Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effects of the holocaust
Why Evil Exists After the World War II and the Holocaust, many Jewish and Christian people were left wondering why God would let such a thing happen. Many felt estranged, as if God had somehow abandoned them in their most desperate time of need. The world needed an explanation as to why God would let such a thing happen to his so-called "children". This need for an explanation of why evil exists in a world that is supposed to have been created by an all-powerful and all-loving God has plagued religious believers for centuries. Because of this need, many scholars have sought out explanations. This search for an answer to the problem of evil has resulted in many theodicies, or defenses of God in view of the existence of evil. One such defense is known as the free will defense. The free will defense attempts to combat the problem of evil by rationalizing that evil is the result human action and therefore, God is not to be held accountable for it. This essay will discuss both the strengths and weaknesses of the free will defense. Before we can discuss the free will defense, we must define the different types of evil that exist. Philosophers distinguish between two types of evil that exist in this world, natural evil and moral evil. Natural evils are those evils that occur that are outside of our control, or more simply put, the evils exist in nature. These evils include natural disasters like earth quakes, floods, and tornados. They also include other forms of "chance" occurrences that are out of our control. Moral evils, on the other hand, are the evils that are in the control of humans and result from human action. They include things such as murder, rape, theft, etc. Evil, both natural and moral, creates ... ... middle of paper ... ...ined free will. The free will defense is a very functional way of approaching evil in this world. It allows people to logically understand and accept the fact that evil is able to exist in a world that an all-knowing and all-powerful God created. This defense is not infallible; in fact, it has several flaws and critics. It does, however, adequately answer the problem of evil for many believers. It might not be able to turn the disbeliever into a believer, but it will provide assurance for those who feel doubt in their religious faith because of the abundance of evil that exists in the world. Theodicies are an important thing for the believer. The believer must know that God is just, all-loving, and all-powerful, for his faith the be strong, and I believe, despite the inconsistencies in the argument, that the free will defense does indeed assure these things.
A foundational belief in Christianity is the idea that God is perfectly good. God is unable to do anything evil and all his actions are motives are completely pure. This principle, however, leads to many questions concerning the apparent suffering and wrong-doing that is prevalent in the world that this perfect being created. Where did evil come from? Also, how can evil exist when the only eternal entity is the perfect, sinless, ultimately good God? This question with the principle of God's sovereignty leads to even more difficult problems, including human responsibility and free will. These problems are not limited to our setting, as church fathers and Christian philosophers are the ones who proposed some of the solutions people believe today. As Christianity begins to spread and establish itself across Europe in the centuries after Jesus' resurrection, Augustine and Boethius provide answers, although wordy and complex, to this problem of evil and exactly how humans are responsible in the midst of God's sovereignty and Providence.
The problem of reconciling an omnipotent, perfectly just, perfectly benevolent god with a world full of evil and suffering has plagued believers since the beginning of religious thought. Atheists often site this paradox in order to demonstrate that such a god cannot exist and, therefore, that theism is an invalid position. Theodicy is a branch of philosophy that seeks to defend religion by reconciling the supposed existence of an omnipotent, perfectly just God with the presence of evil and suffering in the world. In fact, the word “theodicy” consists of the Greek words “theos,” or God, and “dike,” or justice (Knox 1981, 1). Thus, theodicy seeks to find a sense of divine justice in a world filled with suffering.
Many people struggle to properly defend their faith when confronted about it and even waver in their faith when presented with doubts against their faith that sound convincing. This is because many do not move beyond a basic understanding of their faith and fail to learn the fundamentals of Christian faith. The book Truth Matters: Confident Faith in a Confusing World by Andreas Köstenberger and the film God’s Not Dead (Harold Cronk, 2014) present both similar and different viewpoints on defending one’s faith adequately. Arguments addressed by both the book and the film include the credibility of people, a concept of morals, and the existence of evil.
“…And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.” (Matthew 6:9-13) As it says in the Bible, we wish to be led astray from evil. However, evil is a very curious subject. For most intensive purposes, evil can be described as cruel, heinous, and unnecessary punishment. Evil is a relatively accepted concept in the world today, although it is not completely understood. Evil is supposedly all around us, and at all times. It is more often than not associated with a figure we deem Satan. Satan is said to be a fallen angel, at one point God’s favorite. Supposedly Satan tries to spite God by influencing our choices, and therefore our lives. However, this presents a problem: The Problem of Evil. This argues against the existence of God. Can God and evil coexist?
Free will can be defined as: “The right, given to humans by God, to make their own decisions.” A mans free will cannot be destroyed by any power other than God. Humans can always exercise their free will when making decisions. However, when their decisions come in conflict with the laws set by a higher power, they might face consequences based on how they choose to use their free will. The more restrictions imposed upon someone’s free will the more restricted their ability to make decisions become. The extent to which someone may exercise their free will can be defined as their “freedom.” Therefore, the more laws imposed upon someone’s free will the more restricted their freedom. Although no power, save God, can destroy free will, they can limit and even destroy someones freedom. In the essay Shooting an Elephant George Orwell argues that, “when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys” (Orwell, 704). Free will is indestructible; an example of Orwell’s destruction of freedom but preservation of free will is given in his essay. In Antigone an example of how even though higher powers can limit your decisions they cannot stop you from exercising your free will.
A rebuttal can come in a form of a theodicy or a defense. A theodicy provides a framework which claims to make God's existence probable. Whereas a defense demonstrates that God's existence is logically possible. The free will response is a theodicy presented by many theists including C.S. Lewis. Lewis explains it like this: God created humans to love; to love Him and one another. However, in order for love to be true and meaningful it must stem from freewill. According to a theist, forced love is a contradiction and logically impossible. Because God is omnipotent, he can do all that is logically possible. Forced love is logically impossible therefore; God cannot create humans without freewill. As a consequence evil exists. God could not have created a world in which we have no choice but to love. In order to have love we there...
Evil can be characterized as or accompanied by misfortune or suffering; being unfortunate or disastrous. The presence of evil and suffering in our reality appears to present the argument of the existence of an immaculate God. In other words, the conclusion of the Basic Argument is that God doesn’t exist. If the conclusion is true, then perhaps the problem of evil is caused by human moral agents, not the deity or God. The conclusion matters if we want to understand why innocent people suffer.
Yet again to better understand what the argument of freewill is establishing, one has to be able to understand the meaning freewill. According to scientists the idea of free will is incongruent with the laws of physics and chemistry; brain researchers say that our brain is just a cluster of cells that react as a result of chemical and electrical events, thus we take certain actions leaving no room for free will. In simpler terms, free will means that we can freely choose between right and wrong, good and evil. My argument to freewill is that if God is morally perfect why would he take the chance of creating this world where there would even the smallest possibility of evil (unjustified evil) existing. Naturally, the ones who believe on freewill would also argue that without freewill this world would not make sense, that God created us as free beings so that we could choose to accept Him freely or reject Him. Furthermore, one can argue that this PKM God is selfish because he would take the chance of unimaginable suffering happening just so that he could be loved and
The problem of evil in this world poses a significant challenge to theism. There have been several responses from theists of varying religious backgrounds and schools of thought to this problem; in Christianity the two main ones being the theodicies of St Augustine and Irenaeus. A ‘theodicy’ from the greek words ‘theos’ meaning God and dike meaning ‘justice’ literally means a justification of God in response to the problem of evil.
Throughout history, many people have questioned God’s providence in our world. Theodicy addresses the question of God’s sovereignty in the face of the evils of this world. To better understand theodicy, one must be familiar with the Doctrine of Providence. The question of the character of God’s actions during the time “between the times” is examined by the Doctrine of Providence. Up for debate is the question of whether or not God is guiding history toward a certain end and how God is to be understood in relation to suffering and evil. The providentialist character of God is most often challenged by the harsh reality of evil. There are many theodicy arguments that attempt to answer this question of evil. In this paper, I will argue liberation
This story is about two brothers, Ivan and Alyosha. Alyosha is a monk and Ivan is his brother who doesn’t believe or accept God. Ivan believes that God cannot exist because there is evil. He doesn’t want to try and be convinced otherwise by his brother.
In his essay “Why God Allows Evil” Swinburne argues that the existence of evil in the world is consistent with the existence of all-knowing, all-powerful and all-good God. To start, Swinburne bases his argument on two basic types of evil: moral and natural. Moral evil encompasses all the ills resulting from human action, whether intentional or through negligence; natural evil included all evils not caused or permitted by human beings. Whereas moral evil such as abortion, murder, terrorism, or theft comes from humans acting immorally, natural evil, in the form of suffering caused by earthquakes like the Haitian’s, hurricanes such as Katrina, wild forest fires or diseases such as HIV/AIDS, results from pain and suffering that comes from anything other than human action with predictable consequences. Swinburne's argument is that God allows suffering because it's necessary to make humans good of their own accord by giving them the free will to freely choose among their competing deliberations.
If evil cannot be accounted for, then belief in the traditional Western concept of God is absurd” (Weisberger 166). At the end of the day, everyone can come up with all these numerous counter arguments and responses to the Problem of Evil but no one can be entirely responsible or accountable for the evil and suffering in a world where there is the existence of a “omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God.” Does the argument of the Problem of Evil or even the counter arguments help the evil and suffering of innocent human beings across this world? No. However, the Problem of Evil is most successful in recognizing the evil and suffering of the world but not presenting a God that is said to be wholly good and perfect to be blamed and as a valid excuse for the deaths and evil wrongdoings of this world.
The problem of evil develops an argument against the free will concept. McCloskey uses the problem of evil to create evidence against God as he says “No being who was perfect could have created a world in which there was unavoidable suffering or in which His creations would engage in morally evil acts. The traditional answer is that moral freedom is a greater good that outweighs the possibility of evil that it existence requires. God created man to be the ruler of the world and to watch over His creations. He gave man the ability to think and reason. Without doing so, humans could not be responsible agents or capable of freely doing good. It is not necessarily important to know why God allows evil. It is sufficient to know that there
Ten children are killed every day in the United States by guns; people are murdered senselessly; Columbine High School; Over one-third of middle school children in Cascade County have used illegal drugs and over one-half have tried alcohol; innocent people in foreign countries are being wiped out (Kosovo); The Holocaust; Hiroshima; Vietnam; poverty, starvation and oppression in third world countries; Capitalism; environmental decay and neglect; the media; Oklahoma City; the uni-bomber; earthquakes, fires, tornadoes, hurricanes, volcanoes, airplane crashes; domestic/child abuse; disease, birth defects and mental disorders. Why?Why?Why?… The question never changes and is asked over and over and over and over. People in every age and every time try to understand why evil exists, what may be its purpose, and why does it seem at times to be so present and powerful, or in other words -- "why did this have to happen to me, again?!" Or better yet -- "What did I/they do to deserve this?!" Oh, and here's another one -- "God must be really angry at you for this to happen!" And finally -- "If there really is a God, then why does He allow such evil to even exist?!" When confronted with the dark side of life, these questions come naturally to most and not so naturally to some. Yet, they still come. They have to. As humans made in the image and likeness of a creator who acted out of pure love and complete freedom, it is our obligation to ask these questions and to confront the evil situations that exist, situations that go against the very nature and Spirit of God.