paris

So Much Evil. Why?

In light of the profound evil being experienced by the people of Paris and countless other locations around the world, we thought we would raise again the question that many ask when things like this occur: Why? Of course, Greg has spent much of his writing and speaking energy addressing this. Here is a basic, introductory summary to the question:

______________________________

The way in which classical-philosophical Christian theists have approached the problem of evil has generally been to frame evil as a problem of God’s providence and thus of God’s character. Assuming (rightly) that God is perfectly loving and good, and assuming (wrongly) that divine omnipotence entails meticulous control, the problem of evil has been formulated within this tradition as a problem of locating a loving and good purpose behind evil events.

This represents an impossible task, and hence the problem of evil becomes simply unsolvable within this framework.

By contrast the warfare worldview is predicated on the assumption that divine goodness does not completely control or in any sense will evil; rather, good and evil are at war with one another. This assumption obviously entails that God is not now exercising exhaustive, meticulous control over the world. In this worldview God must work with, and battle against, other created beings. While none of these beings can ever match God’s own power, each has some degree of genuine influence within the cosmos.

In other words, a warfare worldview is inherently pluralistic. There is no single, all-determinative divine will that coercively steers all things, and hence there is here no supposition that evil agents and events have a secret divine motive behind them. Hence too, one need not agonize over what ultimately good, transcendent divine purpose might be served by any particular event.

If this world is indeed caught up in the middle of a real war between good and evil forces, evil is expected—including evil that serves no higher end. For in any state of war, gratuitous evil is normative. Only when it is assumed that the world is meticulously controlled by an all-loving God does each particular evil even need a higher, all-loving explanation. For only then is evil not expected, hence only then is it intellectually problematic at a concrete level.

In other words, only when we reject the view that the cosmos is something like a society of free beings, most of whom are invisible, and all of whom have some small degree of influence on the whole—in short, only when we reject the warfare worldview in favor of a monistic one in which one sovereign will governs all—are we saddled with an understanding of God and his relationship with the world in which evil becomes impenetrably mysterious on a concrete level.

—Adapted from God at War, pages 20-21

Image via The Daily Times

Related Reading

Five Brief Philosophical Arguments for the Open View

Introduction I believe that sound philosophical arguments support the open view in which God doesn’t foreknow the future free decisions of humans. My main reasons for holding this view are biblical and theological, but since truth is one we should expect that the truths of Scripture and the truths of reason will arrive at the…

Jesus and the Reality of Spiritual Warfare

In yesterday’s post, we discussed how challenging it can be to believe in the reality of a spiritual realm in the modern world. Today, let’s look at how Jesus’ ministry relates to this spiritual reality. While Jesus and his followers of course believed that God was the ultimate Lord over all creation, they clearly viewed…

Video Q&A: What is Open Theism?

Topics:

The Cross and Cosmic Warfare

Since the time of Anselm in the 11th century, Western theology has focused almost all of its attention on the anthropological dimension of the atonement. In the most popular understanding, the chief thing that God was accomplishing on the cross was satisfying God’s perfect justice and thereby atoning for our sins. The work of the…

A Calvinist and an Arminian walk into a bar…

Toby Bradbury via Compfight Roger Olson posted A Conversation between a Calvinist and an Arminian about God’s Sovereignty that we thought was dead on. In fact, we kind of wonder if Roger is bugging some of the conversations we’ve had. Déjà vu much? And since Roger has argued that Open Theism should be included under the broader umbrella of…

To What Extent is the Future Open to Real Possibilities?

We frequently get questions about the extent to which the future is composed of actual possibilities rather than settled or determined. Here’s what Greg has to say in response to these questions: 1. We can be confident the future is settled, to the extent that the Bible depicts the future as settled. This, of course,…