1. Couldn't
god find a better way to bring about good than via evil? (Or, if you prefer,
can you get creative and at least contemplate ways that appear, on the very
surface at least, better?)
These types of questions are difficult because they
entertain the idea of a perfect being while suggesting that said being is doing
things imperfectly. I honestly don’t
know if he could do it better because the existence of evil draws our attention
beyond the here and now and thrusts into ultimate questions which in turn makes
us consider eternity. The very existence
of a non-temporal God and our temporal existence has built into it imperfection
and dependency which leaves the capacity for evil. And for some reason, unexplained to man,
God’s plan included a damaged creation being redeemed through the death of his
son. Just because we can’t conceive of
an explanation doesn’t mean there isn’t one.
And honestly, an infinite being explaining his infinite perfect plan to
finite imperfect creatures means by default we won’t fully understand because
our very nature is opposed to complete infinite exhaustive understanding. So the absence of an explanation doesn’t
necessarily prove anything, other than what we should assume to be the case
given the nature of an ultimate perfect plan and our limited imperfect
abilities.
2. Doesn't
the process of creating a negative and a positive equal a zero?
Not if the ultimate sum of all things is good. The evil actions of men are finite and
temporal, God’s plan is eternal. In
other words, his actions and will are going to bring about eternal
incorruptible good while the evil intentions and actions of men bring about
temporal evil and are part of an ultimate plan for ultimate good. So, Christ being killed was temporary and
evil, but it brought about a greater, ultimate, and incorruptible good: the
salvation of many.
Then I was asked why the buck stopped at us and why didn’t God
deliver the girls in Cleveland. Well, if
he brings about all things, then God is the one who ultimately delivered them
from the hands of the oppressor. Now,
the question remains, why didn’t God do it before they were raped? The short of it is, we don’t know, and we
don’t always get a clear 1:1 like we do in the story of Joseph or the death of
Jesus. Maybe it will increase awareness
in the area and keep a greater number of girls safe from abduction and
rape? Maybe it will be so shocking and
terrifying to the public that someone considering doing something similar decides
it’s better not to? Again, we see things
on a temporal scale while God sees a big and ultimate picture. So maybe the good never comes in our lifetime
or is even tangible. Maybe someone reads
this discussion or those like it and finds hope in their suffering knowing
there is some underlying current of good in their awful circumstance and they
face it with hope rather than despondency and bitterness? But ultimately, I don’t know. Again, the Gospel shows me that the worst
thing ever brought about something wonderful, so I can, as Paul says, grieve
with hope.
And to clarify, my point was not that we need God to tell us evil
exists. My point was more of a
philosophical flipping of the coin. Say
there is no God, no absolute measurement, nothing supernatural, nothing above
the natural realm, then how do we claim metaphysical realities like evil
exist? How do we grieve with hope? How do we maintain in one hand that evil
exists, and in the other, provide hope for the damaged, the suffering, and the
down trodden?
No comments:
Post a Comment