Geisler/Corduan - Problem of Evil

(Originally written March 13, 2007 in Book 25)

Part 4: God & Evil

14: The nature of the problem of Evil

Nearly every religion attempts to deal with the reality and causes of evil in the world.

The problem of evil arises out of the nature of theism.

There are a number of dimensions to the problem of evil: metaphysical, physical and moral

An inconsistency differs from a contradiction. In a contradiction there are two statements in which one is true and one is false. In an inconsistency one or both statements could be false, but on the surface both cannot be true.

The inconsistency version of the problem of Evil

1) God is an omnipotent and omnibenevolent Being, in accordance with His nature He would abolish all evil
2) Evil exists

Either 1 or 2 could be false, both could be false but both cannot be true.

A way to solve an inconsistency is to show that it is a paradox. Thus, the inconsistency of 1 & 2 can be made into a paradox like this:

1) God is an omnipotent and omnibenevolent being, in accordance with His nature He would abolish all evil
2) Evil exists
3) God expressed his omnipotent and omnibenevolent nature by creating free beings who are solely responsible for evil.

But this solution may not satisfy men. Someone might still want to know why God created free beings. This way of dealing with the problem of evil is the problem of theodicy (the justification of God).

Non theistic solutions to the Problem of Evil

Illusionism's Answer to Evil

A theist cannot deny the reality of evil. A pantheist can claim that nothing is really evil, but only appears evil, but a theist may not.

Evil is everything that frustrates human aspirations and expectations.

Many people influenced by Eastern thought deny the reality of evil.

Frederic Spiegelburg follows the Indian sage Aurobindo in claiming that pain is not a matter of fact, but a perspective. Once one comes to the truth there is no longer a problem of evil because there is no evil.

Alan Watts accuses Westerners of being unwilling to recognize individual finitude and subsequently looking for a solution in the acts of free individual. He sees good and evil as relative distinctions that do not obtain with ultimate reality.

Problems with illusionism

1) Illusionism does not account for the origin of the illusion
2) It does not explain the apparent reality of the illusion
3) Denying the reality of evil does not remove the presence of reality
4) Illusionism is a theory that is ruined by a brutal gang of facts

"It is more likely that the illusionist is being deceived about evil than that all persons are being deceived by evil" (298).

Sadism's answer to evil

Elie Wiesel postulated that God is sadistic and created the world to watch suffering.

Harold S. Kushner in "When Bad Things Happen to Good People" states we ought to forgive God for not making a better world.

Objections to Sadism

1) God is all-good in theism
2) God as a term seems inappropriate for a sadistic being
3) The universe cannot be ultimately evil because evil presupposes good
4) It seems absurd that there is a being responsible for creating and destroying what he creates (Charles Hartshorne)

Finitism's Answer to Evil

David Hume and subsequent thinkers have proposed that God is finite in power or love (or both).

Finitism is represented by process thinkers today. Charles Hartshorne believes that the worst falsehood known is the traditional concept of omnipotence.

Others claim that God is not essentially limited, but instead limits Himself.

Bruce R. Reichenbach claims that God is sovereign in authority and power, but willingly limits Himself.

Objections to Finitism

1) Only an infinite cause explains the existence of things. A finite God could not be the cause of all existence
2) A finite God is not worthy of worship
3) A finite God cannot guarantee an outcome in the struggle of good and evil.

"A finite god is metaphysically impossible, religiously unworthy and ethically demoralizing for people in their struggle against evil" (300).

If there is no infinite God there can be no final solution to the problem of evil.

Determinism's answer to evil

God was forced to create the world as it is.

This view is normally pantheistic, but some theists who hold creation flows necessarily, not willingly from God also hold it.

Benedict Spinoza believed that the world as we have it is the necessary and most perfect product possible of the necessary and most perfect Being possible.

Objection to Determinism:

1) Creation flows from God's will freely, not necessarily (Revelation 4:11, Ephesians 1:11) That is, He was free not to create
2) God has no need to create
3) The necessary Being does not necessarily need to do anything other than exist
4) Even if God had to create it does not follow he had to create an imperfect world

Finitude does not necessitate evil, it only makes it possible

Impossibilism's Answer to evil

It may be impossible for even an infinite God to foreknow future free events. God could have created free beings not knowing they would bring evil into the world with their freedom.

God cannot control free beings without negating their freedom. Even an infinite God cannot do what is contradictory.

Objection to impossibilism

1) A Calvinist might draw a different conclusion that God foreknows and beings are still free
2) There can be no such thing as truly free (unforeseeable) acts by human beings because that limits God
3) Foreknowledge does not imply fore-determination
4) God is timeless, he does not foresee anything. He sees everything eternally now.
5) Just because an event is determined does not mean that it cannot be freely chosen
6) It makes no sense to speak of something in the future being true
7) God knows the choices and the eventually chosen act

Solutions to the Problem of Evil open to Theism

There are two sets of alternatives to the solution of the problem of evil open to theists:
1) Hypothetical
2) Actual

The hypothetical alternatives for theism

1) God could have decided not to create anything at all
- A God who knew that creation would become corrupt should not have created at all
- No solution to the problem of evil will be satisfactory without addressing this possibility that was open to God

2) God could have created only beings who are not free
- Could God have made an amoral world?
- The nature of God only necessitates that if he does, he must do it best, not that he do

3) God could have created beings who are free to sin, but do not actually sin
- Many have argued that freedom without sin is a contradiction
Objections to this:
1) There is no logical connection between freedom and sin
2) Freedom without sin is not a contradiction in Heaven

4) God could have created beings who are free but must sin
- God pronounces that sin is inevitable, but each sin is not
- Forced freedom though is completely incoherent

5) God could have created beings who were free and who would sin

- This alternative is what theists claim God chose to create

The Actual Alternatives for Theism

Theists must defend the way God chose to create (That he chose to create beings who were free not to sin but inevitably would choose to do so)

1) A theist need not prove three things to answer the problem of evil

He does not have to show that this is the best of all possible worlds, but only that there could be no better world or non-world

He does not have to show how God can achieve the highest perfection out of a world with evil in it.

He does not need to definitively prove that this world is the best of all possible solutions.

2) A theistic solution to evil must meet three conditions:
1) It must be at least possible
2) Offer evidence that it is capable of achievement
3) Present a way that is verifiable/falsifiable

The apparent dilemma facing theism

It seems that the proportions: What God does must be his best and the world is not best eliminates any theistic solution to the problem of evil

God must do his best. It is axiomatic that anything less than doing his best would be evil for GOd.

The theist must show that what God produces is the best possible.

Heaven is actually an argument against this world being the best of all possible worlds.

The way out of this dilemma is to claim that this is not the best of all possible worlds, but the best possible way to get to the best of all possible worlds (heaven)

Only an infinitely wise and good God can guarantee heaven as an outcome

The Dimensions of the Problem of Evil

Three aspects to the problem of evil:
1) Metaphysical
2) Moral
3) Physical

The Metaphysical Aspect of Evil

1) God is the author of everything in the world
2) Evil is something in the world
3) Therefore, God is the author of evil

Theists would not want to reject either of the premises. Denying the first would lead to dualism. Denying the second just seems contrary to experience

Theistic reply:

1) God is the author of everything
2) Evil is not a thing (substance)
3) Therefore, God is not necessarily the author of evil

To deny evil is not a real entity is not to deny the reality of evil. Evil is real. It is a real privation in things.

The Moral Aspect of the Problem of Evil

Pierre Bayle postulated the moral problem of evil in the 17th century.

1) Evil exists
2) An omnipotent God could destroy evil
3) A benevolent God would destroy evil
4) Therefore, since evil is not destroyed either:
a) God is omnipotent and malevolent
b) God is benevolent and impotent
c) God is both malevolent and impotent
d) There is no God

Another way of stating it:
1) God is responsible for making everyone, including human freedom
2) Human freedom brought about moral evil
3) Therefore, God is responsible for what brought about moral evil

The Physical Aspect of the Problem of Evil

Not all evil is clearly a result of human freedom

Albert Camus offered the physical problem of evil

1) Either one must join the doc and fight the plague or else join the priest and not fight the plague
2) Not to fight the plague is anti-humanitarian
3) To fight the plague is to fight against God who sent it
4) Therefore if humanitarianism is right, theism is wrong

Theists would deny premise 3

The end times notes

(Originally written May 10, 2006 in 3 Subject Book)

Historic Christian Belief

1 Thessalonians 4:13-18

True, Origen

Between Death & Resurrection

Purgatory
-Roman Catholic Doctrine (2 Maccabees 12:45)

Protestant objections
-Luke 16:26
-Hebrews 9:27

Paradise
-Jesus: Luke 23:43
-Paul: 2 Corinthians 12:4, Philippians 1:23
-Revelation 2:7, 6:9-11

The Return of Christ & the millennium

Historic pre-millennialism (2nd century)
-post apostolic fathers

Amillennialism (4th century)
-Augustine of Hippo

Post-Millennialism (16th century)
-Jonathan Edwards

Dispensational Pre-Millennialism (19th century)
-Darby, LaHaye/Jenkins: Left Behind

Eschatology Notes

(Originally written May 8, 2006 in 3 Subject Book)

Historic Christian Belief

Eschatology

Physical Death

Death - body-soul separation
-not merely 'natural'
-an enemy: sin's penalty
(Genesis 2 & 3, Romans 5:12, 6:23)

For unbelievers: prelude to the final judgment (Revelation 20:6)

For believers: final step in sanctification (1 Corinthians 15:26)

Between Death & Resurrection:

Hades (Hebrew Sheol, Hell)
OT - The Graves
NT - For the wicked dead only

Purgatory

Roman Catholic Doctrine (2 Maccabees 12:45)

Protestant objection to purgatory (Luke 16:26, Hebrews 9:27)

More views on Creation

(Originally written on February 20, 2006)

Quiz

1) The notion that God created the world in six twenty-four hour days is connected with?
- Direct Creationism

2) In Genesis 1:27 how many times does the Hebrew word "barah" meaning "create" appear?
- Three

3) In the heavenly realm Satan's alter ego is?
- Michael

4) Who wrote the book Darwin's Black Box?
- Michael Behe

The cosmos is result of either impersonal + time + chance or Divine Creation

Divine Creation
- evidences in microsphere:
- "anthropic principle" - universe made in such a way that it is made to be conducive to human life
- evidences in microsphere:
"irreducible complexity" - the complexity of certain aspects of humanity makes it impossible for a gradual evolutionary process

Genesis & Evolution

Bible - Special creation of humanity as humanity

Theistic evolution?

Genesis 1-3 is not allegory or parable

3 Differentiations

Genesis 1:1 (ex nihilo) nothing becomes something
- Barah #1

Genesis 1:21 unconsciousness becomes conscious life
- Barah #2

Genesis 1:27 Conscious life becomes imago dei
- Barah #3

barah is used three times in verse 27, signifying that humanity is the pinnacle or apex of creation

Caveat: scientific theory is not equal to fact

The Bible states that:
1) God created, thus there is a time, a specific starting point for creation
2) The universe is not necessary, it is contingent upon something or someone. It is not independent, it is dependent on something
3) God of creation and God of redemption are the same (contrary to Marcion's heresy)

Angels

-Created beings, and self-existent spirits
-Spirits, not bodily (Matthew 22:30, Genesis 18:1)

Hierarchy of Angels
- Michael (Daniel 12:1, Jude 9, Revelation 12:7)
- Gabriel (Daniel 8:16, 9:21, Luke 1:19, 31-33)

Monad agents with the capacity to rebel
-Satan is a fallen angel (Revelation 12:7). Satan is not a self-existent spirit

A Faith for all Season Ch. 4

The starting point for answering these questions is comprehending the Bible. It is a foundational point, but experience and science should be used in addition to form a Christian worldview.

God the Father Almighty, Creator of Heaven and Earth

God created the world out of nothing (ex nihilo) simply by calling them into being

The universe is not eternal; only God is eternal.

A modern school of thought (process theology) believes that both God and the universe are eternally in developmental mode. This view ignores "in the beginning" and blurs the line between the creator and the created order.

The God of creation is the God of redemption. This is a belief that has been held by even the earliest Christians. The Nicene Creed and the Apostolic creed focus on the redemptive work of Jesus Christ, but begin by affirming that God created all things. These creeds affirmed that the God of creation is the God of redemption and combated the gnostic view of a lesser god (usually the god of the Old Testament) creating the world, but a supreme God redeeming us.

Why God Created the World

This question is really two separate questions. The first is for what purpose did God create the world? The second is what caused God to create the world as it is? To answer the first question, creation has been called a theatrum gloriae dei (theater of the glory of God). Humanity is the centerpiece of this theater. We were created for the purpose of demonstration of the glory of God and for enjoying God forever. Man's highest purpose, according to John Piper, is to "glorify God by enjoying him forever" (Dorman, 67).

All creation glorifies God, but only man can enjoy God because man is the only creation capable of worshipping God.

The second question is considered improper to ask by some. They state simply that God created the world because he wanted to. During the Reformation Martin Luther said that before God created the world he was "cutting the switches to punish those who ask such impertinent questions" (Dorman, 68). Calvin said that before God created the world he was "building a hell for the curious" (Institutes 1.14.1)

Jonathan Edwards believed that God was delighting in himself before creating the world and was therefore motivated to create something glorious. He contended that God has both necessary work and free work. It is necessary for God to fully delight in Himself, but creation isn't essential to God's happiness. Creation is a free act that is done through motivation of God's glory.

According to Edwards, benevolence motivated God to create. He defined benevolence as a joy that is found in meeting the needs of others, rather than having one's own needs met. This motivating benevolence can also be described as a love that condescends to meet the needs of unworthy beings (mercy). God is so secure in Himself that He can condescend to us and love what is unloveable. Mercy is God's greatest act of glory because mercy is a free act. Free acts of will are much more glorious than necessary acts.

Alternatives to the Biblical View of Creation

Greek Philosophy

Biblical view - ex nihilo
Plato's view - ex nihilo nihil fit
- Two self evident things: God and matter
- God formed matter to reflect his eternal ideas in creation
Aristotle
- Believed the same thing other than the universe had a beginning: when God formed the matter to like it

Ancient greek philosophy had a tendency to view this self-existent matter as intrinsically evil.

Notes on 1 John and Revelation

(Originally written January 25, 2006)

Roles of God in Salvation

Father = Election
Son = Redemption/forgiveness of sins
Holy Spirit = Secures the believers' future inheritance, blessings = glorified bodies

What can we learn from I John 1:1-4
- we can have fellowship with believers and with God and Jesus
- letter is about the word of life eternal
-note emphasis on sensory perception of the word

1 John 1:5-10 Belief and Practice must be wedded

vv. 5-10 concern what will be true orthodox beliefs

vv. 6, 8, & 10 are directed against the teaching of the heretics

Confession steps
1) call it sin
2) call it forgiven
3) call on God for help

Heretics
- claimed to walk with God but did not
- claimed they had no sin to be cleansed

Why was I John written?
- To expose false teachers who are leading true believers astray (2:26)
- To give true Christians assurance of their salvation

Non-Biblical Gnostic dualism led to five errors:
1) human body is evil, soul is good
2) salvation is escape from body
3) Denied Christ's true humanity in two ways:
-Docetism: Christ only appeared to have a body
-Cerenthianism: the divine Christ joined the man Jesus at baptism and left before he died
4) Asceticism
5) Licentiousness

What is the sin that leads to Death in 1 John 5:16
1) Either referring to physical death that is caused by sin (Old Testament and I Corinthians 11). God ending a life so as the man is brought home rather than damned to hell.
2) A person who stayed in the community but then were heretics and left the community of believers.

Introduction to Revelation

Apokalypsis (Greek) means the uncovering, laying bare, Metaphorically it means a revealing

Revelation = Prophetic Apocalyptic Literature

-Apocalyptic Literature - starts in post-exilic Jewish writing
-Contains dreams, spiritual realm, savior from despair

Prophetic Apocalyptic - incorporates Apocalyptic literature with prophecy of Israel

Symbolic language has real implication

Revelation is a prophetic red book.

Unholy Trinity
Satan - Red Dragon
Antichrist - The Beast
False Prophet - The other beast

Four Interpretive Approaches to the Book of Revelation (or Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 21)

1) Idealist approach (NIV Study Bible likes this)
-Theological poem depicting between good and evil
-No events will actually happen
-Expressions of basic principles of how God acts

Weaknesses of Idealist approach
-Continues the allegorical approach
-No historical fulfillment

2) Preterist Approach
-Contents are factual/historical
-Everything in it except visions in Chapters 21 and 22 was fulfilled by the time John wrote

Weaknesses of Preterist approach
-the decisive victory never happened
-view cannot fit all the events of Revelation chapters 2-19 into the year AD 64-70 or AD 64-96.

3) Historicist Approach
- Revelation chapters 2-19/20 is a forecast of the course of history down to present day
- Revelation sketches the history of Western Europe from the Popes to Charlemagne to Napoleon to Hitler

Problems with the historicist approach
-Totally subjective
-No significance to first century readers

4) The Futurist Approach
-Major emphasis is on the future final victory of God over evil
-Many believe that from 4:1 on is future
-Letter to 7 churches are something held to represent the predominant types of churches in successive stages of church history
-John being taken up into heaven is symbolic of rapture

Major Weakness
- Most of the book was irrelevant for those whom it was addressed
- Little comfort to the original readers who would have to wait for 7 ages of the Church for Christ to return

Revelation 3:14-22

Church at Laodicea: Self-Satisfied Church

Hot/Cold/Lukewarm: Popular view vs. Correct view

Hot: Believer (popular) Medicinal (correct)
Cold: Unbeliever (popular) Refreshing (correct)
Lukewarm: Indifferent (popular) Miserable (correct)

Laodicea had to import water from other places:
1) was a hot spring that by the time the water got there it was lukewarm
2) was a cold water source [Colosse] but by the time it got to Laodicea it was lukewarm.
The water was no longer medicinal or refreshing, it was miserable.
(John knew his readers!)

Perceived Anti-Christs: George III, Napoleon, Reagan, Roman Popes, Mussolini, Hussein, Hitler, Gorbachev

Central passage for the Millennium: Revelation 20:4-6

Christ speaks of two ages
1) Present age
2) Age to come

Views on Millennialism:

1) Amillennialism: there will be no millennium
- The saints are reigning with Christ now in heaven
- Eternity begins at the second coming
- Old Testament prophecies are fulfilled spiritually in the Church

2) Postmillennialism: Jesus returns after the millennium to reign with the saints
- Satan is bound now
- World won to Christ through the preaching of the Gospel and will experience a "wonderful" period of peace
- Church prepares the world for the second coming of Christ

3) Premillennialism: Christ returns to earth before the millennium
-Millenium is a time when God fulfills the Abrahamic and Davidic covenants with Israel
-Church shares in new covenant promises, but God is not finished with Israel yet.

Premillennialists debate the Rapture

Pre-tribulation Rapture/Seven Year Tribulation (Chapters 6-19)/Post-tribulation rapture

Notes on the Canon, Textual Criticism and Interpretation of the Bible

(Originally written January 5, 2006 in Notebook 20)

The Canon & Transmission of the New Testament text

Definition of Canon - originally meant measuring reed

Metaphorical meaning - standard

Applied to the New Testament - refers to those books accepted by the Church as the standard with governs our beliefs.

The Precanonical Period

- Oral tradition (25 years worth)
(The passion narrative was probably memorized)

- Early Christian Preaching:
1) No New Testament books at this time
2) Early Church had the Septuagint

- Logica = Sayings (A collection of Christ's sayings compiled by Matthew)
- Perhaps like the "Q" Source, namely the 250 or so verses common to Matt and Luke, not in others

- Testimonia = Collection of Old Testament Passages

- Agrapha
- Literally means "unwritten"
- they are the unwritten things that Jesus said
- unwritten means not in the Gospel
- An example of this is Acts 20:35

- Direct revelation from God through the prophets (Acts 11:27-28, Acts 13:1, I Corinthians 11:4-5, 1 Corinthians 12-14)

The collection of individual documents

- New Testament authors regarded their messages as authoritative (I Corinthians 7:40, I Corinthians 14:37, 2 Peter 3:1-2, Revelation 22:18-19)
- Internal testimony: the documents were to be read in the public gatherings of the churches (Revelation 1:3, Galatians 1:1-2, I Thessalonians 5:27, 2 Corinthians 1:1, Colossians 4:16)
- Internal testimony: at least two writers cite other New Testament works as "Scripture" (1 Timothy 5:18, 2 Peter 3:15-16)

The influence of that lead to their collection
- Apostles start to die
- A body of truth was needed for teaching new convents
- Influential heretics arise like Marcion of Sinope: Marcion limited the canon to Paul's letters and Luke's gospel. He was anti-semitic and disregarded other books as Old Testament and of the God of wrath.

Formation of the Canon

- The idea: God superintended the collection of the documents via through his spirit in the churches

Tests of canonicity:
1) Apostolic origin (of an apostle or associate)
2) Apostolic doctrine (first oral, then written)
3) Acceptance by the churches

- Canon confirmed the third council of Carthage

Conclusion
- The Holy Spirit superintended the writing, collection and recognition of the canon
- None of the books were accepted by the church because of ecclesiastical compulsion
- Canon wasn't determined by a council or by individuals' judgments. It was the Spirit guidance.
- Church did not determine the canon, it only recognized it

Textual criticism - the study of the copies of any written composition of which the original autograph is unknown

Foundations of Exposition

-Exposition
- Systematic Theology
- Biblical Theology
- Exegesis
- Hermeneutics

How the Bible came to Us

Thoughts in God's mind --> revelation --> Human author's minds --> Inspiration --> Original Manuscripts of the Bible (Collection of 66 Books) --> Textual Criticism --> Modern Greek and Hebrew Bibles -> Translation --> Modern English Versions --> Illumination and Interpretation --> Thoughts in our minds --> Application --> Change in our lives --> Communication --> to others

The Holy Spirit does not help you to interpret the Bible. It prompts you to act on the Biblical passages you read.

Revelation is the wisdom that cannot be known through human methods, it must be revealed by God

Hermeneutics is the science that teaches us the principles, laws and methods of interpretation.

Differing hermeneutical principles and procedures yield different results and is responsible for varying Christian doctrines.

Evangelicals use the grammatical-historical method of interpretation.

Grammatical - considers the meanings of the words in the text

Historical - considers the meaning of the text within historical contexts

Validation - validating your interpretation

Grammatical-historical method seeks to establish the meaning and the intention of the text as it would have been understood by the original readers.

Competent exegesis must be done in the original languages

Interpret literally

Literal - the natural or usual construction and implication of a writing or expression; following the ordinary and apparent sense of words, not allegorical or metaphorical

There are three elements to every word:
1) Symbol - the actual letters
2) Sense - the meaning attached to the symbol (mediator, intercessor, helper)
3) Referent: the actual thing being related to

Interpret the Bible Contextually

Interpret in accordance with the genre of literature

Understand there are figures of speech: metaphors, similes, overstatements, hyperbole, pun, paradox, irony, parables, fables, myths, riddles

Revelation is accommodated.
Revelation is progressive.