Chad V. Meister - God and the Problem of Evil: Five Views

Evil abounds. Regardless of when or where we lookin the feudal systems of the Middle Ages or the cyber world of the twenty-first century, in the posh suburbs of a major city or the poor slums found across the globe, in the practice of organized crime or the peccancy in organized religionin all times and in all places we find pain, we find suffering, we find evil. Evil is no less present, no less pernicious, and no less perplexing in the modern world than it has ever been. This poses a tenacious problem for those who believe in a God who is perfectly good and loving, all-powerful, and infinitely smart. For surely a God who is good and loving would not want there to be widespread pain and suffering in the world. And surely a God who is omniscient and omnipotent could ensure that no such world would exist. But such a world does exist. Our world.

In a world like ours, the adherents of traditional theism face the burden of attempting to offer a reasoned response to this problem of evil. At least the editors and contributors of this book believe that theists face such a burden, and that is why we have crafted it. By traditional theism we are referring to the conventional view of God historically held within the Judeo-Christian faith. On this view God is generally understood to be personal (or at least not less than a person: one who possesses mind and will, has goals and plans and purposes, and so on), ultimate reality (the source and ground of all things), distinct from the world yet actively involved in the world (creator and sustainer), and worthy of worship (wholly good, having inherent moral perfection, and excelling in power). This theistic concept of God includes a cluster of properties, and the ones most relevant to our discussion of evil are omnibenevolence, omnipotence, and omniscience. It is important to note that there are intramural debates within Christian theism about the meanings of these attributes. Some of these debates are reflected in the contributions to this volume. Yet all of the contributors affirm the grand wisdom, knowledge, goodness, and power of the God of historic Christianity.

We (the editors) have chosen five leading Christian thinkers who embrace five different perspectives to present in clear and accessible prose what they take to be the best way to respond to what is called the problem of evil. Before exploring their responses to the matter, it will be helpful to cover some of the relevant background material and major terms and concepts involved in the contemporary discussion on the subject.

To begin, what does the term evil connote? Evil is not an easy term to define in a precise and comprehensive manner. It is used in such diverse ways that one might wonder whether there truly is a singular meaning that captures each and every example of its usage. One might say, for example, that Joseph Stalin was an evil man, that the 2004 tsunami in Indonesia was an evil event, that an ISIS prison is an evil place, and that evolution in the animal kingdom (nature red in tooth and claw, to quote the poet Alfred Lord Tennyson) is an evil process. But what is an accurate meaning of the term evil that covers each of these examples and the countless others that could be included? Lexicons and dictionaries offer little help in this way by telling us, for example, that evil is the opposite of good or that which is morally reprehensible. Here, as with many other instances, the standard dictionary definition of the term falls short of capturing the depth, complexities, and variegations of the way the term is actually used. (A similar problem exists with the word good , for one might have a good pet, a good dinner, a good relationship, a good job, and a good God.)

While a useful, specific definition of the term evil might elude us, we can still have a sense of what we are talking about when we use it in various contexts. General descriptions such as those mentioned above can prove helpful. David Hume provides a few more: Were a stranger to drop on a sudden into this world, I would show him, as a specimen of its ills [that is, its evils], a hospital full of disease, a prison crowded with malefactors and debtors, a field of battle strewed with carcasses, a fleet foundering in the The list of evils is endless, and it includes such broad notions as pain (physical states in which one wishes his or her circumstances were otherwise), suffering (mental states in which one wishes his or her circumstances were otherwise), and injustice (unfairness, the violation of the rights of others, and uncorrected abuse, neglect, or malfeasance).

Beyond these general categories and examples, there are also classifications of evil. A standard classification divides evil into two types: moral and natural. Moral evils are those evils that are in some sense the result of a person who is morally blameworthy of the resultant evil. There was intention behind the event, and the persons free will was involved. Some moral evils are very great, as in the horror of child abuse. Other examples include genocide, torture, and other terrors inflicted on humans (or perhaps other animals) by other humans. There are also less severe types of moral evils, such as stealing or speaking very negatively about someone. Furthermore, certain defects in ones character are also often counted as moral evils, including dishonesty, greed, and gluttony.

The second category of evil has to do with naturally occurring events or disasters rather than with moral agents. Examples of natural evils include hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, famine, illnesses such as leukemia and Alzheimers disease, disabilities such as deafness and blindness, and other terrible events that do harm to humans and other living creatures but for which no personal agent is responsible. Consider the tsunami noted above that occurred in Indonesia. Because of that event, over 250,000 people died. Countless others were left homeless or without fathers, mothers, siblings, and other loved ones. In times past such instances of uncontrollable natural forces have often been referred to as acts of God (notably in insurance claims), though more recently they are often referred to as acts of nature. In any case, such events are natural in the sense that no human person is culpable for them, and they are evil in the sense that harm was incurred to humans or other animals.