Augustine thinks that God is justified in allowing natural evil to remain as it is a deserved punishment and consequence of sinning “all evil is either sin or a punishment for sin”, linking with the temptation and consequent fall of Adam and Eve in Genesis 3. Therefore as the whole of mankind is seminally present in Adam, we are to feel guilty from this disobedience of God resulting in our human actions destroyed the natural order. However some hold the view that this shows a uncaring and unloving God however Augustine would use the example from the Bible were God sacrificed his own son-Jesus to save the life of others therefore it could be argued that this shows God as just and merciful.
In contrast the Bishop Irenaeus argues that God is in fact responsible for the presence of evil in the world and so disagrees with Augustine’s view that evil was brought into the world through external forces such as Angels. Instead Gods creation is not flawless even though we are created from the likeness and image of God. Instead we must achieve perfection through the development of free choice thus the potential to disobey his wishes. Through suffering we start our transformation from human animals to children of God but we must encounter the possibility of evil to do so. Although God has not created us perfectly, we have the potential for moral perfection and should strive to reach it however in doing so the natural order is designed so, that it has the potential to cause harm therefore humans consequently are designed imperfectly. Whilst humans embark on this journey where natural evil and suffering is a consequence of free will God watches his creation form afar and does not interfere as otherwise this would compromise humankind’s freedom.
Irenaeus argues that suffering and pain are good and necessary for the word and its population to benefit causing us to educate ourselves about the world and also understand values which would otherwise be ignored. He believes that this evil is temporary and therefore justifiable as eventually it will be overcome when we transform from Gods image to being in Gods likeness and go to Heaven. Irenaeus states that there are various benefits of moral evil, firstly that “if we had no knowledge of the contrary, could we have instruction of in that which is good”. Therefore showing that through suffering we develop our understanding and desire to help others developing our character. Thus creating a more moral human race as if we had no free will we would just do things for the sake of it and this would not be so morally correct as doing a charitable act out of own free will. Another benefit for the existence of moral evil is that of a predictable environment where the natural laws which are independent of needs and necessary clash with our own individual needs resulting In the presence of natural evil.
When a person has endured suffering, and the hardship which the presence of natural evil entails, Irenaeus argues that they would have developed Gods likeness and reach Heaven within which they will cease to remember the sufferings of which they endured on Earth. Therefore supporting the view that suffering is beneficial and necessary for Gods creation to be who he intended.
b)’The sufferings of innocent people, destroy any attempt to explain why God allows moral evil.’ Discuss (17)
Many philosophers question the traditional concept of God as omnipotent, omnipresent concerned with agape, they doubt this image on the basis that why evil does exists within his perfect creation? Surely a supreme being who represents complete perfection would not allow such flaws within his creation; he would eliminate evil or prevent its stronghold on civilisation. As a result many come to the conclusion that God does not exist as if he did he would use his powers to correct and prevent human suffering and pain as this is the most Christian thing to do. Examples of moral evil such as mass genocide i.e. the Holocaust and natural/physical evil i.e. the Boxing Day Tsunami surely provide an opportunity for God to exert his formidable powers on the world and show that Good can overcome evil, however history has shown otherwise. Thus doubt is cast over this imposing figures morals and wishes for his own creation. However, some do argue in support of God stating that it is not his responsibility to prevent evil as he is not an external reality therefore it does not lie with him. Other less formidable arguments to explain Gods allowance of evil is done by weakening Gods powers and status thus evil is more easily accountable for, However this creates problems in it s own right, mainly destructing the image of God as it shows him to not be ‘all powerful’ (a property often ascribed to him). A less formidable reason is supported by Christian scientists who state that evil is from an illusion of the mind and therefore only an apparent problem.
Aquinas and Plato argue moral evils existence is necessary in society as without imperfection there would not be perfection as evil is just the absence of good. Therefore as God is supreme and a source of complete perfection there has to follow behind him absolute imperfection to contrast with his absolute perfection. Without this it is argued by Hegel that we would not comprehend good as this only occurs when good overcomes evil through struggle. Another Theistic explanation is that of Dualism which sees a battle between the created order- God against disorder in the universe. This view is routed in the bible and heavily relies upon the symbolic instead of the philosophical meaning i.e. the struggle between God and Satan.
In support of Gods choice to let moral evil run within his creation is Despotism where it argues that it is Gods right to let evil into the world and who are we to question his choice as he is our supreme leader and creator. Similar to the Christian view that “it is good because God commands it” as they strongly believe in Gods paternal love towards his people and so whatever he decides is correct.
As thought by Irenaeus pain and suffering are all part of a natural process and are not a weakness in Gods creation Instead they are a testimonial to his fore-thinking of the benefits which moral evil supplies. Firstly that pain serves us a biological and character building purpose; secondly that suffering is beneficial in the long-term as it leads to an appreciation of the beauty of his creation on a broader picture resulting in human values emerging. However this has been counteracted with the extreme and unnecessary large scale of the pain and suffering which moral evil causes. Therefore it seems meaningless to argue that the starvation of a child in Africa will result in a wealthy westerner’s character building- it seems illogical and slightly immoral.
