Discuss whether the existence of evil disproves the existence of God

If God is omnipotent and omnibenevolent, how can evil exist in a world that he created and exists in? Does a less than perfect world mean that God doesnt care, or simply just not exist? Many philosophers have looked into this problem, and there are a number of solutions they have come up with. These solutions are called theodicies.

The Naturalistic Theodicy

This theodicy uses what is called the best possible world. The philosopher Leibniz says that best possible world is a world in which there is a balance of goodness and free will: If the necessity of the wise person to choose the best destroyed freedom, it would follow that God does not act freely when he chooses the best from many alternatives.1 Free will and perfect goodness cannot co-exist in the world, but free will as a choice is also necessary for a perfect world. Free will gives us the opportunity to extend goodness, but also to cause suffering. Therefore, even with God being omnipotent, a medium of free will and goodness is the best possible world he can create. For God to eliminate death and destruction in this world, he would have to eliminate life itself. Humanity is its own downfall being both a created perfection, but also the destructor of perfection.

1.

Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm, Freiherr von Sleigh, Robert C. Look, Brandon, Confessio Philosophi : Papers Concerning the Problem of Evil, 1671-1678 (New Haven and London:Yale University Press, 03/2005) p.139

I have many issues with this view. Personally I can find ways to make the world slightly better, so how can this be called the best possible world? Can an omniscient being not do far more than this? Natural evils such as hurricanes and earthquakes cause suffering, but these are clearly not the effect of humanities sinfulness, but instead laws inbuilt into natures very functioning. Mankind's free will may seem like a good thing, but surely the price to pay for such evil atrocities is too dear? The Free Will Theodicy Plantinga is one philosopher that derived a free will defence. He says: God is omnipotent and wholly good It is not within Gods power to create a world with moral good but no moral evil and God created a world containing moral good These propositions are evidently consistent-i.e., their conjunction is a possible proposition. But taken together they entail There is evil
2

Plantinga is keen to present these as a defence rather than a theodicy. This means that it is not represented as a definite truth, but instead possible truth. Swinburne uses the free will defence in writing his theodicy. He says, A good God, like a good father, will delegate responsibility. In order to allow creatures a share in creation, he will allow them the choice of hurting and maiming, of fustrating the divine plan.
3

Let us presume that this is truth. Surely, God will in some way, make it so as man is swung towards doing the right thing. So this leads me to the question, is human nature good? Inbuilt into our being is emotion: Compassion; Guilt; Joy; Trust, but also emotions such as: Anger; Jealousy and Sadness. These positive emotions are far outweighed in times when anger takes over us. We begin to act irrationally and make fast regrettable decisions. No other creature on the planet kills for no reason; and why is this? Because we experience these negative emotions, so why would God leave space for these? Would removing these emotions result in determinism, or is the choice still there, but the outcome swayed, leaving a choice more likely to be positive? When asking these questions, we have to ask whether it is possible for God to create these positive emotions without the negatives being brought out as well, but if God is truly omniscient, this should surely be possible? If in fact it is, then it would seem that Gods omnibenevolence is lacking, leaving us with a paradox. This can only lead me to believe that either there is no God or, if there is, he has no interest in his creations wellbeing.

The Soul Making Theodicy John Hick seems to expand on Swinburnes theodicy, saying that earth is a refining process leading to a final stage, beyond earthly existence, in which salvation can be completed: They are not punished; they are not even destroyed; they simply come by the disintegrating effect of their own evil to embody less and less being until they cease to exist. 4

2.

p.54 Alvin C. Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil (United States of America;William B Eerdmans Publishing Company,1991) 3. p.100 Richard Swinburne, Is There a God? (Great Britain; Oxford University Press,1996)

This theodicy states that in a perfect world, there would be no room for developing moral character; the character needed to enter the realms of heaven. My main issue with this theodicy is, if God had created us perfect, what is the need for us being refined? God being perfect can only create perfection, so as a created perfection, need do not need to be perfected to gain salvation. It seems pointless that man should go through so much suffering, just to reach a goal that could have been achieved at creation.

Another problem is that not everyone is refined for the same amount of time, and also not everyone learns from their mistakes. Some people commit atrocities and believe it is the right thing for them to do. How have these learned from their mistakes. Or look at infant death. The child hasnt had the chance to gain moral purification, so does he still gain salvation?

So as a theist, how can I justify there being a God when every theodicy I have looked at so far falls short? I believe that mankinds free will is necessary and essential for a proper relationship with God, and in this sense i can empathise with the soul making theodicy, but maybe there is room for me to tweak it a little. Suppose this, Gods perfect world will come into effect at the end. However, mankinds free will causes us to deviate from Gods plan. However, the greatest good will be achieved at the end, when we reach Gods kingdom.

4.

p.71 John Hick, God and the Universe of Faiths (Hong Kong; Macmillan Press,1988)

Consider this graph showing Gods ultimate and perfect plan, and mankinds path through free will. We can observe mankind taking a different route to Gods plan, but still arriving at the same goal: a perfect world. We can see that both of these can still be consistent with each other. If this is the case, not only has Gods creation allowed us free will, but has also allowed us perfection at an end time where there will be no more pain or suffering. In the book of Revelation it speaks of the new heaven saying, See, the home of God is among mortals. He will dwell with them;they will be his peoples, and God himself will be with them; he will wipe every tear from their eyes. Death will be no more; mourning and crying and pain will be no more, for the first things have passed away. 5 Biblically it speaks of an end time in which Gods perfection prevails, and the very privilege of being fully in the presence of God in this end time is enough for me to bear

5.

Rev 21:3-4

the worlds imperfections. With this knowledge we know that Gods war against sin is over, but the battle is ongoing. However we can already see glimpses of the kingdom of God on earth. When you look into the good actions of man, we can find God. When humanity chooses to use their free will in the right way, we can see how beautiful Gods love can be. Looking through history, we can see unbelievable acts of kindness when we have made the right choices with our gift of free will. For example, look at William Wilberforce in the abolition of the slave trade, or Mother Teresa and her missions of charity. But its also through the little acts of kindness we see every day where Gods plan is put into action. Perhaps mankind isnt the demon we perceive it to be, but we choose to dwell on the negatives in order to sympathise and learn. The inbuilt capacity to care in us shines out, and always remains, if we choose to act on it or not.