Transcript Evil

Lecture 20: The Problem of Evil
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
The Nature of Evil.
The Existence of Evil in a World created by
God.
A Possible Solution Regarding the Problem of
Evil.
Problem of Evil and the Moral Law Argument.
Meaning in Suffering and Evil?
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
Consider…
If there is an omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly
good God, how can it be that the world is full
of evil?
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
Consider…
1.
2.
3.
4.
An all-good God would destroy evil.
An all-powerful God could destroy evil.
But evil is not destroyed.
Therefore, as such God does not exist.
Examples of suffering from a typical local
paper:
Somalis are stealing food from starving neighbors…people are dying by the
thousands;
Muslim women and girls are being raped by Serb soldiers,
In India, Hindus went on a rampage that razed as mosque and killed over 1,000
people.
In Afghanistan gunmen fired into a crowded bazaar and shot ten people
including 2 children.
Cigarette company is having to defend itself against charges that it is engaged
in a campaign to entice adolescents to smoke.
High school principle is indicted on charges of molesting elementary and middle
school boys over a period of 20 years:
A man is being tried for murder in the death of a 9 year old boy; he grabbed
the boy to use as a shield in a gunfight:
…racism…rape…assault…murder…greed…exploitation…war…genocide.
Examples of suffering from a typical local
paper:
Typical Responses to Suffering:
1. Look away approach: We may take note, shake our heads sadly,
and go about our business. We work, we worry about our children, help
our friends and neighbors, and look forward to Christmas dinner.
2. Can’t ignore approach: We sit in our cool homes with dinner on
our table and our children around us, and we know that not far from us
the homeless huddle, children go hungry…you ask yourself: Is it human,
is it decent, to enjoy our own good fortune and forget the misery that is
near us? But we may even say it is morbid to keep thinking about the
evils; it’s depressive; it’s sick. Nevertheless, how can we close our minds
to what is going on around us?!!!
Examples of suffering from a typical local
paper:
Typical Responses to Suffering:
3. Labor at Obliviousness approach: We drown our minds in our
work or in pleasure or in both.
4. Good Samaritan approach: Evil can be eliminated…Eden on
earth is possible. Whatever it is in human behavior or human society that
is responsible for misery around us can be swept away. Reform our
world. Remove the human defects that produced the evil in the first place
(e.g., apply utopian communism).
5. It has led some people to the following conclusion by examining evil:
bitterness, resentment against God, etc:
Examples of suffering from a typical local
paper:
Philip Hallie, who studied cruelty for years made an interesting statement
in his study of Nazi medical experiments on Jewish children in the death
camps. He states that Nazi doctors broke and re-broke “the bones of sixor seven-or eight year old Jewish children in order, the Nazis said, to
study the processes of natural healing in young bodies.” Across all his
studies on cruelty Hallie writes:
“the pattern of the strong crushing the weak kept repeating itself, so that
when I was not bitterly angry, I was bored at the repetition of the patterns
of persecution…My study of evil incarnate had become a prison whose
bars were my bitterness toward the violent, and whose walls were my
horrified indifference to slow murder. Between the bars and walls I
revolved like a madman….over the years I had dug myself into Hell” in
Lest Innocent Blood Be Shed (Philadelphia: Harper & Row, 1979), 2.
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
Consider…
1.
God is the Author of everything.
2.
Evil is something.
3.
Therefore, God is the Author of evil.
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
Consider…
1.
God is the Author of everything.
2.
Evil is something.
3.
Therefore, God is the Author of evil.
I.
What is Evil?
•
Atheism affirms evil but denies the reality of God;
•
Finite godism can claim that God desires to destroy evil but is
unable to because he is limited in power;
•
Deism can distance God from evil by stressing that God is not in
the world, but beyond it.
•
Panentheism insists that evil is a necessary part of the ongoing
progress of the interaction of God and the world.
•
Pantheism affirms the reality of God but denies the reality of evil.
•
Theism affirms both the reality of both God and evil.
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
The problem of evil may be viewed in simple
form as a conflict involving three concepts:
1. God’s power,
2. God’s goodness, and
3. the presence of evil in the world.
Common sense tells us that all three cannot be true at the
same time.
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
Solutions to the problem of evil typically
involve modifying one or more of these
three concepts:
1. limit God’s power,
2. limit God’s goodness,
3. modify the existence of evil (e.g., call
evil an illusion).
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
Consider…
•
If God made no claims to being good, then the existence
of evil would be easier to explain; but God does claim to
be good;
•
If God were limited in power so that he was not strong
enough to withstand evil, the existence of evil would be
easier to explain; but God does claim to be all-powerful;
•
If evil were just an illusion that had no reality, the
problem wouldn’t really exist in the first place; but evil is
not an illusion. Evil is real.
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
We face the reality of two types of evil:
a.
Moral Evil (evil committed by free moral agents,
involving such things as war, crime, cruelty, class
struggles, discrimination, slavery, ethnic cleansing,
suicide bombings, & social injustice);
b.
Natural Evil (involving such things as hurricanes,
floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, etc).
God is good, God is all-powerful, yet evil exists.
#1




Evil is the absence or privation
of something good.
Rot can exist only as long as the tree exists.
Truth decay can exist only as long as the tooth
exists.
Rust on a car can exist only as there is a metal.
Decayed carcass can exist only as there is a
body.
Therefore, evil exists only in another but not in
itself.
#2
To say evil is not a thing in itself is not
the same as saying that evil is unreal.
A. Evil may not be an actual substance, but it
involves an actual privation in good substances.
B. It is not an actual entity but a real corruption in
an actual entity, e.g., rotting trees, rusting cars,
tooth decay, brain cancer, etc.- all these are
examples of how evil is a corruption of
something good.
II.
How Can evil exist in a world
created by God?
The problem of evil can be summarized:
1.
God is absolutely perfect.
2.
God cannot create anything imperfect.
3.
But perfect creatures cannot do evil.
4.
Therefore, neither God not his perfect
creatures can produce evil.
In a theistic universe there are only two sources
for moral evil.
II.
How can evil exist in a world
created by God?
Christian response…
•
•
•
God created every substance.
Evil is not a substance (but the corruption in a substance).
Therefore, God did not create evil.
Evil exists only in another but not itself.
III.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The Problem of Evil:
A Possible Solution:
God is absolutely perfect.
God created only perfect creatures.
One of the perfections God gave some of his creatures
[angels, lucifer, Adam, & Eve] was the power of free
choice.
Some of these creatures freely chose to do evil.
Therefore, a perfect creature caused evil.
III.
The Problem of Evil:
A Possible Solution:
1.
Evil arose in the abuse of a good power called freedom.
2.
Freedom in itself is not evil. It is good to be free. But with
freedom comes the possibility of evil.
3.
God is responsible for making evil possible, but free
creatures are responsible for making it actual.
IV. The Problem of Evil & the Moral
Law Argument
THE MORAL LAW ARGUMENT:
1.
2.
3.
Moral Law imply a Moral Law Giver.
There is an objective moral law.
Therefore, there is a Moral Law Giver.
Moral laws don’t describe what is, they prescribe what ought to be.
They can’t be known by observing what people do. They are what all
persons should do, whether or not they actually do.
IV. The Problem of Evil & the Moral
Law Argument
How do unsaved people know that the torture of Jewish children
by Nazi doctors are evil?
By reason? While it is true that moral principles and ethical
theories do rely on reason (otherwise there is no coherence, logic,
or intelligibility). we build those principles and theories, at least
in part, by beginning with strong intuitions about individual cases
that exemplify wrongdoings, and we construct our ethical theories
around those intuitions. Typically ethicists look for what the
individual cases have in common, then they try to codify their
common characteristics into principles. Once the principles have
been organized into a theory, they may revise their original
intuitions until their intuitions and theories are in harmony.
IV. The Problem of Evil & the Moral
Law Argument
Nonetheless, original intuitions retain an essential primacy. If we
found that our ethical theory affirmed those Nazi experiments, we
would throw away the theory as something evil itself.
But what exactly are these original intuitions? What cognitive
faculty produces them? Not reason, apparently, since reason takes
them as given and reflects on them.
How about memory? No because we aren’t remembering that it is
evil to torture children.
How about sense perception? No because when we say that we
just see the wrongness of certain actions, we certainly don’t mean
that it’s visible.
IV. The Problem of Evil & the Moral
Law Argument
Can we even identify the cognitive faculty that recognizes evil
intuitively? It would be a mistake to infer that there is no such
faculty.
It’s clear that we have many other cognitive faculties that
similarly can’t be accounted for by the triad of reason, memory,
and perception. For example: We have the abilities to tell mood
from facial expression, to discern affect from melody of speech.
While we don’t understand much about the faculty that produces
moral intuitions in us, we all regularly rely on it anyway…we
have some cognitive faculty for discerning evil in things, and that
people in general treat it as they treat their other cognitive
faculties: as basically reliable, even if fallible, and subject to
revision.
IV. The Problem of Evil & the Moral
Law Argument
It is also clear that this cognitive faculty can discern differences in
kind and degree of evil.
For example: A young Muslim mother in Bosnia was repeatedly
raped in front of her husband & father, with her baby screaming
on the floor beside her. When her tormenters seemed finally tired
of her, she begged permission to nurse the child. In response, one
of the rapists swiftly decapitated the baby and threw the baby in
the mother’s lap.
This evil is different, and we feel it immediately. We don’t have
to reason about it or think it over. When we read this account, we
are filled with grief and distress, shaken with revulsion and
incomprehension. The taste of real wickedness is sharply
different from the taste of garden-variety moral evil, and we
discern it directly, with pain.
IV. The Problem of Evil & the Moral
Law Argument
This moral faculty also discerns goodness. We recognize acts of
generosity, compassion, and kindness.
When we weep when we are surprised by true goodness.
IV. The Problem of Evil & the Moral
Law Argument
Consider: the attitude which you and I respond to the evil around
us will be different if we see through it to the goodness of God.
Someone asked Mother Theresa if she wasn’t often frustrated
because all the people she helped in Calcutta died. “Frustrated?”
she said, “no-God has called me to be faithful, not successful.”
Evil our own evils-our moral evils, our decay and death-lose their
power to crush us if we see the goodness of God.
IV. The Problem of Evil & the Moral
Law Argument
Can evil lead us to God? A loathing focus on the evils of our
world and ourselves prepares us to be the more startled by the
taste of true goodness when we find it and the more determined to
follow that taste until we see where it leads. And where it leads is
to the truest goodness of all-evil becomes translucent, and we can
see through it to the goodness of God.
If we taste and see the goodness of God, then the vision of our
world that we see in the mirror of evil looks different, too. Start
with the fact of evil in the world, and the problem of evil presents
itself forcefully to you. But start with a view of evil and a deep
taste of the goodness of God, and you will know that there must
be morally sufficient reason for God to allow evil-all of them
work together for good for those who love God-for those who are
finding their way to the love of God.
V.
Is there Meaning in Suffering and
Evil:
1. Every worldview has to handle this problem: There is no Exit.
A. Assumed in every answer or explanation is the purpose of human existence.
B. There is no exit: Moral Law Argument:
How can an objective moral law be develop from a materialistic, naturalistic source?
It can’t be grounded!
2. Can we be good without God?
A. There is no explanation even for noble deeds if self-preservation is sine qua non.
B. God is the Author of Life:
1. Life is Sacred…I’am made in the image of God.
2. Is God is the Author, there is a “story line.”
3. If there is a story, then worship is the first response…then love follows.
V.
Is there Meaning in Suffering and
Evil:
3. Heinous evil cannot be explained apart from a
Christian world.
4.
Evil is a problem within…start there!
5.
Meaninglessness does not become weary of
pain, but from pleasure.