The problem of EviL

The Problem of Evil:


Definition of Terms:

Intrinsically Good: What is good in and of itself, and an end and not merely as a means to an end. (Mt 19:17) Vital to the proper answer … is the recognition of God’s purpose in creating man; viz., sonship (with Himself) and, concomitantly, for brotherhood (with his fellow-man).
Thus, whatever is filial and fraternal is intrinsically good. It is intrinsically good to believe in God, to love God, to honor God, to obey God. Whatever is filial and/or fraternal can never, under any circumstances, be evil.

Intrinsically Evil: Only that … which is unfilial and/or unfraternal. It is intrinsically evil to reject God, to fail to love God, to rebel against God, to refuse to honor and to obey God, to be self-centered rather than God-centered. It is intrinsically evil to fail to be a son of God, to be out of fellowship with God. It can never be good in any sort of circumstance, to be unfilial and/or unfraternal.



Instrumentally Good: That which helps to bring about or to bring to pass that which is filial and/or fraternal is instrumentally good. To say something is instrumentally good is to say that it is good as a means, not that it is good as an end within and of itself.




Instrumentally Evil: That which hinders that which is filial and/or fraternal.



Valued: What is to be valued? Only that is properly valued which is either intrinsically good or instrumentally good. Nothing which is either intrinsically evil or instrumentally evil should ever, under any circumstance, be valued. (AAA, p87, 88)




Evil: Sin is the only evil. This thus avoids the view that God Himself uses evil means – natural calamities, animal pain, and human suffering – to attain good ends. Thus, God is not blameworthy in any sense. (AAA, p98)




Natural Calamities:

How we view this world assuredly has an impact on how we view natural calamities. Our world is never intended to be our eternal home. Rather, it’s the vale of soul-making.
The total situation (of the world) is one which is ideal as an environment in which man can freely accept or reject God’s invitation to become and live as a son of God and as a brother to man – that is, in harmony with God’s will as revealed in the Scriptures. God’s purpose in creating the world is thus a justification of the possibility of natural calamities, animal pain, and human suffering.
To be an ideal environment for soul-making, our world must be characterized by law or regularity of response and be of such a nature as to allow man to learn something of its conditions of response. … nothing sub-human is intrinsically evil; only a being with the capacity to be both a son of God and a brother to man and to do that which contradicts sonship and brotherhood can be guilty of that which is intrinsically evil. Thus, … trees, water, wind, mountains, deserts, shifting of the earth, rain, etc. – or even dogs, cats, tigers, lions, leopards, and snakes, etc. – cannot be evil per se or be guilty of evil.




It might be asked, “What contribution does an earthquake which destroys twenty thousands (including many infants) make to ‘soul-making’?” Although we may (due to the limitation of our knowledge) not be able to explain completely every instance of such destructive forces, it should be clear that God is not blameworthy for having created a world in which such events occur. This is the case because God has a morally justifiable reason for having created such a world. [AAA, p57-58]




It must be remembered that God did not create the world to be man’s permanent home but to be merely his temporary ‘vale of soul-making,’ the environment in which man’s one and only probationary period is to be spent. In this connection, it is good for man to realize that his life on earth will be brief (i.e. it is certain that his life on earth will end), and that the exact time of that end is uncertain. Such natural calamities … are of such a nature as to provide man with reminders of these two important facts. This is not to say that such events force (in the sense of overwhelming so that there is no alternate choice) man to the acceptance of these views. But they afford conclusive evidence for such, provided one will use properly his own free will. The realization that one’s life on earth is both certain (as to the fact that it will end) and uncertain (as to the exact time that end will occur) should lead men to give most serious thought to the questions of God and the proper response to him. The destructive power and the uncertainty of such events should serve as a reminder to man that this world is not his permanent home. This, too, could play a vital role in an environment designed for ‘soul-making.’



The element of uncertainty as to the persons who will suffer loss from such events can also play an important role in ‘soul-making.’ If one could be certain that he could avoid all such calamities by becoming a son of God (and living in submission to his will), this certainty could be a great obstacle to one’s deciding to love and to submit to God from the proper motive (thus becoming a true son of God). … He wants man to act because of love for him – no matter how great a price might have to be paid for such obedience. God would have men to choose suffering over sin. (Heb 11:24-26; Rev 2:10) So the uncertainty as to what persons (infants, righteous men, wicked men) will be struck by such calamities can be a vital constituent element in the total situation which is man’s environment for ‘soul-making,’ his temporary environment, not his permanent home. [AAA, p58-59]