LESSON 15 OF 19
← Back to Lessons
LESSON 15 Β· PROBLEM OF EVIL

If God is Good, Why Is There Evil?

This is the hardest question skeptics ask - and it deserves a real answer. Not "just trust God." Not "it's a mystery." A genuine, thoughtful response that takes the pain seriously and still makes sense.

First: Take the Question Seriously

When someone asks this question, they're often not just being philosophical. They might have lost someone they loved. They might have been hurt deeply. They might be watching news of war, famine, or abuse and genuinely struggling.

The first thing a thoughtful Christian should do is not rush to an answer. Acknowledge that the question is real. The pain is real. And the question deserves more than a slogan.

With that said - there are actually very good reasons to believe that the existence of evil and suffering is compatible with a good, all-powerful God. Let's think through them carefully.

Two Types of Evil

  • A
    Moral evil - evil caused by human choices. War, murder, abuse, theft. This evil flows from people choosing to do wrong things.
  • B
    Natural evil - suffering caused by natural events. Earthquakes, cancer, tsunamis, disease. This type is harder - it doesn't seem to be anyone's fault.

The two types need different responses. Most of the evil in human history is moral evil - caused by humans. The question then becomes: could God have made a world without moral evil?

The Free Will Defense

For moral evil, the most powerful response is the Free Will Defense, developed by philosopher Alvin Plantinga.

The argument goes like this: love and goodness are only meaningful if they are freely chosen. A robot programmed to say "I love you" doesn't actually love anyone. God, wanting creatures capable of genuine love, goodness, and relationship, had to create beings with real free will.

But here's the problem with free will: if it's real, it can be used to choose evil as well as good. You cannot have a world where people genuinely love, serve, and choose God - and also guarantee that no one ever does anything wrong. The two are logically incompatible.

πŸ’‘ PLANTINGA'S KEY INSIGHT

Philosopher Alvin Plantinga showed that the existence of evil does not logically contradict the existence of God. Even an all-powerful God cannot create beings with genuine free will and also guarantee those beings never choose evil. That's not a limitation of God's power - it's a logical impossibility, like making a square circle.

πŸ’‘ EVERYDAY ANALOGY
The Parent and the Child. A good parent raises their child with real freedom - they don't chain them to a wall to prevent them from ever getting hurt or doing wrong. Why? Because a child who is forced to behave well hasn't actually developed character, wisdom, or love. Good parents accept that real freedom means real risk. They grieve when their children choose wrongly. Does that make them bad parents - or does it make them parents who value something deeper than mere safety?

What About Natural Evil?

Natural evil is harder. Why would a good God allow earthquakes and childhood cancer? A few responses:

  • 1
    The soul-making argument. Philosopher John Hick argued that a world of constant comfort and safety couldn't produce courage, compassion, patience, or faith. These virtues only grow through difficulty. C.S. Lewis wrote: "God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains - it is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world."
  • 2
    We can't see the whole picture. A young child in a doctor's office receiving a painful shot has no idea why the parent is allowing this. From the child's perspective, the parent seems cruel. But the parent sees something the child doesn't. This doesn't mean we shouldn't grieve suffering - but it suggests humility about concluding that no good purpose could possibly exist.
  • 3
    The Bible doesn't promise comfort - it promises presence. Christianity doesn't claim God will prevent all suffering. It claims God entered into suffering Himself (in Jesus), walks through it with us, and promises that suffering is not the final word.

The Problem of Evil Cuts Both Ways

Here's something most people miss: the Problem of Evil actually assumes objective moral standards - which, as we learned in Lesson 2, point toward God.

When someone says "there is too much evil in the world for God to exist," they're assuming that some things are genuinely evil - not just unpleasant or unpopular. But objective evil requires an objective moral standard. And objective moral standards, as the Moral Argument shows, require God.

The very complaint against God - "this is truly evil" - smuggles in a premise that actually supports the existence of a moral lawgiver.

MORAL EVIL
Suffering caused by human choices - war, cruelty, abuse. The free will defense addresses this type.
NATURAL EVIL
Suffering from natural events - disease, earthquakes, disasters. Doesn't result directly from human choices.
FREE WILL DEFENSE
The argument that genuine freedom - necessary for real love and goodness - makes moral evil possible but not God's fault.
THEODICY
A philosophical attempt to justify belief in a good God given the existence of evil and suffering.

Common Objections

❓ OBJECTION

"God could have just made people with free will who always choose good."

βœ“ RESPONSE

Plantinga addresses this directly. A being "with free will that always chooses good" is a contradiction in terms - if it's guaranteed to always choose good, it doesn't truly have free will. True freedom means the genuine ability to choose otherwise. God could have created robots that always behave well - but that would not be the same as creating beings capable of real love and genuine goodness.

❓ OBJECTION

"The Holocaust was so extreme - no good purpose could justify it."

βœ“ RESPONSE

This is the most emotionally powerful form of the objection, and it deserves respect. A Christian should never minimize the Holocaust or claim to know exactly what God's purpose was. The honest answer is: we don't know why God permitted it specifically. But "I don't know why this happened" is different from "there is no God." Our inability to see a purpose doesn't mean no purpose exists - it may mean we don't have God's perspective. This calls for humility, not certainty in either direction.

πŸ€” Think About It
  • If God removed all suffering from the world right now - by preventing every bad choice - what would have to be removed along with it?
  • Can you think of a time in your life when something hard eventually led to something good? Does that change how you think about this argument?
  • How is the Problem of Evil actually an argument that assumes God's existence at the same time it argues against it?
  • What is the difference between an intellectual answer to suffering and an emotional response to suffering? Do both matter?
πŸ“ Quick Check

Why can't God simply create beings with free will who always choose good?

🎯 WHAT YOU LEARNED

The existence of evil does not disprove God. Moral evil flows from the free will that makes genuine love possible. Natural evil may serve purposes we can't fully see from our limited vantage point. And ironically, calling something "truly evil" already assumes an objective moral standard - which points back toward God.

GO DEEPER

Ready for more? Try the Grades 9–12 track.

The Advanced track covers everything you just learned - and goes much further. Formal philosophy, peer-reviewed science, the origin of life, DNA, molecular machines, quantum physics, and more. 14 lessons that prepare you for any challenge.

Start Grades 9–12 β†’
πŸ”¬
CONTINUE YOUR JOURNEY

You know why to believe. Now go deeper into what to believe.

Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee is a free, verse-by-verse journey through the entire Bible - available in over 100 languages. It's been quietly shaping believers for over 50 years. A natural next step from here.

Visit ttb.org β†’
πŸ“–
← If God Is Real, Why Doesn’t He Just Show Himself? Next: But Doesn’t the Bible Have Terrible Things in It? β†’