and suffering, even seemingly gratuitous evil and suffering, would be entirely expected given theism.

2021

This book is an inquiry into particular matters concerning the nature, normativity, and aftermath of evil action. It combines philosophical conceptual analysis with empirical studies in psychology and discussions of historical events to provide an innovative analysis of evil action. The book considers unresolved questions belonging to metaethical, normative, and practical characteristics of evil action. It begins by asking whether Kant's historical account of evil is still relevant for contemporary thinkers. Then it addresses features of evil action that distinguish it from mundane wrongdoing, thereby placing it as a proper category of philosophical inquiry. Next, the author inquires into how evil acts affect moral relationships and challenge Strawsonian accounts of moral responsibility. He then draws conceptual and empirical connections between evil acts such as genocide, torture, and slavery and collective agency, and asks why evil acts are often collective acts. Finally, the author questions both the possibility and propriety of forgiveness and vengeance in the aftermath of evil and discusses how individuals ought to cope with the pervasiveness of evil in human interaction.

2017

Evil is the opposite of good. This phenomenon has unleashed serious threat to human existence. The problem is that it is difficult to understand and even to deal with. Evil is a subject that has defied solution politically, socially or religiously. This paper examined the issue of the origin, effect and ways of dealing with evil for a better society. The research adopted the historical and literary methods of research. Various views are examined. Findings affirmed that God created evil as well as good. However, this view challenged the omnipotence and the goodness of God. The research identified bloodshed, corruption, demonic activities, human trafficking, child abuse and child dumping/abuse and many others as social vices associated with evil. This research recommends that man should learn to live with it, overcome it with good, while religious groups should lead in the campaign to end evil and/or reduce its effect on society.

Ankara Üniversitesi İlahiyat Fakültesi dergisi, 2012