Introduction
The problem of evil is a theological and philosophical dilemma that refers to a conflict between the existence of evil in the world and the notion of the all-powerful and benevolent God. The problem has several dimensions, the first one being that if God is all-powerful, he should be able to prevent evil from occurring. The second notion is that if God is all-knowing, he must be aware of all the evil happening in the world. The third idea concerns the fact that if God is all-good, he should be willing to promote goodness and prevent evil.
Yet the problem of evil persists, and its existence raises the question, if there is a God, why does he allow evil to exist in the world? This question further raises others, one of them being whether the world people live in is the best of possible worlds and how evil is represented within it. There are various responses to the question of evil, but the most prominent one is the concept of free will. Free will is viewed as a gift, a moral responsibility, a means of redemption and salvation, and even as a cause of evil. However, the generally accepted argument is that through the exercise of free will, people acquire the capacity to confront evil, as their moral choices play a decisive role in shaping a more benevolent world.
The Problem of Evil
Universal Understanding
The concept of evil is multifaceted and complex, but it is commonly understood as a morally and ethically wrong act, typically associated with intentional harm. As Kelly notes, evil is not easy to define, but it is definitely easy to recognize. Evil is a universal phenomenon that is not defined solely by scholars but instead has numerous definitions across various dimensions.
Regardless of the multitude of approaches to defining evil, a universal opinion is that it is an act of abuse toward a sentient being that can experience pain. A narrower perspective allows defining evil as an intentional imposition of suffering “by a human being upon another sentient being.” ‘Intentional’ presupposes that the doer of an evil action is aware of what they are doing. When someone unintentionally hurts another being, it is not considered evil.
‘Imposition of suffering’ means that there is harm done to a sentient being as a result of the action. The harm does not have to be physical to be evil. Quite frequently, people can hurt others through inattention, betrayal, irony, or insensitivity, and these instances are also considered evil. Finally, ‘another sentient being’ means any such being, not just humans. People can harm animals, whether they are their own pets or those used in laboratory experiments. People can also do evil to whole species of animals by driving them to extinction. Moreover, people can even harm God by disobeying His laws or violating His commands.
Classic Perspective
The classic view of evil questions the possibility of evil in a world where there is a good and omnipotent God. At the same time, many people tend to question the goodness and omnipotence of God since it seems illogical to them that such a God would allow so much evil, especially toward those whom one loves. The basic response to such claims is that no evil occurs without God’s permission. Hence, God has a reason for allowing evil to occur, which ultimately serves a greater good. Evil is viewed as corruption, which is associated with a loss of form and a tendency toward decay, eventually leading to a loss of being and death.
Molinism
Another approach to defining and interpreting evil is a Molinist view. This philosophy considers God’s knowledge of evil not only as the knowledge of everything that beings could do (natural knowledge) but also as what they would do in specific circumstances (middle knowledge). Based on middle knowledge and the knowledge of his own decree, God possesses complete knowledge of the actual world. This type of knowledge is referred to as free, and it also encompasses the foreknowledge of everything that will occur in the future. According to the Molinist approach, God wills positively every good act and decision that humans make. However, God does not will evil acts but only allows them to occur. Hence, evil is viewed as the result of humans’ free choices.
Skepticism
Among the various approaches to defining and interpreting evil, a skeptical theist view warrants consideration. Under this view, people cannot fully grasp the concept of evil since they lack sufficient knowledge of God’s deeds and intentions. This opinion dwells on the point that if God does not deliberately cause evil but also does not prevent it from happening, his role and power are doubted. As such, the concept of evil remains unclear, both in terms of individuals committing it and God’s failure to intervene.
Finally, there is also the notion that one can be inclined to do evil things due to defects in free will. This means that an individual has a diminished ability to will good things. In turn, this can encourage an individual to turn to God for help in resolving this issue. The prevailing opinion is that free will is the most potent power against evil, which is why it is necessary to analyze this concept in detail.
Free Will as the Defeat of Evil
One of the most common theistic responses to the problem of evil is the existence of free will. It is believed that God has endowed human beings with the gift of free will, which means they can choose what to do and what not to do, potentially leading to right choices and avoidance of evil. By granting people the gift of free will, God allows them to make the right choice, placing responsibility on them rather than himself.
The point of free will is that people have the power to make choices concerning their behaviors and moral obligations, selecting between good and evil actions. However, the gift of free will also means that individuals have the choice to do something evil, since otherwise, they would not be entirely free. Hence, free will can also lead to dire consequences, allowing people to hurt others. Still, the right to choose between good and evil is indeed a gift, granting every person the opportunity to make good choices. As long as individuals utilize this gift with good intentions, they will eliminate the amount of evil in the world.
Furthermore, free will enables individuals to make morally responsible choices. The value of free will in defeating evil lies not in malevolent alternatives, but in the opportunity for benevolent ones. As such, free will entitles people to the opportunity to choose good over evil and give their choices moral value. Without free will, no genuine moral choices would be possible. As a result, human beings’ moral responsibility would not bear any significance.
Another idea connected with free will, as the defeat of evil, is that God allows evil to exist because it serves a higher purpose. Such goals may include character development, moral growth, or the ability to opt for goodness freely. There is an opinion that evil does not take place unless it is allowed by God, and that God has “a good reason” to permit evil. However, the very existence of evil and the opportunity for people not to choose it as a result of free will signifies the power of free will and its potential to turn evil into the greater good.
Free will is also a forceful tool in the fight against evil when it comes to voluntarily doing something bad in the expectation of salvation and redemption. The presence of evil creates a context in which human beings seek reconciliation and forgiveness. Redemption often requires a recognition of one’s moral failures, which would be impossible should there be no free will. Without free will, people would not recognize the responsibility for their actions, so the notion of redemption would lose its meaning. Free will enables people to acknowledge their evil actions and choices, take responsibility for their actions, and realize their wrongdoings, thereby making it possible for them to seek forgiveness.
Free will also helps individuals defeat evil by allowing them to repent and turn away from sinful behaviors. Without free will, there would be no opportunity for people to make such a choice willingly and rationally. Furthermore, without the possibility of choice, there would be no genuine and sincere repentance.
Also, free will is the central element of salvation in terms of faith and belief. Free will is what makes human beings able to choose to believe in a higher power, follow the teachings of their faith, and commit to the path of salvation. This choice is critical as it signifies a sincere and voluntary responsibility and commitment to a religious path, which grants salvation once an individual repents. As such, free will helps to overcome evil, if not by eliminating it, then at least by prompting people to reconsider their choices and feel genuinely remorseful for committing evil deeds.
Finally, free will is also defensive against evil in that it gives value to people’s choices. If God constantly interfered with people’s choices and prevented all evil by himself, the value of human agency would be undermined. Without people’s free will, the world would be deterministic, with human choices being meaningless and unimportant. Hence, free will defends against evil and emphasizes the value of people’s choices.
Conclusion
The problem of evil remains a significant challenge in theology and philosophy. On the one hand, it enables people to make informed choices and strive for redemption in cases where they have done something wrong. On the other hand, it may also undermine some individuals’ faith in the existence of the omnipotent God. However, the concept of free will helps to combat evil by enabling people to take responsibility for their actions. While free will cannot completely eradicate evil, it empowers people to confront it.
Bibliography
Cary, Phillip. “A Classic Response.” In God and the Problem of Evil: Five Views, edited by Chad Meister and James K. Dew Jr., 131-142. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2017.
Cary, Phillip. “A Classic View.” In God and the Problem of Evil: Five Views, edited by Chad Meister and James K. Dew Jr., 13-36. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2017.
Craig, William Lane. “The Molinist Response.” In God and the Problem of Evil: Five Views, edited by Chad Meister and James K. Dew Jr., 143-150. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2017.
Craig, William Lane. “The Molinist View.” In God and the Problem of Evil: Five Views, edited by Chad Meister and James K. Dew Jr., 37-55. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2017.
Ekstrom, Laura W. God, Suffering, and the Value of Free Will. New York: Oxford University Press, 2021.
Hunt, William. Evil and Many Worlds: A Free-Will Theodicy. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2021.
Kelly, Joseph F. The Problem of Evil in the Western Tradition: From the Book of Job to Modern Genetics. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2002.
Mawson, T. J. “Classical Theism Has No Implications for the Debate between Libertarianism and Compatibilism.” In Free Will and Theism: Connections, Contingencies, and Concerns, edited by Kevin Timpe and Daniel Speak, 142-157. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
Pereboom, Derk. “Libertarianism and Theological Determinism.” In Free Will and Theism: Connections, Contingencies, and Concerns, edited by Kevin Timpe and Daniel Speak, 112-131. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.
Wykstra, Stephen. “A Skeptical Theist View.” In God and the Problem of Evil: Five Views, edited by Chad Meister and James K. Dew Jr., 99-127. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2017.