Ironing Out the Problem of Evil

Thoughts, thoughts, I want your thoughts! Here is one of my final drafts for my philosophy term paper. It's close to being done, but thought I'd ask any and all for their opinions. Hope to hear from you :-)

Bomb explodes killing hundreds. Man murders ex-girlfriend. Teacher dies in school shooting. Child drowns by neighborhood bully. In skimming across newspaper postings, such headlines are not uncommon. People are known to commit some of the most heinous acts conceivable to the human mind. Yet, why do such evils exist? How is it that people can be so cruel to each other? For centuries, people have struggled with the concept of the reality of evil and have consequentially used evil as a justification against the existence of an omnibenevolent and omnipotent God. People contend that if God is so good and powerful, than either evil should not exist or God is not what we believe Him to be. For why would a God allow evils to occur if He is all powerful or why would He not stop evils from occurring if He is all good? Does this not infer a contradiction? The short answer to this complex question is no, however this issue requires much explanation. In order to reconcile these apparently contradictory principles, one must understand all the dilemma involves. Therefore, my intention is to explain the nature of evil, the nature of God and the nature of man to prove that it is possible to say that God can be omnipotent and omnibenevolent, while also accepting the presence of evil in the world.
First, before addressing this issue, one must understand the definition of evil if one is to understand God’s relationship with it. According to Aquinas, “evil is not an entity” but “a privation, or absence of some good which belongs properly to the nature of the creature”(63; Sharpe). For example, deafness is not a thing by itself, rather it is the application of loss of hearing upon a person. Similarly, evil is not a thing, but a privation of a good. It is the absence of something; it is the privation of that which should exist. For example, consider the presence of darkness. Darkness is not a thing, but a denial of a thing, namely light. It is the absence of solar radiation/energy and hence is a void, a denial of that which provides visibility. Augustine, using this same analogy, comments that just as “darkness is nothing but the absence of light, and is not produced by creation, so evil is merely the defect of goodness” (Sharpe). Notice, he states darkness is not created, but rather is separate from creation. Similarly, evil, which is outside of goodness, cannot be made by God, who is the sole Creator of goodness, not evil. Thus, if one can say that darkness is outside of God’s creation in a physical sense, then one can also say evil is outside of God’s creation in a spiritual sense. Such is the nature of evil, an absence of good.
Secondly, in order to understand evil, one must consider the nature of God. Now, to be God is to be perfect, for if God is imperfect, then He is not God. Thus, it is illogical to label God deficient in anything. Considering this then, it is not unjustified to say God is omnibenevolent and omnipotent, even with the presence of evil (or the absence of good) in the world. For again, once one understands that evil is outside of God’s creation, the idea that God is all-good and all-powerful is not problematic. One can also consider the nature of God and evil by way of analogy. Take for example the Sun. The Sun, like God, is there, always existing, always beaming its radiance upon the Earth. However, there are days when the Sun is clouded, and darkness covers the land, and storms break and rains fall. However, we know that the glorious Sun, though unseen, still shines, still warms the Earth and still remains that which it is. No one who understands basic concepts regarding the operations of the atmosphere would say because clouds cover the sky, that the Sun stops being the great life-giving star that it is. So it is with God; though evils occur, He does not cease from being the omnibenevolent and omnipotent God which He is. He remains the same God regardless of the absence of goodness in the world.
Also, to say that God is to blame for evils is an injustice to God. How can someone be blamed for something which they did not do? If a little boy is punished for stealing a bike he did not steal, then it would be an injustice to punish him for stealing. So too is it wrong for people to blame God for something He is not the cause of. It is not God who wills evil, since evil is outside of His all-perfect nature. But some may argue, “Although God does not will evil, He does permit it. Why would He do that?” It must be remembered that God is omnipotent and can allow evil for the purpose of taking it and affecting some good from it. As Augustine notes “God judged it better to bring good out of evil than to suffer no evil to exist” (Sharpe). For example, evils, when approached as a means to a positive end, can make people more empathetic, more loving, and more forgiving. That is, God is so omnipotent that he can permit evil so to “further either the general good or man's good” (“The Problem of Evil”). So, although a man loses his job and gets in a car accident, he can learn to work harder, drive safer, and have greater sympathy for those who encounter similar circumstances. The evil can work towards a greater good. Furthermore, it must be stated that in analyzing the problem of evil people must search for God’s goodness coming from the evil because if not, they will perceive only the evil itself (which is the absence of God) and not to the good (God) surrounding the evil, which works to amend all sufferings. In a sense, it would be like looking through large patches of “physical” blackness, deliberately avoiding the light which envelopes it. If one only looks at the darkness, then that clearly will be all they see. Thus, it behooves one to seek the light when dealing with evil, for otherwise, evil appears to be all that exists and this is not so.
Lastly, human nature must be considered when examining evil. Man differs from all other creatures since he possesses free will- the ability to choose what or what not to think, do or say. This freedom is a gift from God, which every human possess to either choose good or evil. Thus, because of this freedom, and the respect God has for it, man can choose to do things outside of God’s will and thus frustrate the manifestation of goodness. But one might argue, “Granted, if God is not the creator of evil, how can man choose to perform evil deeds unless God works through people to perform them? For you say that without God, man can do nothing.” Indeed, this is true, without God man can do nothing. The very ability man has to act is dependent upon God. Just as all plants are dependent upon the Sun for their sustenance, so man needs God for the purpose of living out his existence. However, although God must operate in man to allow Him to act, this does not therefore conclude that He incurs culpability for the free will choices a person decides to perform. Yes, God will work to encourage all people do good, however, He will not force His creators to do His will, for to do so would be denying man of this gift of free will. If God in any way forced a person to choose good, then man would not be made truly free and this would infer that God made us to be as mindless beings who follow only the motions of instinct, as do animals. Still others might argue “If God is omnipotent, why didn’t He make man to always be able to choose good all the time? Why couldn’t their will be fixed to always want to choose goodness?” Here again, if God made man to always choose good, he would not be free. And to not be free would make rewarding those who do good pointless. Man is not a machine, he must act freely if he is to be free.
Thus, in looking at the relationship between the nature of evil, God and man, it can be observed that yes, God can be both omnibenevolent and omnipotent with evil still existing in the world. However, one must approach this with an open mind, for yes, it is puzzling as to why evils would exist if indeed God loved us. But, again, when we see evil for what it is and how God relates to it, and the good that can come from evil, the possibility of the two apparently contradictory statements being reconcilable makes more sense and the problem of evil less troublesome and therefore not an insufferable dilemma with which to wrestle. Vivo Christo Rey!



Works Cited
Aquinas, Thomas. TheDe Malo of Thomas Aquinas. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001.
The Problem of Evil. Traditional Catholic Apologetics

Happy Feast of Saint Gemma Everyone!!!)