THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND SUFFERING NATURAL EVIL

THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND SUFFERING

NATURAL EVIL The apparent malfunctioning of the natural world, which produces diseases, earthquakes, volcanoes, famines and floods THE CHALLENGE OF EVIL AND SUFFERING Omnipotent Mackie’s Inconsistent Triad Evil MORAL EVIL Arises as a result of human actions that are morally wrong, such as murder, war and cruelty. Omnibenevolent Demonstrates that the ideas of God being all powerful and all loving cannot logically work with the existence of evil, eg if God was all powerful and all loving he would not allow evil to exist. Evil does exist so therefore either God is not all powerful, is not all loving or does not exist. OMNIPOTENT OMNIBENEVOLENT PERFECTLY GOOD Why can God not be this? He is seemingly incapable of destroying evil. No all loving God would want His creations to suffer as they so evidently do. If God was perfectly good, He would not allow evil to happen. Possible solutions God does not have unlimited power, He merely has the power to guide events rather than to control nature. God’s love is not like human love so it would be unrealistic to expect Him to intervene to stop suffering. God’s goodness might mean something different from human goodness. Problems with the solutions If God is not in full control then it is questionable as to whether good will always overcome evil. If God is not the ultimate power, is He worthy of worship? This does not really give a good reason why God does not intervene. If God is not morally perfect then is he really worthy of worship?

DIFFERENT RELIGIOUS VIEWS ON EVIL CHRISTIANITY ISLAM Some Christians see suffering as the result of human sin (Augustine). All occurrences of natural evil are understood to be expressions of Allah’s will and natural disasters can be tests of fortitude and faith as well as expressions of His displeasure. A more popular view on moral evil is that it is the result of God allowing humans to have free will (Ireneaus). This means that many Muslims believe that when a natural disaster happens, they are either being tested or punished by Allah; and that He is justified in doing this. HINDUISM Evil is an illusion brought about by greed and selfishness. All suffering is the result of evil committed in a previous life and is therefore not God’s fault. Evil and suffering can be overcome by achieving good karma.

THE AUGUSTINIAN THEODICY WEAKNESSES THEODICY God allows evil to exist as part of his greater plan of love – linked to the exercise of free will. STRENGTHS Augustine’s idea is consistent with the God of classical theism. Blame is placed with humans and therefore God’s qualities remain unchallenged by the existence of evil. Free will is considered to be a good thing and gives humans the option to choose to be good. God created the world to be completely good – evil is not an actual substance, it is the going wrong/lack of or the ‘privation’ of good. Evil came from the sinning of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden – this original sin was then passed to humans. Because suffering is a punishment for sin, God is right not to intervene. People who don’t sin are not punished and therefore are happy, those who do sin deserve their punishment. God, as an act of love, allows sinners into Heaven if they believe in the salvation of Jesus and repent of their sins. The idea of God creating a perfect world that then goes wrong is contradictory as if God created humans as he wanted to they would have no trace of evil and so even if they were exercising free will, they would not choose to act in an evil way. If the world was perfect there would have been no knowledge of evil yet Adam and Eve chose to disobey God which suggests that they did have knowledge of the difference between good and evil and they chose to be evil. This theodicy suggests that the world was created in a perfect form and has been diminishing ever since. This is in contrast to the idea of the big bang that suggests that the world was formed in chaos and has been developing to be more orderly ever since. It is unlikely that humans used to be perfect as we have evolved from lower forms of life with limited moral awareness. The idea of evil as the absence of good seems to contradict many other Christian teachings and stories about Satan, eg his temptation of Jesus in the Wilderness of the ‘possession’ of Judas in his betrayal of Jesus. The idea of punishment in hell contradicts the idea of an omnibenevolent God. If hell was part of the design, did God know that things were going to go wrong? If suffering is a punishment for sin, why do the innocent suffer?

THE IRENAEAN THEODICY STRENGTHS This is the best possible world as it gives humans the opportunity to develop God-like characteristics such as patience and compassion which are essential for ‘soul making’. Swinburne – a world where humans can grow and develop their knowledge is superior to one where they are just puppets. It may seem appealing for the cure to serious diseases to be prayer alone but this then removes the challenge and reward of humans finding out the answers for themselves. Necessary to develop Image and likeness The world contains evil and suffering because they provide humanity with the opportunity to develop the qualities necessary to become like God. Two stages of creation, the first involves humans being made in the ‘image of God’, ie intelligent but morally immature. Stage two is when humans grow to achieve the ‘likeness of God’ which involves them developing their morality over a period of time. Free Will Free will is an essential part of the plan as becoming like God requires people to consciously choose good over evil – if there is no opportunity to make this choice then people are simply good by default. John Hick – soul making John Hick developed this idea and said that if God had made us all perfect then we would automatically love him but this love would be worthless. Hick believed in the process of ‘soul making’ the idea that humans had to endure certain hardships/difficult decisions in order to become better people. Hick asserted that the world could not be perfect as this would leave no opportunity to choose good over evil (as evil would simply not be an option. ) Irenaeanus spoke of an afterlife in which he said everyone would achieve perfection and all suffering would be justified – this can help people make sense of why they suffer on earth. Laws of science and nature If God were to intervene to keep people safe from harm, then this would interfere with the laws of science and nature. There needs to be challenge in life to help people with the process of soul making and becoming like God. WEAKNESSES If an afterlife is necessary then why not simply give people longer earthly lives instead? Suffering does not always lead people to become better people – 75% of those abused as children go on to abuse someone else during their lifetime. Suffering can often seem disproportionate, eg was the mass suffering of the Jews in the Holocaust justified in terms of the process of soul making? Ignores the fact that many people develop characteristics such as compassion and patience without suffering. Many violent crimes are committed by people with mental disturbances, these people cannot be held fully responsible for their choices so it is difficult to justify this on the grounds of free will. Why did God design a process that was going to take so long? Could he not speed up the process of soul making to reduce the amount of suffering in the world? Why does it seem that some people suffer more than others? Why do the innocent suffer, especially very young children. They do not have the capacity to learn from their experiences, they can only suffer.

PROCESS THEODICY God did not create the world, it created itself and God is just a part of this creation. The Ultimate reality is not God but ‘conscious creativity which is a process in which one thing stems from another. When the process produces harmony there is good and when the process produces discord there is evil. STRENGTHS For those who do not feel compelled for God to be the God of classical theism, it frees God of the responsibility of evil whilst allowing him to be involved in the world. Empirical in that we can observe that the amount of good does outweigh the amount of evil. God is not fixed, he is still developing, he both physical and material. Being material means that he is involved in the world. This means that any suffering on earth is also experienced by God – John Hick described God as ‘The fellow sufferer who understands’. God is not the source of creation itself but he does play an important role in it. His job was to start off the process of evolution which would lead to the development of humans. God does not have total control over the process or over human behaviour and so people are free to ignore his teachings. God does not have the power to stop evil as he does not have the power to stop the natural process. God must take some responsibility for the existence of evil as he set in motion the evolutionary process knowing that he would not be able to control it. God is partly responsible for the existence of both good and evil in the universe as he could have chosen to have done nothing within the creative process and simply left the world in its original state of chaos. In trying to fashion the chaos into an orderly universe and begin the process of human life he is partly responsible for the good and evil that followed. God is vindicated in starting off the process of evolution as the evil that has been committed by humans is outweighed by the good that they have done. WEAKNESSES Does not justify what God allows millions to suffer and some to flourish, eg the millions of people living in countries stricken by famine because the natural process made their climate difficult to farm. Denies that God is all powerful and questions whether he is all loving if he does not seem concerned that humans would suffer on such a large scale. If God is not all powerful and all loving, is he really worthy of worship? The idea that in the end, the amount of good that humans have done will outweigh the amount of evil is little comfort to those who have suffered, eg victims of the Holocaust. There is no promise of Heaven or that the innocent will in some way be rewarded. The reward appears to be that the amount of good cancels out the amount of evil, there is no compensation for those who have suffered.