The Problem of Evil - Proof or Puzzle?

Many of you know that my wife has cancer. Her long-term prognosis is not great, but the most recent scan we had shows that the chemotherapy is reducing the size of her tumors, and we are very thankful. We are keenly aware that many other cancer patients received bad news this week, and are suffering terrible physical and emotional pain from this horrible disease.

The reality of pain and suffering – whether caused by diseases like cancer, disasters like tsunamis, or inhumanities like murder – is a great challenge to faith. The psalmist Asaph says his faith faltered as he “saw the prosperity of the wicked” (Psalm 73:2-3). In the midst of his anguish, Job complained about God’s seeming indifference: “It is all one; therefore I say, He destroys both the blameless and the wicked” (Job 9:22). And even the Lord Jesus cried out on the cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me” (Matthew 27:46, quoting Psalm 22:1).

Philosophers refer to the difficulty in reconciling the existence of suffering with the existence of God as the problem of evil. To state the argument in its classical formulation, it goes like this:

Premise 1: Evil exists.

Premise 2: If God was all-powerful, He could prevent the existence of evil.

Premise 3: If God was all-good, He would prevent the existence of evil.

Conclusion: Therefore God does not exist.

What are we to make of this argument? Christians accept the first premise – evil does indeed exist. And Christians agree with the second premise – God is all-powerful, and He could prevent the existence of evil. But what about the third premise – that if God was all-good He would have prevented the existence of evil? This is the key contention, and it is the one that I want to focus on in a moment.

Philosophical Fridays: Science and Religion, Conflict - Concord - Complements?

It is very common for dogmatic Christians and dogmatic atheists to agree on one thing: science and religion are in complete disagreement with one another. But from a biblical point of view, this can hardly be the case. Passages such as Psalm 19 teach that God is the creator of the natural world as well as the ultimate author of Scripture. Since there is one God, all truth is God's truth, and there can be no conflict between the study of the natural world (science) and the study of the supernatural (religion).

The Spiritual Resurrection Body

One of the biggest challenges to understanding the Scriptures is understanding what the biblical text meant to those for whom it was written. It is very easy to superimpose our own ideas onto the text and filter the Scriptures through our own interpretative grid rather than understand what the inspired author actually meant. As an illustration of this point, consider Paul's description of the resurrection body in 1 Corinthians 15:44:

Philosophical Friday: Miracles and "Natural Law"

Last week I made the point that since Scripture presents God as constantly upholding the created order, one could legitimately question whether a Christian should ever speak of the “natural world.” While we may speak of visible and invisible realities, we should never fall prey to the notion that the visible world is removed from the sustaining providence of God.

This naturally (ahem) leads to a discussion of “natural laws”

Philosophical Friday: The "God of the Gaps" vs The God of the Bible

In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against a stone, and were asked how the stone came to be there; I might possibly answer, that, for anything I knew to the contrary, it had lain there forever: nor would it perhaps be very easy to show the absurdity of this answer. But suppose I had found a watch upon the ground, and it should be inquired how the watch happened to be in that place; I should hardly think of the answer I had before given, that for anything I knew, the watch might have always been there. (...) There must have existed, at some time, and at some place or other, an artificer or artificers, who formed [the watch] for the purpose which we find it actually to answer; who comprehended its construction, and designed its use. (...) Every indication of contrivance, every manifestation of design, which existed in the watch, exists in the works of nature; with the difference, on the side of nature, of being greater or more, and that in a degree which exceeds all computation. —   William Paley, Natural Theology (1802)

The most famous example of the argument for God’s existence on the basis of design is Paley’s “watchmaker” illustration. The assumption of such an argument is that there are certain complex systems in the natural world that cannot be explained by natural means and therefore require a super-natural designer.

Philosophical Fridays: Intelligent Design, the Nature of Science, and Truth

Many of you know that my wife was diagnosed with cancer last August, and since that time she has undergone chemotherapy and radiation to reduce the tumor, successful surgery to remove the tumor, and is now in the process of follow-up chemotherapy to prevent recurrence of the tumor. We appreciate all the prayers we have received, and all of the tremendous care we have been given by our fantastic doctors and nurses.