After blogging my thoughts on the problem of natural evil, I was rightly taken to task for dismissing any link between freewill and natural disasters. Firstly this was due to traditional Christian theology that dates nature's hostility to man from the Fall. But even if we do not exactly subscribe to such a doctrine, there are other links between the two subjects.
It is fairly clear that God grants the universe a great deal of freedom in the way it operates. The whole point of natural laws is that the universe can function without the need for God to step in and make adjustments the whole time to keep the show on the road. At the same time, those natural laws are not deterministic and so God has not set everything up in advance to come out a certain way. However, he does know the way it is going to turn out and so must think of the result as being good. Thus, I would say that the universe is allowed a 'radical integrity' and given the trouble this can cause we must assume that it is central to God's purposes.
So why did he not create a world where things are better than they are here? Why does he tolerate the inevitability of scarcity, evil and pain? Why not create a world where everyone has what they need and do not have a desire for more than that? I suggest that the reason for this is tied up with the idea of 'radical integrity' and God's obvious desire that we should be our own creatures and not simply automatons.
Imagine a perfect world. In that world, there are animals who never need worry about where the next meal is coming from, never need worry about finding a mate and never need worry about getting eaten. We can be absolutely sure that these animals will never evolve into conscious beings because there is simply no need to. They won't be happy because the concept of happiness can never occur to them. Evil doesn't exist but neither does the concept of good. They simply do not have the ability to comprehend either concept. What about love? I can't see how that can have appeared either because love almost always involves some sort of self-privation which is impossible in a world without scarcity. Of course, God can step in and create the difficult conditions in which these ideas can develop, but that makes him even more responsible for evil than he is already. If you want a universe that enjoys radical integrity and you want love and good to develop, you have to ensure that the conditions exist for them to appear. Without scarcity, they won't. The flip side is that scarcity gives rise to other consequences. The human desire for status is a direct evolutionary result of the fact that there is not enough to go around.
In our universe, love and good have developed to a quite remarkable extent. This has happened because natural evil exists. This natural evil has also given rise to much moral evil because pride, violence and promiscuity have all evolved because of it. But without it, we would not be conscious of good either or, if we were, we would not be free as the concept of good would simply have been planted in our heads by God rather than being something we discover for ourselves. Thus beings who know love and good through their own efforts can only evolve in a world of privation. Otherwise, everything we value, including freewill and consciousness, simply won't exist.
Imagine a world where the lion lies down with the lamb....
ReplyDeleteWhat a horrible, literally God-forsaken , place that would be.
The idea that man must evolve to conquer evil, or be conquered by evil sounds quite Nietschzian.
ReplyDeleteThe most important thing to recognise about evil is that it goes to the very heart of choice and freedom. I am not saying that evil exists for us to overcome but that having the freedom of choice must necessarily mean having the freedom to choose between good and evil. It is possible to conceptualise a world without evil but such a world is necessarily less diverse and rich in choices than one with both good and evil. But that is not the whole story.
ReplyDeleteEvil exists within us. Not only that, evil can also happen without any human cause. This suggests that God is comfortable with the existence of evil. I think this is because, in God's perspective, evil is well within God's control. Even in the story of Job, where God gave Satan free rein to do what he will to Job, God was clearly in control. He established the limits of Satan's power and he has the power to undo the damage caused.
This can be demonstrated in life itself. What is exciting and challenging to the adult or the expert is dangerous to the child or the novice. Can we expect a dancer not to jump for fear she might injure herself? To stand up is to risk falling down. This is why we are protective with a child learning to walk but as adults, we not only walk, we run, climb, jump and dance. We do not see these latter activities as evil nor dangerous, but in the sense that they are dangerous to the child, they can also be seen as evil.
The same applies to the things that we find evil. To God, I believe that overcoming evil is just part of maturing to his level. Let me explain by speculating on a kind of hell that is not the kind of hell Christians commonly imagine. First imagine heaven as you would like it to be - perfect, no evil, you are yourself perfect and you are with God. Now consider an 'evil' person in this place - he is jealous of what others have, he still has lust in his heart, evil thoughts in his mind. Can he be happy, even in heaven? Will he not, instead, be in living hell? I am not saying that this is the real hell, but rather that it is not necessary for God to punish the evil person.
On the other hand, consider the good Christian. On earth, he is already comfortable with the evil in the world. He knows how he should conduct himself and he knows how to respond to those who suffer or who are evil. When he finally meets God, will he not be in heaven? Will it matter what heaven is like?
I think we need to see evil as simply part of the richness and diversity of the world that God created. Indeed, the more we try to eliminate evil from our lives, the less rich our lives will be. And the less wisdom we will have. Rather, we should recognise evil for what it is, that we can be in charge and not be controlled by it. When we realise this, we will also be able to appreciate the good qualities that exist in us because of this world of true freedom and choice - the ability to be humble because we too are sinners, to sympathise and respond to those who suffer, and to love (as James Hannam suggests).
When Jesus came to earth, he said he had good news, that his yoke is light, and that we will be saved. Although he cured the sick, healed the paralysed, and forgave the sinners, he never removed the possibility of sin or evil, nor said that this was a possibility. I think we should not tremble in the presence of evil but see it simply as part of the richer, more interesting world that God has created. Once we understand this, and our right relationship with it, then the argument about the existence of evil is, I think, moot. I think that recognising the presence of both evil and good in this world, and in ourselves, is the first step to true wisdom. This does not, of course, in any way suggests that we should accept evil. We need to learn how to deal with evil, how to respond with anger, sympathy and love. We then need to see that like learning to walk, we can overcome evil and if we do, the full richness of a life of choice is available to us.
Bede, it seems like you think that evil (natural evil in this case) is necesary in order to know about love, goodness, etc. However, such a view is challenged by the fact that there is, supousedly, already a being who knows about love and goodness without actually experimenting any suffering: God. How does God knows about love, kidness or happinnes??
ReplyDelete