Skip to main content

Thoughts on Evil

1. If a man cannot act freely, then he cannot love freely. If he cannot love freely, then he is no man. We are made in God’s image, and in removing choice and love from us, God would be rubbing away at least some of his image from us.

2. Far from seeing good most clearly when we contrast it with evil, we see good best when evil is absent. I don't see what God is like by looking at the devil. I see him best when I see him. None of us mistakes an act of love when we see it--as when we witness sharing between children or the care of strangers in need--whether or not it occurs alongside evil. Still less will we mistake God and his goodness when we see him on his return. Evil will cease and we will see good in its purest state. Paul says in the love chapter of 1 Corinthians 13, "Now we see only a reflection as in a mirror. Then we shall see face to face."

3. Concerning a destructive 1755 earthquake in Lisbon, Portugal, Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that we cannot blame God for evil, but man. We do not have a complete perspective to make a right judgment of an event like the Lisbon earthquake, as horrible as it was. Loyal to his philosophy about nature, he felt that the people of Lisbon would have experienced less or no catastrophe had they remained in nature, and not built dense cities with tall buildings susceptible to destruction.* From a secondary source's perspective, Rousseau's statements seem dismissive of the loss of life and pain that the earthquake caused, but I do believe that God is not to blame for such events. We are ultimately to blame because we chose to obey our own desires rather than those of God (Genesis 3 discusses the curses placed on us as a result).

4. We do not always know whether an event is ultimately for good or for evil. A Chinese proverb shows that a horse running away is seen at first as bad luck; but later the horse returns with a herd of other horses alongside. "Bad luck? Good luck? Who knows?" said the horse's owner. Later, the man's son, attempting to tame the horse, fell and broke his leg, which was seen as bad luck; later still, an army came and conscripted all capable men. Since the boy had broken his leg, he was spared from conscription. The moral is that we do not see the fuller picture of events that could lead us to right judgment.**

5. God is the ultimate source of knowledge of good and evil. "Where were you..." God questions Job when Job complains of his situation. God responds to Job's questions at God by referring to Job's lack of knowledge. We should be careful to reserve judgment in suffering.

6. Evil is real. God is superior to evil. God has overcome the world and its evil (John 16:33). God will redeem us and his world from evil and destruction (2 Peter 3:13, Acts 3:21, Isaiah 60:11-21, 65:15-25, Daniel 7:14, 18, Ephesians 1:10).***

7. The earth itself was cursed when man sinned. God said to Adam in Genesis 3, "Cursed is the ground because of you; through painful toil you will eat food from it all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you, and you will eat the plants of the field. By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground,..." Romans 8:20-22 says that "the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in the hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time." When we sinned, creation was cursed alongside us. God cursed creation "in the hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God." Hope in Scripture is not wishful thinking, but an expectation that something will happen. This includes a restoration of man and creation alike (Isaiah 65:15-25).***

8. Response to those who believe morality exists only because natural selection has bred us to care for each other and so continue our species: While self-sacrifice helps others and ensures others survive, it hurts the self and threatens survival. Self-sacrifice does not encourage survival of the species because it does not benefit the self-sacrificing person's survival. This is especially true in sacrificing one's life for another. Natural selection cannot have selected a gene that leads people to die for others when natural selection selects genes that ensure survival. This would be a contradiction between the purpose of natural selection and the outcome of natural selection. You cannot be genetically programmed to allow yourself to die for others if the purpose of natural selection is to survive. The only objection to this that I see is that natural selection chooses genes that lead to the survival of the entire species, and not an individual in the species, so that by sacrificing yourself for another, you ensure that the species survives. However, one member of the species would survive in either case, so why not simply allow the threatened person to die while you live? Either way, someone will live and someone will die.

*Walther, Daniel. "Voltaire and the Lisbon Earthquake." Ministry Magazine: International Journal for Pastors. Web. 1956. 2 September 2017.
**I first heard this in a talk by Ravi Zacharias, found on YouTube. You can find the proverb here.
***Except for John 16:33, verses to which I refer in numbers six (6) and seven (7) come from Alcorn, Randy. "How Will the Earth be Redeemed?" Eternal Perspectives Ministry. 22 March 2010. Web. 2 September 2010.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Heroes

Although we have several examples of heroes in our day, one of the best known is of a woman named Agnes Gonxhe Bojaxhiu (“Gonja Bojaju”), who devoted her life to sustaining the “poor, sick, orphaned, and dying.” Her venue was Calcutta, India, where she served as a teacher until she began to take notice of the poverty there. Seeking to do something about it, she began an organization that consisted of just thirteen members at its inception. Called the “Missionaries of Charity,” the organization would eventually burgeon into well over 5,000 members worldwide, running approximately 600 missions, schools and shelters in 120 countries; and caring for the orphaned, blind, aged, disabled, and poor. As her personal work expanded, she traveled to countries like Lebanon, where she rescued 37 children from a hospital by pressing for peace between Israel and Palestine; to Ethiopia, where she traveled to help the hungry; to Chernobyl, Russia, to assist victims of the nuclear meltdown there; and to ...
2 comments
Read more

The Nice Guy Fallacy

I read part of a poem recently by one of my favorite poets. It reads: I envy not in any moods The captive void of noble rage The linnet born within the cage That never knew the summer woods. I envy not the beast that takes His license in the field of time Unfetter'd by the sense of crime To whom a conscience never wakes. Nor what may call itself as bles't The heart that never plighted troth But stagnates in the weeds of sloth Nor any want-begotten rest. I hold it true, whate'er befall I feel it, when I sorrow most 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. At base, Tennyson contrasted a life of risk, and consequent pain, with one of security. He sides conclusively with the life of risk, and says he fails to envy those who have faced no hardship. I agree with him; and, for good or ill, his words are just as relevant today as they were in the nineteenth century. Like then, there are those today who choose to live their lives with as little risk as...
2 comments
Read more

Comparative Medical Care

One thing I'd like to understand is why there is such a difference between medical costs here and those in Haiti. At the time the book Mountains Beyond Mountains was written, in 2003, it often cost $15,000 to $20,000 annually to treat a patient with tuberculosis, while it cost one one-hundredth of that-- $150 to $200-- to treat a patient for the disease in Haiti. Even if the figures aren't completely accurate, the sheer difference would still be there. Indeed, the United States pays more per capita for medical care than any other country on Earth. My first guess for why the disparity exists is that there is a market willing and able to pay more for medical treatment, so suppliers see the demand and respond with higher prices. According to at least one doctor (go to http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2009/05/what_is_the_cause_of_excess_co.php), part of the reason is administrative prices here. People here have a higher standard of living, and so the cost of care is shifted to ...
2 comments
Read more