By: Brian G. Chilton | May 29, 2022
Another week, another tragedy. This time, we heard of the tragic school shooting in Uvalde, Texas. Like most of you, I am troubled by the incessant and increasing reports of violence across our nation and world. For many folks, these senseless acts of violence leave them with a tinge of doubt. Why is it that a benevolent God would permit such acts to occur? This question enters the philosophical and theological sphere known as theodicy. Theodicy ponders the goodness of God’s providence in light of acts of evil.
Bellator Christi Ministries has addressed the problem of theodicy in considerable detail on both the website (https://bellatorchristi.com) and the Bellator Christi Podcast. While we could go back through those issues, I think a more pressing issue is at hand. By their statements online, I have observed that some people have contemplated the thought of hitching their wagon to another theology in light of such senseless acts of evil. This is not a good idea, for reasons I hope to show. For the remainder of this article, I would like to pose four different theological and philosophical options that cover the problem of theodicy, and I will show that Christianity holds the best answer for why a benevolent God permits evil acts. The article examines the following parameters: 1) either God exists, or he doesn’t; 2) humans have free will, or they don’t; 3) God is benevolent, vengeful, or both; 4) there is ultimate justice, or there isn’t.
Option A: Atheism—No God, Questionable Freedom, No Justice
When acts of violence occur, it is strange that many begin to gravitate toward the position of atheism. Because many believe that a loving, benevolent God would never allow evil acts to occur, it is naturally assumed that such a God does not exist. Most problematically for the atheist is that ultimate justice cannot be found. If there is no God, then there is no day of reckoning, no scales that are measured, and no ultimate meaning to anything. One may very well assume that good and evil are just figments of our imagination.
Even though atheism is a popular go-to theory, the worldview only exacerbates the problem when it is taken to its logical end. If you follow the route of atheism, you will find that not only do you not find an answer to why evil things occur, but you will also find that you have no standard by which to gauge anything evil in the first place as well as no final standard of justice. In a world that God does not exist, then morality does not exist. If you have no God, then you also have no ultimate justice. Life then becomes nothing more than pitiless indifference.
Option B: Universalism—Benevolent God, No Justice
Universalists hold that everyone, no matter their theological moorings or ethical behavior, will go to heaven in the end. Admittedly, while this is one heresy that I wish were true, the aspect of justice is highly questionable in this worldview. True, it could be that the ethically immoral go through a time of purgatory before going to heaven. However, what if the person does not desire to go to heaven? Sounds strange, but it is not beyond the scope of possibility. Consider the lyrics of AC/DC’s Highway to Hell. The authors of the song appear to want nothing to do with heaven. Furthermore, is there a reckoning for evil acts in universalism? Though universalism is better than atheism, it does not seem to have the power necessary to deal with evil acts. Additionally, it does not emphasize the great disdain that God has for sin. Quoting Deuteronomy 32:35–36, the writer of Hebrews notes, “For we know the one who has said, ‘Vengeance belongs to me; I will repay,’ and again, ‘The Lord will judge his people.’ It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:30).[1]
Option C: Fatalism—Vengeful God, No Choice
Fatalism is the belief that human beings hold no free will and, thereby, no responsibility. Fatalism may come in the form of naturalistic atheism, deism, or some forms of Christianity. However, fatalism does not answer the problem of evil. For the atheistic varieties of fatalism, the worldview does not resolve the problem of evil actions for the reasons mentioned in Option A.
For deistic and theistic versions of fatalism, everything comes about by the pre-planned will of God with no human responsibility. This is not to be compared with divine foreknowledge of the willing acts of free agents. Rather, this view holds that God pre-planned everything to come about as it has. The problem with this mentality is self-evident. God is presumed to be the source of evil in this worldview as human beings do not have the capacity to choose other than their pre-designed nature and choices are dictated. Therefore, the ethical and moral standard of God becomes suspect. Of the three positions given thus far, this position holds a slightly higher rank than atheism but less than universalism.
Option D: Christianity—Benevolent, Just God Overseeing a World of Free Agents
Thankfully, a fourth option exists. The classic Christian worldview holds the best answer to the problem of evil. The position is as follows: A benevolent, just God created and oversees a world of human free agents and will hold each person accountable for their deeds in the afterlife. For this position to be true, let’s examine four truths the Scripture teaches.
Truth #1: God is loving and just.
While space does not permit us to afford a full examination of God’s goodness and just nature, let us consider a few passages as a case study. First, God’s benevolence is shown in his great love for humanity. The apostle John states, “Love consists in this: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins” (1 Jn. 4:10). Furthermore, Paul writes, “For while we were still helpless, at the right time, Christ died for the ungodly … But God proves his own love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:6, 8).
Second, God is also holy and just. Job reflected on the holy nature of God as he said, “Indeed, it is true that God does not act wickedly and the Almighty does not pervert justice” (Job 34:12). Because of God’s holy nature, he expects his people to act holy, as well. In Leviticus, God said, “Be holy because I, the Lord your God, am holy” (Lev. 19:2). Jesus furthers this thought, saying, “Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect” (Matt. 5:48).
Truth #2: Human agents are free.
This topic can easily dive into some deep wells of philosophical and theological thought. Suffice to say, for now, the Bible suggests that human beings hold some degree of free agency. That is, human beings choose to act to at least some degree. God’s call on people to repent is sufficient to show the ability of people to freely act to at least some degree. Jesus called on people to repent, saying, “No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all perish as well” (Lk. 13:3). Peter picked up this theme and said, “Repent and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38).
Truth #3: God desires to save humanity.
God desires to save humanity from their sin and themselves. Jesus lamented Jerusalem’s refusal to repent in Matthew 23:37. God expressed his desire to save people rather than to bring judgment in Ezekiel 18. The chapter ends with God lamenting, “For I take no pleasure in anyone’s death … so repent and live” (Ezek. 18:32). It is when a person and society turn from God that evil increases. Throughout the book of Judges, one finds an example of what happens as a nation further slips into depravity as they continue to reject the loving will of God.
Truth #4: God holds each person accountable for their actions.
Lastly, the Scripture teaches that God holds each person accountable for their actions. This is not only true for unbelievers, but it is also true for believers. Paul speaks on the Judgment Seat of Christ in 1 Corinthians 9:4–27; 2 Corinthians 5:10–11; and Romans 14:10. The writer of Hebrews adds, “And just as it is appointed for people to die once—and after this, judgment—so also Christ, having been offered only once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to bear sin, but to bring salvation to those who are waiting for him” (Heb. 9:27–28). Thus, each person will have to give an account for their deeds.
Conclusion
Christianity holds the best answer for why a loving God allows evil deeds to occur. Could he stop every evil act? Well, he could and sometimes has. But if God were to intervene in every act of evil, he would remove the free agency of humanity. Remember that God allowed himself to become victimized by the depraved nature of humanity. He allowed himself to be crucified on a cross at the hands of evil men to provide the ultimate good—a way for humanity to be reconciled to himself. This opened a pathway into an eternity with him.
Granted, the solution that Christianity offers does not always bring immediate gratification. We often want justice now for atrocious acts committed. If you find yourself in that situation, then rest assured that you are in good company. The prophet Habakkuk contemplated the same. Yet God answered the prophet much as he does us. Justice is coming. God will weigh the actions of each person and will judge accordingly. But know this, only a covenant relationship with God through Christ will grant you access into his kingdom. Make sure that your heart is right with him. To allow anyone into heaven, God must extend grace rather than judgment. Personally, I am thankful for God’s loving grace. Nonetheless, evil will not win in the end. Instead, the love of God wins for eternity.
Additional Resources
https://bellatorchristi.com/2021/09/26/worldviews-and-the-problem-of-evil-ronnie-campbell/
https://bellatorchristi.com/2022/03/13/the-glory-of-god-theodicy/
About the Author
Brian G. Chilton is a Ph.D. Candidate in the Theology and Apologetics program at Liberty University. He is the host of The Bellator Christi Podcast and the founder of Bellator Christi. He received his Master of Divinity in Theology from Liberty University (with high distinction); his Bachelor of Science in Religious Studies and Philosophy from Gardner-Webb University (with honors); earned a Certificate in Christian Apologetics from Biola University and plans to pursue philosophical studies in the future. Brian is a member of the Evangelical Theological Society and the Evangelical Philosophical Society.
Brian has served in pastoral ministry for nearly 20 years and currently serves as a clinical hospice chaplain. Additionally, he serves as an editor for the Eleutheria Journal. At the prompting of the Lord, Brian established Bellator Christi Ministries in 2012. The ministry is aimed to provide readily available resources in theology, apologetics, biblical studies, and philosophy to those who want to know what Christianity teaches and why it should be believed. In 2019, Brian published his first book entitled the Layman’s Manual on Christian Apologetics. After finishing his Ph.D., Brian intends to publish more books. His areas of expertise include early NT creeds, near-death experiences, biblical reliability, the blend of divine sovereignty and human freedom, and the need for empathy.
https://www.amazon.com/Laymans-Manual-Christian-Apologetics-Essentials/dp/1532697104
[1] Unless otherwise noted, all quoted Scripture comes from the Christian Standard Bible (Nashville, TN: Holman, 2020).
© 2022. BellatorChristi.com.
You should add Marcionism, Christian Gnosticism, and possibly Apocalypticism to your list. They neatly avoid the Problem of Evil by saying that Jesus is the son of an unnamed god, a good god, which is quite different from the guy in charge of the world now.
By throwing Yahweh under the bus, you’re able to embrace Jesus as the good guy who comes from a wholly good god.
Interesting point, Bob. Do you see them as better or worse than the Christian viewpoint?
Much better, simply because the Problem of Evil vanishes. None of them helps to make the religion any more plausible, of course, but it does eliminate that rather embarrassing problem.
So, would this unnamed deity be who we classically understood as God?
I don’t understand why you think subjective morality is somehow defective or insufficient to explain morality. Your god is the most complex imaginable thing, assuring you that under Occam’s Razor he stays as the most unlikely candidate, since all non-god explanations are necessarily less complex than “god”.
I have blasted to bits many times in the past Frank Turek’s argument to god from morality, an argument you now imitate here when you pretend that atheism logically leads to pitiless indifference.
I don’t understand why you think getting pitiless indifference out of “atheism” is supposed to be some sort of rebuttal to atheism. Are you not aware of just exactly how pitilessly indifferent most educated adults are toward the plight of the less fortunate? One minute after the radio host speaks in hushed tone about the recent Texas school massacre, she is speaking all excitedly in congratulating some caller for solving a puzzle-game.
Furthermore, most people are hardwired by evolution against pitiless indifference, we are mammals, we by nature do have some care and concern for others like us, even if we are indifferent to unfairness we see happening elsewhere.
I sure wish you’d allow substantive reply, because allowing only minimal reply gives the reader the false impression that nobody is able to “refute” you comprehensively. I request a formal written debate with you at any location of your choosing.
Barry, evolution cannot account for anything unless it is guided by intelligence. If you logically follow the atheist line of thought, then it only stands to reason that nothing matters in a world where God does not exist. No justice will be ultimately found. You may say, “That’s where we need to step in and provide justice.” Well and good. However, there are many crimes that go unpunished. Additionally, many innocent parties have been imprisoned for crimes they never committed. What of all the supremacists who unjustly lynched young black men in the streets in the late 1800s and early 1900s? Where is justice found for those poor souls? Atheism offers nothing to account for morality and justice. It offers no sense of justice for shooters who cowardly take their own lives or who were executed in an exchange of fire with the authorities. If evolution is your go-to response, then how can we trust anything we think as we are nothing more than molecules set in motion by chemical responses? Atheism has nothing to offer, except for deluding ourselves to think that we are our own gods and will never give an account to anyone but ourselves. That, my friend, is what makes atheism so dangerous–not so much dangerous for society, but dangerous to those who delude themselves with such a notion.
Pertaining to the Occam’s Razor argument, I would argue the opposite. It is far simpler to envision a universe stemming from an uncaused Cause (being God) than a series of physical events occurring in the past. For a good scientific argument for the case for God, see Stephen C. Meyer’s book Return of the God Hypothesis.
I would happily debate you if you were willing to listen to the points that were being made. But as it stands right now, you have not shown that you are willing to listen to the other side. As such, an exercise of this nature would be futile, as both of us would simply be talking over the other.