The Most Powerful Argument Against God?

     One of the greatest obstacles for many in accepting the reality of God is the problem of evil, pain, and suffering. The argument can be traced as far back as the Greek philosopher Epicurus ca. 300 BC. If God is all-good and all-powerful, why does evil exist? If he desires to take away evil from the world but cannot, he is not all-powerful. If he can take away evil but does not, he is not all-good. If he is neither willing nor capable, he is neither all-good nor all-powerful. If he is both willing and capable, why does evil exist?   

     On the surface this may sound like a compelling argument, but is it valid? If the logic is so incontrovertible, why have there been staunch theists long before, during, and ever since the time of Epicurus?

The Question is Reasonable, But is the Conclusion Reasonable?

     Do “bad things” necessarily disprove the existence of a supreme causal entity beyond our universe? Do “bad things” then prove that something does come from nothing, that lifeless matter does generate intelligent life, and that specified complexity (intelligent design) does happen randomly without a purposeful designer?¹ Do our unanswered questions eliminate the answers we already have? Is human ignorance so powerful that it justifies the rejection of any supernatural creative force outside our universe and beyond our comprehension? If there is a problem we have difficulty understanding, might we be the problem? Is it possible that there is a purpose to the “bad” that we are not grasping, or perhaps the “bad” has a solution we are not looking for or not willing to accept?²

The Question No one Seems to be Asking …

     Why is there so much “good” in the world? Why isn’t anyone asking that question? If there is a black dot on an otherwise blank page, and passers-by are asked what they see, almost everyone will hone in on the black dot. Why? What about the rest of the page – the vast majority of the page – that surrounds the dot? We tend to be so focused on tiny abnormalities that we fail to see and appreciate everything else. The reality of evil, pain, and suffering grabs most of our attention because it’s not normal. With all the negativity in our newscasts and conversations, we seem oblivious to the plethoric beauty and decency in this less-than-perfect world. How do we explain love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control? If we are merely an evolutionary accident of amoral, unintentional, mindless forces directed by nothing and heading nowhere, there ought to be a whole lot more “bad” and a whole lot less “good” than there actually is.

     Maybe we’re asking the wrong question. To say – “Why is ‘evil’ in the world?” – presupposes: (a) knowledge of what constitutes “evil,” (b) knowledge (and appreciation) of what constitutes the contrasting “good,” and (c) an objective standard beyond oneself that determines what is “evil” and what is “good.” Is abortion evil or good? Is genocide evil or good? Who decides? You? Me? Adolf Hitler? Mother Teresa? Nazi Germany? ISIS? The society in which I live? Someone else’s society? Or is there an objective standard beyond any individual or social group? The question presupposes a higher authority (God?).³

     The irony is that evil and suffering exist, not because there is no God but because people reject God and then live accordingly. “The fool has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.’ They are corrupt, They have done abominable works …” (Psalm 14:1). While the basis of the world’s evil lies in a practical denial of God, this is frequently twisted around to serve as what appears to be one of the most powerful objections to God’s existence.

Starting with a False Premise  

     Those who reject the God of the Bible because of evil, pain, and suffering are actually rejecting a misconceived version of God. It is true that the God of the Bible is all-good and all-powerful,⁴ but it is not true that he is only all-good and all-powerful. There are other aspects of his nature that provide a fuller, more balanced image. To assert that the God of the Bible can do anything and always gets what he wants is a fallacy not based in scripture. There are some things he cannot do. He cannot lie (Titus 1:2). He cannot be tempted by evil (James 1:13). He cannot do what is logically contradictory or impossible, like make a “square circle” or create a “married bachelor.” While the God of the Bible is sovereign,⁵ this doesn’t mean he always gets what he wants. Even though he desires all to be saved (1 Tim. 2:4), not all are willing to accept his conditions of salvation (Matt. 7:21; 23:37; etc.). God cannot be understood apart from all his attributes: justice, holiness, love, mercy, forbearance, et al., which, by the way, are often left out of the conversation.

A Revised Premise

     In order to have the greatest state of goodness in the world, it is necessary for some specific goods to exist that entail the possibility of certain evils. Humans are designed with the ability to think and the freedom to choose. A God of love doesn’t force us to act against our wills but grants freedom. The blessing of freedom involves choice, and choice includes not only the possibility of making good decisions but also bad ones. It is impossible for God to have made us free moral agents and yet take away our capability of making wrong choices. Freedom without choice is a logical contradiction.     

     Now God has provided an instruction manual to guide us in the right direction (2 Tim. 3:16-17), but when people disregard divine directives and make bad decisions, pain and suffering often result. It is man, not God, who has created slavery, whips, bombs, death camps, liquor, pornography, pollution, environmental destruction, false religion, and so on. The gift of freedom, when misused, accounts for the majority of human misery.⁶

Is All Suffering Evil?

     Most consider something good if it brings pleasure and bad if it causes pain, but this is shallow and shortsighted. What about things such as courage, patience, resilience, and determination? The imperfections of this world serve a purpose in allowing us to grow and develop into mature, responsible beings in a way that would otherwise not be possible. The suffering we see in the lives of others provides opportunities for compassion and service. God’s desire for his creatures seems to be, not the suffering itself, but the positive and beneficial effects. “Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope” (Rom. 5:3-4 ESV).

     Hardships also help to create an acknowledgment of human weakness and the need for God in one’s life. Pride and arrogance are self-destructive traits (Prov. 16:18), but suffering has a way of helping put things in perspective. It is said that when a man is flat on his back, the only direction he can look is up. “My flesh and my heart may fail, but God is the strength of my heart and my portion forever” (Psa. 73:26).⁷

Conclusion

     The problem of evil, pain, and suffering may offer an excuse for rejecting God, but it provides no solid proof that God isn’t real. It’s okay to have questions, but it’s not okay to ignore answers that challenge unfounded preconceptions. Whether or not I’m contributing to making this world a better place, how is shaking my fist at the concept of God going to make any positive difference?

Endnotes:

     ¹ See Are You Sure About God? (Part 2).

     ² See Richard Parr, “Big Questions of Life: Is there a God?,” HubPages (23 Oct. 2015), <Link>.

     ³ Listen to the thought-provoking exchange between atheist David Silverman and theist Frank Turek on this question, <Link>. Also Dennis Prager's commentary on Subjective vs. Objective Morality, <Link>.

     ⁴ Psa. 18:30; 19:7; 136:1; 147:5; Jer. 32:17; etc.

     ⁵ Isa. 46:9-10; Dan. 4:35; Psa. 115:3; 1 Tim. 6:15; etc.

     ⁶ Even natural calamities are ultimately linked to human sin. From a biblical perspective, the earth’s environment today is significantly different than it was prior to the catastrophic global flood (Gen. 6–9). See Wayne Jackson’s “Why Do Natural Disasters Happen?” <Link>, where he observes: “No wickedness, no Flood. No Flood, no change of earth’s environment. No change of earth’s environment, no geological disasters. Thus, no wickedness, no geological disasters.”
    ⁷ The last portion of this article is a revised version of the 8th June 2016 post, <If God is So Good ...>.

Related posts: Where's the Proof of God?, Religion Explained? 

Related articles: Kyle Butt, Providence and Evil 

Image credit: http://www.yenmag.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/h-armstrong-roberts-woman-holding-hands-up-to-face-with-shocked-expression.jpg

Are You Sure About God? (Part 3)

     To affirm that “God does not exist and cannot exist,” and “the physical universe is all there is, was, or ever will be,” is to make faith claims that cannot be confirmed scientifically. To begin with these presuppositions is to limit oneself to only naturalistic explanations, thus missing out on a wealth of knowledge outside the narrow purview of experimental and observational science. The evidence points beyond the natural world – to the supernatural (outside of and superior to nature). In our search for the knowledge of God, there are certain things we can know simply from observation and inductive reasoning that move us in the direction of faith.

Compelled to look beyond nature …

     When we carefully observe the amazing world around us, reasonable inferences can be drawn. How do we account for its incredible beauty and our innate capacity to appreciate it?¹ How do we explain its wondrous design, from the tiniest microscopic organisms to the vast solar systems? We can’t help but marvel at the mystery of life. Unless we’ve missed an elusive piece of evidence, there is no way this colossal “miracle” could have arbitrarily appeared from a void of nothingness. If there is no supernatural, intelligent, creative force (if there is no God), why is there something rather than nothing, and why is it so far beyond our ability to replicate or even explain? The more we learn, the more incomprehensible our universe proves to be from a strictly naturalistic worldview.

     Nobel Prize winning physics professor Steven Weinberg candidly observes, “Today we understand most of these things in terms of physical forces acting under impersonal laws. We don't yet know the most fundamental laws, and we can't work out all the consequences of the laws we do know.” Weinberg goes on to say, “I have to admit that, even when physicists will have gone as far as they can go, when we have a final theory, we will not have a completely satisfying picture of the world, because we will still be left with the question ‘why?’ …. So there seems to be an irreducible mystery that science will not eliminate.”² In other words, after millions of years of human evolution (so we’re told), with the most brilliant minds and scientific and technological advances, we still don’t have a clue!

     Surely we are compelled to acknowledge there’s more to our universe than meets the eye. Are we willing to look beyond the restrictive confines of humanistic naturalism? Where can we find answers to life’s most fundamental questions? Who are we? Where did we come from? Why are we here? Where are we going? How should we live? Within the evolutionary arena of mindless forces governed by nothing and going nowhere, there are no answers.

Seeking a reasonable explanation …

     Seeing that humans are intelligent, purposeful beings, it is only reasonable, maybe even intuitive, to suspect that the primal cause/grand designer of the universe has intelligence and purpose. Since none of us is omniscient, we have to accept the fact that there are a number of things we cannot know unless that information is revealed. Fallible human reasoning will only get us so far. Is it possible that the primal cause/grand designer has provided an explanation that we are incapable of devising or discovering by ourselves?

     The thoughts, the will, and the desires of someone else are unknowable apart from communication. My friend Richard Parr shares this helpful analogy.³

I can use logic to determine that my wife has performed activities around the house. I see the clean kitchen, the made bed, and the wet shower floor …. Yet no amount of applied logic can make me sure of what she is thinking, how she feels, what she wants... unless, that is, she communicates her thoughts and feelings to me …. But then we have moved from logical explanations, to relational experiences. I then know because she made me know, not because I deduced it.

Could it be the same with our Maker? Beyond the limited reach of scientific investigation and our capacity to reason is a relationship – one that is actuated by communication through which God’s existence and purpose are more fully realized.

Has God Communicated?

     The Bible claims to have come from God and to be all-sufficient to meet man’s spiritual needs (2 Tim. 3:14-17). Former district attorney Robert C. Veil comments:

I recognize that critics will object that the Bible’s own claim of inspiration cannot be considered on the ground that “you can’t use the Bible to prove the Bible.” But such an objection would be overruled, for it ignores standard and accepted practice in other proceedings. We routinely allow the accused in criminal cases to speak for himself ... Even in civil cases, where the burden of proof is much lower, we allow the defendant to speak in his own behalf when his character is called into question. If the Bible is to be accorded a fair trial, its own claims of inspiration must be carefully considered along with all other evidence.⁴

Conclusion:

     Although any religious writing can claim divine derivation, can it be proven? What kind of evidence would substantiate such a lofty claim? Is there any other document or collection of writings (religious or otherwise) comparable to the Bible? We will consider this further in our next post.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ For example, even though there is “nothing evolutionarily beneficial about flower-producing plants,” they comprise approximately ninety percent of all plant species today (Himanshu Sharma, “10 Fascinating Mysteries of Life that Science Can’t Explain,” Listverse [10 April 2015],<Link>).

     ² Steven Weinberg, “A Designer Universe?,” Physics & Astronomy Online (2016), <Link>.

     ³ Richard Parr, “Big Questions of Life: Is there a God?,” HubPages (23 Oct. 2015), <Link>.

     ⁴ Robert C. Veil, “A Prosecutor Looks at the Bible,” Apologetics Press (2016), <Link>.

Related Posts: Are You Sure About God? Part 1, Part 2, Part 4

Image credit: http://mymomsfridge.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/contemplation.jpg

Are You Sure About God? (Part 2)

     In our previous post <Link>, we briefly noted the three ways of attaining knowledge: (a) personal observation and experience; (b) inferences drawn therefrom (inductive reasoning); and (c) the testimony of others. We then considered the first of these: what can be known about God (or anything else) from observing the world around us? The physical universe is something we can all see and examine, so how is it to be explained? Everything we know by observation and experience leads to the conclusion that the cosmos is real and had a beginning. As we examine the evidence further, what more can we learn?

Here’s what we know from inductive reasoning …

     Everything that comes to be (an effect) must have an adequate cause outside itself and superior to itself. The physical world consists of matter (rocks, dirt, water, etc.) but also complex living organisms. Life is more than materials. Consciousness, thought, rationality, and purpose are not comprised of materials. Lifeless matter does not generate life, unconscious matter does not effect consciousness, nonintelligent matter does not yield intelligence, nonrational matter does not produce rationality, and amoral matter does not create morality.

     Consistent, complex, functional design does not happen by accident. Where there is design, according to all that is known about how the world operates, there must be a designer. Specified complexity is inherent in all known living organisms. Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is the code of genetic information – the exact hereditary instructions in every life form.¹ Even the “simplest” life form, the one-celled amoeba, has as much information in its DNA as 1,000 complete (33-volume) sets of the Encyclopedia Britannica.² Specified complexity does not result from mindless randomness. Only intelligence produces information, logical arrangement, and deliberate order.

     The universe demonstrates remarkably fine-tuned patterns of activity, including precise and interdependent environmental conditions (known as anthropic constants) essential for supporting life on earth. There are approximately 122 of these constants, including oxygen level, atmospheric transparency, moon-earth gravitational interaction, carbon dioxide level, gravity, water vapor levels, earth’s rotation and axis tilt, et al. Astrophysicist Hugh Ross has calculated the probability that all of these constants would exist by chance (without purposeful design) for any planet in the universe, concluding that there is one chance in 10¹³⁸ (1 followed by 138 zeros)!³ In other words, for all practical purposes, it is impossible.

The will to disbelieve …

     While evidence is all around us, how the evidence is interpreted is not always determined by the mind but by the will. No one is neutral; we all have presuppositions. Although many just don’t care, there are many others who have the will either to disbelieve or to believe.

     One morning Andy discovered Scrabble^® letters on the kitchen table arranged to spell, “TAKE OUT TRASH – MOM.” He recalled learning in Biology class that life arose spontaneously from nature, so perhaps the cat knocked over the box, causing the letters to just randomly fall into place. He didn’t want to take out the trash, so he attributed the apparent “message” to a freak accident. Going to the beach to find Amanda (a girl he liked), he saw her in the distance walking with Tim. He noticed written in the sand, “Amanda + Tim xx.” He couldn’t imagine that she liked Tim, so he reasoned that maybe the tide or a sand crab was responsible for the unusual markings resembling words. He then noticed Amanda giving Tim a big hug after Tim had pointed to the sky, so Andy looked up and saw “I LUV U” written in white smoke. Just an unusual cloud formation?⁴

Could there be another explanation?

     What is the alternative to a supernatural, intelligent, purposeful designer? Renowned physicist Stephen Hawking argues for the possibility of an infinite number of universes (the multiverse theory), and given enough time with so many chances at least one life-friendly universe is bound to appear.⁵ Well, while we’re at it, one could also reason that it’s within the realm of possibility that the apparent “messages” Andy saw resulted from a cat knocking over a box of letters, a crab’s random sand tracks, and a freak cloud formation. This is reminiscent of the scene in the 1994 movie Dumb & Dumber, where Lloyd asks Mary what the chances are of them getting together. She responds, “Not good,” and Lloyd asks, “You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?” Mary replies, “I’d say more like one out of a million.” Then Lloyd says, “So you’re telling me there’s a chance…”  The sad reality is, the odds of Andy’s and Lloyd’s assumptions being true are substantially more favorable than Dr. Hawking’s.

Conclusion

     An effect cannot be greater than its cause. The ultimate source of the universe has to be outside of time, space, matter, and finite energy, capable of creativity and design on a magnitude we mere mortals cannot fathom. Any attempt to comprehend (and to judge!) the supernatural within the restrictive confines of nature is pretentious, unreasonable, and misguided.

     By observing the natural world with no anti-theistic presumptions, we can easily conclude the existence of an original cause/grand designer. Yet within such a limited scope we cannot know much about the original cause/grand designer. In our next post we will continue the investigative journey, introducing the third way of attaining knowledge – testimony.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ “The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine (C), and thymine (T). Human DNA consists of about 3 billion bases, and more than 99 percent of those bases are the same in all people. The order, or sequence, of these bases determines the information available for building and maintaining an organism, similar to the way in which letters of the alphabet appear in a certain order to form words and sentences” (“What is DNA?” Genetics Home Reference [25 Oct. 2016], <Link>). Can there be information without intelligence?

     ² Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watch Maker (New York: Norton, 1996): 116. Each volume of the Encyclopedia Britannica is comprised of roughly 1,000 pages, and an entire set contains approximately 40 million words in nearly 65,700 articles, not counting the index volumes.

     ³ Hugh Ross, “Why I Believe in the Miracle of Divine Creation,” in Why I Am a Christian, ed. N. L. Geisler and P. K. Hoffman (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006): 138-41.

     ⁴ Adapted from N. L. Geisler and F. Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist (2004): 113-14.

     ⁵ Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, The Grand Design (New York: Bantam Books, 2010).

Works Consulted:

     Geisler, Norman L. and Frank Turek. I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2004.

     Parr, Richard. “Big Questions of Life: Is there a God?,” HubPages (23 Oct. 2015), <Link>.

     ---. “Big Questions of Life: Relating with God,” HubPages (8 April 2014), <Link>.

     Stokes, Mitch. How to Be an Atheist: Why Many Skeptics Aren’t Skeptical Enough. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016.

*See also John R. Baumbardner and Jeremy D. Lyon, "A Linguistic Argument for God's Existence," JETS 58/4 (2015): 771-86.

Related Posts: Are You Sure About God? Part 1, Part 3, Part 4

Image credit: http://www.popsci.com/sites/popsci.com/files/styles/large_1x_/public/import/2013/images/2013/02/thinkingfyi.jpg?itok=5DXKOYXW