[First Last Name]
English [Number]
[Date Month Year]
In this paper, I argue that God – an all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing entity with a perfect will that can only choose according to His nature (that is, what is good) – exists (Slide 3). Evil also exists. In addition, created nature (human nature and all things in nature), which is compatible either to God or evil or both, exists as a meaningful context of the existence of God and evil.
If God’s nature is all good, then His nature is not compatible with evil. Thus, there is no evil in Him or in His nature. Because He is all-powerful, God is unimaginably far more superior than evil. Because He is all-knowing, God knows wherever evil goes and whenever evil goes.
Moreover, if God’s nature is not compatible with evil then evil cannot coexist with God in His nature. However, outside the nature of God, such as the created, evil can exist in the same way that God can. Thus, in the created nature, God and evil can co-exist. However, because of the free will granted to human nature, a human nature can choose to let God alone exist in it or evil alone can do the same.
Furthermore, if God is unimaginably more powerful than evil then He can destroy evil. Moreover, because God knows wherever and whenever evil goes, He has the means to locate evil and destroy it wherever it goes.
However, on the basis of His perfect will, God can make choices in perfect consistency with His all-good nature. He can destroy evil should He choose to destroy it. Conversely, He can alternatively choose not to destroy evil as well. Thus, because of God’s perfect will, either way (whether evil will be destroyed or not) is good because God wills that way so.
As objection to the above thesis, if God and evil are incompatible, the more powerful God then has no option but to destroy evil as it contradicts and opposes good, which He is. Because good is incompatible with evil, either good or evil must be destroyed by the other, and not coexist. Because both cannot coexist, either God does not exist if evil does or evil does not exist if God does. And, since God is more powerful than evil, then it follows that God will destroy evil. However, when we look around in this world, we always see evil lurking somewhere or manifesting itself. If evil exists, then it follows that God does not exist.
As a rebuttal, the objection is invalid because it assumes a lot of invalid things. First, it assumes that God is an elemental force, albeit all-powerful, that has no intelligence to make choices as to what course of actions to pursue. It assumes that good automatically destroys evil in the same way that water automatically extinguishes flame when poured upon it. Contrariwise, an “elemental force” cannot be a definition of God because no elemental force is all-powerful, all-good, and all-knowing. Moreover, God is all-intelligent eternally far more than created things and elemental forces.
Second, the objection assumes duality of nature; that is only divine nature (God nature) and evil nature exist. It disregards the undeniable existence of the created nature, both in human beings and all things in nature, animate (living) and inanimate (non-living). The simplistic presentation of reality as dualistic cannot adequately provide depth in the argument, which inevitably brings about an erroneous logical conclusion primarily due to over-simplification of facts and reality used in the argument. It is like looking at a very deep ‘waterless’ well. Seeing nothing but darkness, simplistic arguments easily conclude with ‘logic’ that there is nothing there: not a stone, no soil, no trace of moisture, and so on. In fact, there something may even exist, such as a body of water in a certain depth just behind that darkness. While the observation of darkness as seen was correct, the conclusion that darkness means nothingness is erroneous.
Under an expanded non-dualistic condition of the argument, the context of the three natures provides an understandable environment where logic can be well utilized. The all-good nature (divine nature) remains incompatible with the all-bad nature (evil; or more specifically Evil); while recognizing that truth that good and evil can co-exist in the created nature. In the context of the created nature, it becomes clearer that good and evil can coexist despite their natural incompatibility.
Third, the objection made an error of attributing a similar conceptual level to two incomparable concepts. By comparing God with evil, the objection compares an entity (nature) with a non-entity (phenomenon). While God is a person or a being, evil is not. It is a phenomenon without personality; a non-being. The comparison, therefore, was invalid at the onset. Good may be compared with evil, in the same way that God with the Devil. But God cannot be validly compared with evil unless God was defined as a phenomenon (thus, ‘god’) or evil as a being (thus, ‘Evil’). However, it is understandable that the objection had used a negative non-entity (evil) to invalidate the existence of an Entity, which embodies the perfection of a positive non-entity (good), perhaps because the existence of the negative entity embodying the negative non-entity is far more difficult to accept as existing than the positive Entity.
Works Cited
The Problem with Evil 10 June 2014. PDF file.
