Augustine would argue that the existence of natural evil in the world does not make it impossible to believe in a God who is all loving and all powerful as God is not responsible for it and so is justified in allowing it to stay. Augustine argued that everyone is guilty for Adams sin as everyone was seminally present in the loins of Adam, therefore everyone need to be punished. He continues that natural evil is a fitting punishment and came about because the human action destroyed the natural order. Consequently, God has no right to intervene and put a stop to suffering; theoretically, we cannot complain about natural evil as, according to Augustine, we deserve what we get. Augustine argues that, as evil originates from Adam and not God, it is possible for an all loving all powerful God to exist alongside natural evil.
The Irenaean theodicy states that humanity develops through encountering evil, so evil has a good purpose; therefore, it is not impossible to believe in an all loving all powerful God. John Hick argues that God is at an epistemic distance; we are created in Gods image and not in his likeness, throughout life we are given challenges which help us grow closer to God in the hope of entering his likeness. Peter manning states “natural evils provide opportunities for the exercise of morally good behaviour …which move humanity further toward the possession of God’s likeness”. Natural evils, such as volcanoes and earthquakes, provide humans with the opportunity to display courage, love and goodness. John Hick concludes that the world is not “designed for the maximisation of human pleasure and minimisation of human pain, it may nevertheless be rather well adapted to the quite different purpose of ‘soul-making’”. The existence of natural evil does not make it impossible to believe in a God that is all loving and all powerful, as, in the words of Irenaeus, “How, if we had no knowledge of the contrary, could we have instruction in that which is good” .
Lastly, Peter Vardy would claim that the existence of natural evil does not make it impossible to believe in an all loving, all powerful God as what we perceive as natural ‘evil’ is actually the world doing what it is supposed to. According to Genesis, “And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good”. Therefore, a massive tidal wave like the Tsunami was just being a ‘good’ tidal wave, as it is supposed to; a massive earthquake is just being a ‘good’ earthquake. Everything God made was good and fulfils its purpose; many natural evils are necessary. If there were no earthquakes then the world would, at some point, explode. Therefore, God is being all loving in saving the world and saving us, hence it is not impossible for him to exist alongside natural evil.
On the other hand, many argue that the existence of natural evil in the world makes is impossible for an all loving all powerful God to exist. The logical problem of evil states, in the words of John Hick, “if God is perfectly loving, he must wish to abolish evil; and if He is all-powerful, he must be able to abolish evil. But evil exists; therefore God cannot be both omnipotent and perfectly loving”. This entails the death, or impossibility of the God of classical theism, Aquinas explains “If, therefore, God existed, there would be no evil discoverable, but there is evil in the world. Therefore, God does not exist”. If God was all loving, then he wouldn’t want his creation to suffer from natural evils, and if he was omnipotent then he would have the power to prevent this from happening; therefore, the existence of natural evil makes it impossible for an all loving all powerful God to exist.
The evidential problem of evil supports that the existence of natural evil makes it impossible for an all loving all powerful God to exist. It argues that natural evil and the suffering that arises from it is evidence against the existence of God. William Rowe argues that if natural evil and the suffering that arises from it could bring about some greater good, then God might be justified in allowing it to exist. However, there are many natural evils that do not bring about any greater good, and bring about endless, pointless suffering. Rowe states “there exist instances of intense suffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented…an omniscient, wholly good being would prevent the occurrence of any intense suffering it could…therefore there does not exist an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good being”.
Depending on your faith and beliefs, the existence of natural evil may make it impossible for you to believe in an all loving all powerful God. However, process thought explains that God is not omnipotent, but that he is all good. Process thought argues that God persuaded the world into a state of greater order from matter, and as God is not the creator of natural laws including natural evil, then God is limited within these laws and is not omnipotent. However, God can exist alongside evil, as God suffers as well. A. N. Whitehead describes him as ‘the fellow sufferer who understands’. When natural evils occur, His creative desires are frustrated. It is impossible for an all loving all powerful God to exist alongside natural evil, however for a God who simply is not powerful enough to intervene, he can exist alongside natural evil. To conclude, whether you believe natural evil makes it impossible to believe in an all loving all powerful God depends on your faith, beliefs and whether you believe God is all loving and all powerful.
by
zahr (student)
