Why We Believe

What is Evil?

Before we look into the problem presented by evil and suffering to the Christian world view, we must have a working definition of evil. Is evil, which is expressed in suffering, a part of God’s creation or is it something else. John 1:3 echoes Genesis 1:1, which posits God and the creation He is responsible for, by saying “Through him all things were made; without Him nothing was made that has been made” (NIV), That would appear on the surface to say that God is responsible for evil. However, perhaps this is really not so clear. If evil is not created, then it cannot be attributed to God. In fact, the early church would not identify evil as a part of creation. As Augustine has said, evil is a “privation” or a lack of a thing, not a “thing” itself. Evil is simply an absence of goodness, and the suffering that accompanies evil is also a result of there being nothing good present. With that in mind we can explore the problem of evil and suffering with the understanding that God is not responsible for its presence because he is not responsible for absence or privation of that which is good.

Natural vs. Moral Evil

Before we distinguish between the Emotional Problem and the Intellectual Problem of Suffering and Evil, we must distinguish between moral evil and natural evils, all of which contribute to suffering. Natural suffering would be the result of forces out of our control: death and suffering due to earthquakes, hurricanes or some other such natural disaster. Moral suffering would be suffering in this world due to the evil acts of persons upon others. A natural example of moral suffering is the kind of suffering brought on by the Nazis during the holocaust.

Emotional Argument of Evil and Suffering

For most people, unbelief due to suffering is more an emotional than an intellectual problem. The emotional problem comes with how evil and suffering challenge faith. It is apparent for many of us that there is a lot of pointless suffering in the world. How could a God of Love permit pointless suffering? This is compounded by the health and wealth prophets who tell their congregations that God wants us to be rich and always healthy. The implication is that if you lack either, there is something wrong with you—blaming the victim. This is what Job experienced when his so-called friends insisted that Job’s problems were the result of his own sins. This is echoed by Jesus in Luke 13:1-5: When evil things happen it is not accurate that the suffering is retribution for personal sin.

A logical syllogism for the emotional problem of sin and suffering might be as follows:

1. God is all-powerful, all-knowing and good.
2. A good, all-knowing and all-powerful God would destroy evil and not permit suffering.
3. Evil is not destroyed.
4. Therefore, there cannot possibly be such a good, all-knowing and powerful God.

According to the Ontological Argument for the existence of God, God would be the greatest that one could possibly conceive. Therefore, premise one would be true. The only premise agreeable to all would be premise three based on observation. The real problem with this argument would be premise two. If premise two is false, then the conclusion would be false.

Basically, the argument against the existence of God here (as well as in the intellectual argument discussed later) is that the coexistence of God and suffering is improbable. However, we are not in a position due to our finite condition to say that it’s improbable that God lacks good reasons for permitting the suffering in the world. Therefore, outside of our ability to understand the fact that suffering MIGHT have a purpose, God’s existence is probable. Christianity entails doctrines that increase the probability of the co-existence of God and suffering. According to William Lane Craig, the problem of suffering is easier to understand against Christian Doctrine: The chief purpose of life is not happiness, but knowledge of God.

The basic task of the Christian in combatting the emotional argument for the problem of evil and suffering is pastoral. Instead of trying to make a person understand intellectually how a good and powerful God and suffering can co-exist, we must get alongside that person, invoking the power of the Holy Spirit to provide a bridge between the grieving individual and the God-man Jesus. How did Jesus care for people? How did Jesus almost tirelessly heal and tenderly minister to those that came to Him. Most importantly, how did Jesus identify with and embody all the world’s evil and suffering onto himself, beginning from the garden of Gethsemane (a parallel to the Eden) to the death on the cross.

We must point out to the grieving individual that it is not God who is responsible for evil and suffering, but the sinful rebelliousness of man that began in Eden. In Genesis 3, first the woman responded to the satanic temptation by distorting the instruction of God (you may not touch, when God only said you may not eat) which was originally spoken to the man, and the woman got second-hand. Then the woman believed a direct lie and went off on her lust to be like God with the encouragement of the devil. The man compounded the evil by following his wife (loving her more) instead of following God. Evil came in with the absence of the good. Hence, Augustine’s argument that evil is privation. Mankind lost his/her pre-fall state and became mortal and vulnerable to natural evil and moral evil.

Mankind is in rebellion against God and His purposes. God’s purpose is not restricted to this life but continues over into eternity. Paul says “I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us. (Rom 8:18 NIV)” The knowledge of God is the good that overrides all the evil from suffering and the round-about suffering from evil. William Law addresses this cycle of despair in his work on “Dying to Self”

The creature does not have, neither was it ever intended to have, light in and of itself, being only darkness. Darkness, though it is an absence of Light, at the same time holds the capacity of receiving Light. When the creature is deprived of Light, it is in a constant state of wanting or desire. Without Light, nature can be nothing but continual covetousness, envy, pride and wrath—expressions of wanting without fulfillment. These four properties of nature and darkness generate one another and, therefore their own torment of wanting unfulfilled. The creature, without the Light and only darkness, has no power to alter or change its situation.

On the cross Christ endured a suffering unimaginable for us because of love. How can we reject Him who gave up everything for us? Meditation on the cross of Christ can give us the strength to carry our own cross, die to the self, receive the Light of God and bask in His Love.