NATIONAL QUALIFICATIONS CURRICULUM SUPPORT
Religious, Moral and
Philosophical Studies
The Existence of God
[INTERMEDIATE 2]
David Berry
The Scottish Qualifications Authority regularly reviews
the arrangements for National Qualifications. Users of all
NQ support materials, whether published by LT Scotland
or others, are reminded that it is their responsibility to
check that the support materials correspond to the
requirements of the current arrangements.
Acknowledgements
Learning and Teaching Scotland gratefully acknowledge this contribution to the National
Qualifications support programme for RMPS. The painting of Adam and Eve on p43 is by
Janette K Hopper (chair of the Art Department, University of North Carolina, USA) and
reproduced by kind permission.
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part for educational purposes by educational
establishments in Scotland provided that no profit accrues at any stage.
2
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
Contents
Introduction
5
Section 1:
The cosmological argument
St Thomas Aquinas
Questions
13
14
16
Section 2:
Does the cosmological argument work?
The big bang
Bertrand Russell
Has the cosmological argument been defeated?
Questions
17
17
18
19
21
Section 3:
The teleological argument
The complexity of the universe
William Paley
St Thomas Aquinas
Questions
23
23
26
28
29
Section 4:
Does the teleological argument work?
David Hume
The theory of evolution
Has the design argument been defeated?
Questions
31
31
32
33
36
Section 5:
The problem of evil and suffering
Moral evil
Natural evil
Questions
37
37
39
42
Section 6:
Does evil and suffering show that there is no God?
Genesis
The freewill defence
Other religious responses
– The crucifixion
– Life after death
Questions
43
43
44
46
46
47
49
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
3
CONTENTS
Section 7:
Does God exist?
Quotations
Questions
51
51
52
Appendices
1: Aristotle’s four causes
53
2: The anthropic argument
55
3: Moral responsibility, personal maturity and strength of character
56
Bibliography
58
4
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
INTRODUCTION
Introduction
Still the question remains whether there is any more reason to believe in God than
there is to believe that Elvis lives. Are those who believe in God any better justified?
The answer, perhaps, is that they are not.’1
Steven Law
‘I don’t believe in an old man with a grey beard.’
Ben Elton
‘Were there no other evidence at all, the thumb alone would convince me of God’s
existence.’
Sir Isaac Newton
Do you believe in God?
Some people may immediately answer this question with a resounding ‘no’. Others
will say confidently ‘yes’ and others still will say ‘I’m not sure’. If this same question
is asked of anything else that exists in the world it’s highly unlikely that any answers
will be forthcoming! It would obviously make little sense to try to engage a cow with
questions about God.
A cow is probably only really aware of its immediate
surroundings. Humans, however, are very different. We are
not only aware of immediate experiences like hunger,
tiredness, etc., we can also think about our past, and even
consider what will happen in the future. Humans also appear
to have the unique ability to appreciate beautiful scenic
views and enjoy music. It’s highly unlikely that any cow has
ever spent much time thinking about its origins or its longterm future. It’s equally unlikely that it enjoys listening to
Mozart or that it notices the beauty of the countryside. And it’s almost certain that no
cow has ever considered the possible existence of a supernatural being.
The search for the existence of God says something very profound about humans.
1
S Law, The Philosophy Gym, p78
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
5
INTRODUCTION
‘How did the universe come into being?’
‘How did I come to exist?’
‘What is the purpose of life?’
‘Is there life after death?’
‘Is there a God?’
The first step: understanding what you’re looking for
Before you begin trying to prove that anything exists the first key thing you must do is
establish exactly what it is you’re looking for. The modern day philosopher Peter
Vardy makes this point by explaining that if you were asked to go on an expedition to
find an aardvark you should first make sure that you know what an aardvark is. If you
don’t then no matter how hard you try you’re simply not going to find one!2 The
starting point of this course must first be to establish
what most people who believe in God have in mind
when they talk about God. To do this you must make
every effort to consider what the philosophers and
theologians mean(t) when they talk(ed) about God.
One of the obvious problems we have when we talk about belief in God is that it’s
very difficult to try to express anything at all about God. Most people who believe in
God accept that God is a mystery who is beyond our understanding. The Jewish hero
Job states:
Can you fathom the mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the almighty?3
One of the great Christian theologians was a man named St
Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274AD). He was keen to point
out that we have to be very careful when we use any words
to describe God. He thought that God was so radically
different from anything that exists in the world that
knowing anything for certain about the true nature of God
was almost impossible. He did however believe, as we will
see later, that
2
3
Peter Vardy, The Puzzle of God, p69
Job 11:7
6
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
INTRODUCTION
we can know that God exists. Aquinas suggested that the only way we can talk about
God is by using analogous language. This simply means that when people talk about
God they often compare ‘him’ with familiar objects or ideas. Aquinas thought that the
words we use never describe God exactly as s/he is but rather they correspond to what
s/he may be like. One common way to express ideas about God is by using metaphors.
Definition: A metaphor is a tool used in language when a comparison is made
between two things, based on resemblance or similarity, without using ‘like’ or
‘as’.
Sacred religious writings are full of metaphorical expressions about God. If we
understood these references literally then we would have a very strange picture of God
indeed.
Look closely at each of the descriptions of God found in various parts of the Bible.
God has measured the waters in the hollow of his hands and places the heavens
between his thumb and his little finger.
Isaiah 40:12
He [God] will cover you with his feathers, and under his wings you will find refuge.
Psalm 91:2, 4
I love the Lord, for he heard my voice; he heard my cry for mercy. Because he turned
his ear to me I will call on him as long as I live.
Psalm 116:1, 2
The writer doesn’t actually think that God has huge hands, feathers and an ear.
Discuss
What ideas are being expressed in each of these three references above?
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
7
INTRODUCTION
In the Christian religion people have also attempted to express ideas about God in
great works of art. This is not common to all religions. Islam, for example, strictly
forbids any attempt to produce an image of God because of the danger of
misrepresenting God. Some Protestant Christians are also uncomfortable with any
attempt to produce an image of God.
The great artist Michelangelo produced some of the most famous paintings of God.
Some of these can be found in the Sistine Chapel in Vatican City, Rome. These
images can be downloaded from the following web site:
www.christusrex.org
Any painting of God should also be understood as being metaphorical. When
Michelangelo painted God in this way he wasn’t trying to suggest that God actually
looks like this. He was trying, rather, to express ideas about God’s nature.
It’s very important to take time to recognise that philosophers and theologians do not
think that God is ‘an old man with a long grey beard who lives in the clouds’.
The writers that you’re going to study were NOT trying to find a superman-type
figure, who had arms and legs, a long beard and is incredibly muscular. The God we
are interested in is essentially a spiritual being that is radically different from anything
physical that we can see. Although many theologians disagree about the nature of
God, we mostly tend to think about God in very traditional terms. The following
characteristics are probably those that have been the most popular ways of considering
God.
God is a being who is:
• Radically different from anything that exists in the physical universe (spiritual not
physical).
• Omniscient (all knowing)
• Omnipresent (present everywhere)
• Omnipotent (all powerful)
• Eternal (was not created but has always and will always exist)
• Benevolent (good/loving)
8
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
INTRODUCTION
If you are interested you may want to look up the following Biblical references that
express other ideas about God. See if you can match them to the key ideas about God
listed above.
John 4:24
Job 26:12–14
Luke 12:7
Psalm 145:5,6
Psalm 139:1–4
Psalm 139:7,8
Exodus 34:6
1 John 4:7
Psalm 90:2
Psalm 23:1–3
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
9
INTRODUCTION
Summary – Introduction
√
Thinking about the existence of God is something that shows that humans are
very different from everything else that exists in the world.
√
When people speak about God they use metaphors because God is a mystery.
√
Theologians and philosophers don’t think that God is a man with a long beard.
√
In this course we will assume that if God exists s/he is a spirit who is:
•
•
•
•
•
Omniscient
Omnipresent
Omnipotent
Eternal
Benevolent.
In this course you will study two arguments that have persuaded many people that
there must be a God. You will also study one argument that has persuaded many
people that God doesn’t exist. These arguments are:
1.
The Cosmological Argument
2.
The Teleological Argument (more commonly known as the design argument)
3.
The Problem of Evil and Suffering
10
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
INTRODUCTION
Questions
1.
Why do you think humans think about the possible existence of God?
2.
Why is it difficult to know anything about God?
3.
Explain what type of language St. Thomas Aquinas said people use when they
write about God.
4.
Look at the following song lyric: ‘Why does it always rain on men? Is it
because I lied when I was 17?’ (Travis)
The writer is using metaphorical language. Try to explain what idea he is trying
to express.
5.
Look carefully at the ideas expressed about God in the following Biblical
references.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Job 11:7
Isaiah 40:12
Psalm 91:2,4
Psalm 116:1,2
Try to write a paragraph about God based on these ideas. Remember that the
writer is using metaphorical language.
6.
Try to find one of Michelangelo’s paintings of God.
(a)
(b)
Do you think God is really a strong man with a long white beard?
(Explain your answer.)
What ideas are being expressed in the paintings you have located? Copy
and complete the chart below.
Metaphorical Image
Idea Being Expressed about God
• Muscles
• Male
• Long White Beard
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
11
INTRODUCTION
7.
Look up the following Biblical references that describe God using metaphorical
language. Try to match up each reference to one or more of the following ways
of describing God: Omniscient, Omnipresent, Omnipotent, Eternal or Spiritual.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
8.
Exodus 34:6
Job 26:12–14
Psalm 23:1–3
Psalm 90:2
Psalm 139:1–4
Psalm 139:7,8
Psalm 145:5,6
Luke 12:7
John 4:24
1 John 4:7
Copy and complete the following sentences:
‘When philosophers and theologians talk about God they are not thinking about
…’
‘When philosophers and theologians talk about God they are thinking about …’
12
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
Section 1
The cosmological argument
Religious belief: God is the creator of the universe: Without God there would be
nothing.
The great advantage that this argument has is that it begins with a statement that
nobody can seriously doubt. It begins with the simple FACT that there is a
universe.
Consider the following information:
• Our galaxy4, the Milky Way, contains about 400 billion stars.
• The largest galaxies in the universe contain about 1000 billion stars.
• There are about 100 billion galaxies in the universe.
• The furthest parts of the universe are about 15 billion light years away.
Have you ever wondered why all this exists? It’s perfectly possible that nothing
should exist at all. But, the fact is, the universe does exist.
Discuss
‘Why does something exist rather than nothing?’
The cosmological argument is perhaps the simplest of all the traditional arguments for
the existence of God. It tries to show that there is a God from the bare fact that the
universe exists.
4
A galaxy is a ‘cluster of stars’. The universe is made up largely of emptiness. However, in
various parts of the universe there are large groups of stars that are ‘relatively’ close
together.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
13
THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
The argument predates Christianity and has been presented by some hugely significant
thinkers in many different forms throughout the centuries:
•
•
•
•
Ancient Greek philosophers (e.g. Aristotle and Plato)
Christian theologians (e.g. St. Thomas Aquinas, Father Frederick Copleston)
Jewish theologians (e.g. Maimonides)
Islamic theologians (e.g. the Kalam argument presented by, among others, alGhazali).
St Thomas Aquinas
Probably the most famous advocate of the cosmological
argument was St Thomas Aquinas (1225–74AD). He presented
five ways to prove that God existed in a book known as Summa
Theologica. Three of these explanations were forms of the
cosmological argument. We will briefly look at one of them.
The argument from the ‘Uncaused Cause’
•
•
•
•
•
Everything has a cause.
Every cause has a cause.
This cannot go back forever.
Therefore there must be an uncaused cause that isn’t caused.
The uncaused cause is what people understand by ‘God’.
Think about yourself ... What caused you? You
obviously did not bring yourself into existence; you are
the effect of your parents and your parents are the effect
of their parents, and so on. However, to fully explain
your cause you will need to go back much further than
your near relations. Even if you could trace your family
line back hundreds of years you would still have only
partly explained where you came from. In order to fully
answer the question you would need to explain where all
humans came from. To then explain the cause of the
human race you would then need to find out when and
how the earth came into existence; explain the origins of
our solar system; understand the history of our galaxy,
etc. Your attempt to fully answer the question, ‘What caused you?’ will eventually
lead you right back to the very beginning of the universe itself.
14
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
Aquinas was pointing out that behind everything there must be a huge chain of causes
that goes back and back in time. He believed that it doesn’t make any sense to say that
this chain goes back and back for ever. The whole thing must have started at some
point. Aquinas believed that there must have been something that started off the chain
of cause and effect. He felt that the only possible answer was God, the uncaused
cause.
Summary – The cosmological argument
√
People believe that God is the creator of everything that exists.
√
People believe that without God, nothing would exist.
√
People believe in God because of the simple fact that there is a universe.
√
The most famous advocate of the cosmological argument was a theologian
called St Thomas Aquinas (1225–74AD).
√
Aquinas believed that behind everything there is a huge chain of causes that can
be traced back to the beginning of the universe.
√
He said that it doesn’t make sense to say that this chain never ends so he
concluded that there must be an uncaused cause at the start.
√
Aquinas called the uncaused cause God.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
15
THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
Questions
1.
What simple fact is the starting point for the cosmological argument for the
existence of God?
2.
List some of the people that have presented a form of the cosmological
argument.
3.
Write a very short paragraph about St Thomas Aquinas. Make sure that you
mention the following points:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
When was he alive?
What religion was he?
In how many different ways did he try to prove that God existed?
In what book did he present these arguments for God’s existence?
4.
What would you say if someone asked you the question, What caused you?
Make sure you try to give a full explanation.
5.
Why did Aquinas call God the uncaused cause?
6.
Try to explain in your own words Aquinas’s argument from the ‘uncaused
cause’.
7.
Read carefully the following paraphrase from Aquinas’s Third Way:
Assume that at one time there was nothing. It is clear that nothing can come
from nothing. If, therefore, there was once nothing, even now there would be
nothing. The universe cannot therefore have come into existence from nothing
unless something brought it into existence.
However, we know that the universe now exists. If God, or something equivalent
in terms of power, does not exist then the universe must always have existed
since, if it was not created, it could not have come into existence of its own
accord from nothing.
Try to explain in your own words what Aquinas was trying to express. Keep
your answer fairly brief.
16
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Section 2
Does the cosmological argument work?
Many people find the cosmological argument very appealing. It certainly raises some
interesting questions for scientists to grapple with. However, not everyone is
convinced.
The big bang
In recent years scientists have proposed the theory of the Big Bang in an attempt to
explain how the universe came about. The idea was first talked about by a Belgian
priest-scholar called Georges Lemaître in the 1920s. However, it wasn’t really thought
of as a serious scientific idea until the mid-1960s. Two young radio astronomers, Arno
Penzias and Robert Wilson, accidentally discovered evidence that a huge explosion
must have taken place at some point in the early history of the universe. This seemed
to confirm Lemaître’s idea that the universe exploded into existence. It is now thought
that this event took place between 12 to15 billion years ago. The order of events goes
something like this:
The universe explodes into existence.
Immediately after the Big Bang the universe was thought to be
smaller than the nucleus of an atom.
A millisecond later the universe had expanded to the size of
the sun.
A few minutes after the Big Bang the first hydrogen and
helium atoms were formed.
Gradually these atoms then formed into gases which
eventually would become the stars and all matter that we can
see.
Everything that now exists in the universe could be thought of
as debris from the bang.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
17
DOES THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
What actually ‘exploded’ is difficult to say. One common way to try to explain it is to
imagine squeezing everything that presently exists into a tiny, almost unimaginably
small space. This space is thought to be about a billion times smaller than the size of a
proton. Given that about 500 billion protons can fit into the dot on this letter ‘i’, this is
clearly a pretty small space!5 It is so small that it has been called the ‘point of infinite
density’. Others say that just before the explosion there was nothing but energy. What
certainly didn’t happen was that two stars collided or some molecules bumped into
each other causing the explosion. The Big Bang is thought to have created everything
that exists. Some even simply say that there was nothing and then there was
something.
Many people think that this scientific theory takes away the need for a creator God. It
is suggested that everything, even time itself, began at this point.
Bertrand Russell
Many philosophers have also challenged the cosmological
argument. As well as talking about scientific explanations like the
Big Bang, they also comment on the logic of the argument itself.
One such famous critic was the English philosopher Bertrand
Russell (1872–1970). He made two key criticisms.
Criticism one – What caused God?
Many people point out that the cosmological argument appears to contradict itself.
Look at the following quote from Bertrand Russell:
‘If everything must have a cause, then God must have a cause. If there can be anything
without a cause, it may just as well be the world as God …’6
Russell was pointing out that if you start by saying that everything needs a cause, then
maybe it’s not fair to then say, ‘everything that is except God’. You may feel like
simply asking, ‘What caused God?’
Russell was also suggesting that it’s perfectly possible that the universe may not in
fact have had a cause at all. The universe could well be eternal. He suggested that
when people say that the universe must have had a beginning they simply lack
imagination.7
5
B Bryson, A Short History of Nearly Everything, p27
B Russell, Why I am not a Christian, p4
7
B Russell, Why I am not a Christian, p4
6
18
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Criticism two – How can we ever know that the universe needs a cause?
Russell’s most famous comment on this argument came in a radio debate with another
English philosopher, Fredrick Copleston. Russell said that we cannot ever know the
answer to questions about the origins of the universe. The only thing that we know for
sure is that the universe exists.
‘I should say that the universe is just there, and that is all’
8
Russell was following in the tradition of the Scottish philosopher David Hume. Hume
had said in his book Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (published posthumously
in 1777) that we have no right saying confidently that the universe as a whole needs a
cause. We can say that everything in the universe appears to have a cause because we
have observed this in our experience. However, the creation of the universe was
clearly a unique event. It was also an event that didn’t have any observers! Because
no-one was there to watch the event unfold we simply can’t ever know whether it
needed a cause or not. Hume would have almost certainly liked Russell’s conclusion,
that all we can say is that the existence of the universe is a brute fact.
Has the cosmological argument been defeated?
People who like the argument will point out in response that there is a key difference
between God and the universe. People believe that God is spiritual in nature whereas
the universe is clearly made up of physical objects. It makes sense to ask what caused
the universe because everything in the universe appears to need a cause. Maybe,
however, spiritual realities don’t need to be caused. If given a choice between
believing that a physical thing (the universe) has always existed, or believing that a
spiritual thing (God) has always existed, many will go with God.
Discuss
What do you think caused the Big Bang?
8
B Russell, The Existence of God (a debate between Bertrand Russell and Father F C
Copleston) p134
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
19
DOES THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Some people think that the Big Bang actually helps the case for God. This is because
it suggests that the universe had a definite starting point. Why it started in the first
place was really the question that persuaded Aquinas that God must have been its
cause.
Frederick Copleston also responded in the radio debate by suggesting that Russell was
simply not facing up to the problem. If you conclude that things ‘just are’ and that
they don’t need an explanation then you are simply avoiding the issue. Or, to use
Copleston’s metaphor, refusing to ‘sit down at the chess board’.
Peter Vardy suggests that the success of the argument depends on your willingness to
ask the question, ‘Why is there a universe?’9 If you’re not willing to ask this question,
the position Russell appears to take, then the argument won’t even get started. If,
however, you’re more inclined to ask the question then maybe the cosmological
argument does succeed in at least posing some difficult questions about the origins of
the universe.
Summary – Does the cosmological argument work?
9
√
The theory of the Big Bang is often thought of as the best explanation for the
existence of the universe.
√
Bertrand Russell said that the cosmological argument contradicts itself because
if everything must have a cause then so must God.
√
David Hume said that we can never know that God caused the universe because
nobody was there to witness this unique event.
√
Bertrand Russell also said that all we can ever say for sure is that the universe is
a brute fact.
√
Copleston said that these criticisms are simply attempts to avoid the issue.
√
The Big Bang can also be used as an argument for God’s existence.
Peter Vardy, The Puzzle of God, p70
20
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Questions
1.
Try to explain in your own words the theory of the Big Bang. You will not need
to write a lot about this in your exam so make sure your answer is no more than
a fairly short paragraph.
2.
Do you think the theory of the Big Bang shows that we don’t need God as an
explanation for the existence of the universe?
3.
Why did Bertrand Russell say that the cosmological argument appears to
contradict itself? Do you agree with him? Explain your answer.
4.
Why do you think Bertrand Russell said, ‘I should say that the universe is just
there, and that is all’? (Explain your answer.)
5.
Do you agree with Fredrick Copleston that Russell is simply avoiding the
question?
6.
Why did David Hume say that we can never know whether the universe had a
cause? Do you think that this is a good reason to say that the cosmological
argument doesn’t work? Explain your answer.
7.
Look again at the Aquinas’s quote below:
Assume that at one time there was nothing. It is clear that nothing can come
from nothing. If, therefore, there was once nothing, even now there would be
nothing. The universe cannot, therefore have come into existence from nothing
unless something brought it into existence.
However, we know that the universe now exists. If God, or something equivalent
in terms of power, does not exist then the universe must always have existed
since, if it was not created, it could not have come into existence of its own
accord from nothing.
(a)
Do you believe that the universe has always existed or do you prefer to
think that God has always existed? Explain your answer.
(b)
Do you think that it’s possible for the universe to come into existence of
its own accord from nothing? Explain your answer.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
21
DOES THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
8.
Why do some people say that the Big Bang is actually evidence in favour of the
cosmological argument? Do you agree with them?
9.
Does the cosmological argument persuade you that God exists? Explain your
answer.
22
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
Section 3
The teleological argument
Religious belief: God is a purposeful creator; all of life is created by God with a
definite purpose and goal.
The basic strategy of this argument is based on another observation about the universe.
This time, however, the argument moves beyond the indisputable fact that the universe
exists to another indisputable fact: things within the universe (particularly living
things) are extraordinarily complex. The Big Bang theory suggests that everything
that now exists is debris from the explosion. It is argued that the only reasonable
explanation for the fact that this debris is ordered and complex is that God must have
put them together with a purpose in mind.
The complexity of the universe
The best way to approach this argument is to observe the world as it is. It is only after
we fully experience the world and all its complexity that we will begin to understand
why the teleological argument has been so influential. What follows are the kinds of
observations often cited by people who believe the complexity of the world must point
towards a designer (God).
1.
The bucket orchid
This plant has the most amazing method of pollination.
It naturally produces a rich sugary food – a nectar which
is very attractive to bees (apparently the bee thinks he
smells a lady bee!). When the bee arrives it lands on the
surface of the orchid near to the lip of the ‘bucket’. The
surface is very slippery so frequently bees fall in,
landing in a pool of liquid which has been produced by a
gland in the plant. The bee doesn’t drown in the
substance but becomes stuck. However, there is one
possible escape route. At the side of the bucket there is a
tunnel leading out the side of the bucket. The exit from the tunnel is conveniently
aided by a step and hairs suitably placed near the surface. As the bee is
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
23
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
about to emerge, the opening contracts, pinning the bee down. Whilst held in this
position, the plant ‘glues’ two pollen sacs onto the bee’s back. The glue takes a short
while to set so the plant carefully holds the bee in position long enough to ensure that
the pollen won’t fall off when it eventually flies away. Some of these sac-bearing bees
are again attracted to other flowers. They clearly haven’t learned their lesson as they
frequently end up back in the bucket. This time as they approach the tunnel exit hole, a
special ‘hook’ on the roof picks the two sacs off the unsuspecting bee’s back and
cross-pollination takes place.
2.
Wings and flight …
(a)
Birds
The hummingbird is an incredible creature. Most birds partly glide through the sky
with their wings outstretched. The hummingbird can’t do this; so to allow it to stay
airborne it then has to beat its wings very fast. This unique wing ‘design’ means that
hummingbirds are the only birds that are capable of sustained hovering. To do this
they must in fact beat their wings an amazing 60 times every second! They can even
fly backwards!
(b)
Insects
If you think the hummingbird has amazing wings you might
be surprised to know that insects are even more incredible.
For example, the common fly has wings that beat about 200
times per second. A honey bee has two pairs of wings that
can beat an amazing 250 times per second. The complex
motion of its wings also lets the bee hover in one spot. The next time you see a bee or
a fly watch it carefully. Maybe in future you should respect the wee creatures that fly
about your house rather than attempt to squash them with the nearest newspaper!
24
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
3.
YOU!
Did you know that …
Your brain is the most complex structure known to man. Your
eye can distinguish 1 million light surfaces. Your lungs are big
enough to cover half a tennis court. You have 60,000 miles of
blood vessels. Your skin is constantly replacing itself. You give
birth to 100 billion red blood cells every day. Your bones are as
strong as iron. Your heart beats 100,000 times a day.
Did you know that …
When you read light bounces off 14 million colour sensors and 200 million black and
white sensors, sending countless electrical impulses along the optic nerve to be
processed by the most complex computer known to man10.
When you look carefully at the above examples, as well as countless others, you can’t
help but notice that every living creature is made up of many, many different and
unique parts (organs, limbs, muscles, etc.) which are all performing some vital
function. They appear to have been designed with a specific purpose in mind.
The name of the teleological argument comes from the Greek word telos, which
means ‘purpose’11. Many people conclude that the only possible explanation for the
10
11
BUPA television advertising campaign
The idea of things having a function or a purpose relates to a famous section of work
written by the great Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 BC). If you have time you may
want to find out what Aristotle meant when he said that there are four causes that govern all
material things. Appendix 1 will help you get started.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
25
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
existence of such complex creatures is that God must have designed and then made
them. How else could debris from an explosion end up forming itself into things so
amazingly complex?
William Paley
The human eye has had a famous association with the teleological argument about
God’s design or purpose. Scientific discoveries in the eighteenth and nineteenth
centuries showed more and more how incredibly complex life was. The English
theologian William Paley (1743–1805AD) argued in his book Natural Theology that
nature obviously bears evidence of order and design. He used the human eye as an
example of this, suggesting that it is silly to believe that something as complicated as
this could possibly come about by accident. We must conclude, therefore, that there is
a designing force behind nature. Paley believed that this force is what people call God.
In order to illustrate his argument he presented it in the form of a story.
Imagine that you are walking down a beach and that you stumble upon a wrist
watch. Even if you had never seen a wrist watch before, it is likely that you
would be struck by the fact that it differs from the other objects in the vicinity: a
watch is obviously a collection of parts that have been cleverly combined in
such a way as to fulfil a particular function, namely, to indicate the time. You
would assume that the watch is not a natural object, but an artefact, i.e.
something made on purpose by some intelligent agent. Indeed, you are likely to
assume that the watch is the handiwork of a watchmaker who knew what he was
doing when he made the watch. The assumption at work here is that the order
found in the watch (and other artefacts) does not occur as a result of blind,
accidental forces. On the contrary, it is assumed that order is always the result
of an intelligent designer.
The next step in the story is to point out that the natural world also displays order, in
fact an order far more complex than that found in the watch.
Consider just one example, the human eye. Is it not a marvel of engineering?
Could one design a better instrument of vision if one tried? But if the order of
the parts in the watch was best explained in terms of an intelligent watchmaker,
ought we not to posit an intelligent world-maker for the same reason? Indeed,
the world-maker must be of infinite intelligence given that the natural world is
complex beyond our imagination.
26
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
Paley’s logic of analogy
Paley was using an analogical argument to present his case. An analogy is used when
someone deliberately compares two similar ideas. An analogical argument, therefore,
considers the similarity between things and then draws some similar conclusion. Paley
suggests that it is reasonable to compare the natural world with a watch because they
clearly have something in common.
ANALOGY
WATCH
√ complex
√ has an obvious purpose
HUMAN EYE
√ very complex
√ has an obvious
purpose
Conclusion
‘We know that a watch
has been designed.’
Conclusion
‘We can assume that
the human eye has been
designed.’
An argument from analogy uses inductive logic. Based on what we observe we can
induce a conclusion. This type of logic can only ever provide us with evidence that
creates a high likelihood of the conclusion being true. Paley is really saying that given
the complexity of the natural world it is highly likely that it came into being because of
the intention of a designer (God).
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
27
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
St Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas presented his own form of the teleological argument. Aquinas called his fifth
proof the Argument from Harmony. Everywhere we look there is ‘adaptation’ or
‘accord’. Fish need to swim so they have fins and tails; dogs need to gnaw bones so
they have strong teeth. We can either say this is merely accident or we can argue for
‘design’ or deliberate intention. Aquinas argues that the clear-thinking person will
choose the latter.
Summary – The teleological argument
√
People believe in God because there are so many things in the universe that are
incredibly complicated. They appear to have been made with a particular
purpose in mind.
√
The most famous advocate of the teleological argument was William Paley
(1743–1805AD)
√
Paley said that if we all agree that a watch must have been designed by a
watchmaker then surely an eye (that is complex beyond our imagination) must
also have been designed.
√
Paley was using inductive logic to present his case, in other words he believed
that it was highly likely that God exists.
√
Aquinas said that the harmony that exists in the world shows that things must
have been designed with a purpose in mind.
28
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
Questions
1.
What simple fact is at the heart of the teleological argument?
2.
Read about the bucket orchid and the wings of birds or insects.
(a)
(b)
3.
Choose one and write a brief description of it.
Does it persuade you that the existence of God is a possibility? (Explain
your answer.)
Read the amazing facts about the human body. Copy and complete the chart
below:
Parts of the human
body
Eye
Brief comment about it
(say how amazing it is)
Can distinguish 1
million light surfaces, 14
million colour sensors
and 200 million black
and white sensors
Specific function that
it performs
Allows us to see the
world
Lungs
Blood vessels
Heart
Brain
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
29
THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT
4.
Some people say that all the different parts of your body clearly have been
designed with a specific function in mind. Do you agree with these people?
Explain your answer.
5.
Write a very short paragraph about William Paley. Make sure that you mention
the following points:
(a)
(b)
(c)
When was he alive?
What nationality was he?
What particular part of the human body amazed him most?
6.
Write a brief description of Paley’s version of the teleological argument.
7.
What type of logic was Paley using?
8.
Write a brief description of St Thomas Aquinas’s version of the teleological
argument.
9.
The name of the argument (teleological) is derived from a Greek word telos.
What does this word mean?
10
Aristotle said that there were four causes behind everything in the universe (see
appendix 1).
Copy and complete the chart below:
Aristotle’s four causes
What did he mean?
The material cause
The efficient cause
The formal cause
The final cause
11
Which of Aristotle’s four causes is the key idea behind the teleological
argument?
30
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Section 4
Does the teleological argument work?
David Hume
The design argument has convinced many people over the years, but hasn’t persuaded
everybody. Its most famous critic was David Hume. We will briefly look at two of his
responses to the argument.
Criticism one – the success of the analogy
Hume’s key point related to the logic of the design argument. He
pointed out that the strength of an analogical argument depends
on how similar the things being compared are. He suggested that
human inventions and living things are actually not as similar as
you might first think. Hume pointed out simply that living things
are organic in nature whereas man-made machines are
mechanistic. The analogy between the universe and any product
of human design is therefore, according to Hume, not strong
enough to allow us to draw definite (highly likely) conclusions.
ANALOGY
WATCH
√ complex
√ has an obvious purpose

Mechanistic
Conclusion
‘We know that a watch
has been designed.’
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
HUMAN EYE
√ very complex
√ has an obvious
purpose
 Organic
Conclusion
‘We can’t be certain
that the human eye has
been designed.’
31
DOES THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Criticism two – who designed the universe?
At one point Hume actually conceded that maybe the argument worked. Maybe the
evidence of order and design in the universe does in fact lead to the reasonable
conclusion that it must have been designed. However, he then suggested we are not
entitled to jump to the conclusion that the designer of the universe is actually God, an
all-powerful, all-knowing or even good being. Maybe, Hume suggested, it could have
been the work of a team of designers, or of an evil force, or perhaps, even, the bungled
work of an inferior, junior designer.
Hume famously said ….
This world for aught we know, is very faulty and imperfect compared to a superior
standard and was only the first rude essay of some infant deity who afterwards
abandoned it, ashamed of his lame performance.
When you stop and honestly consider the human brain it’s difficult to agree with
Hume that the ‘designer’ could possibly be ashamed of his lame performance.
However, as we will see later, Hume had something else in mind. Can you think of
something in the universe that you may wish to call faulty?
The theory of evolution
The theory of evolution is for many the decisive challenge to the design argument.
David Hume appeared to anticipate it in his own earlier writings: ‘Why can matter not
contain within itself the source of order and design?’ Charles Darwin produced his
famous book, On the Origin of Species, in 1859. Darwin offered an explanation for the
order and complexity in the natural world without the need of a designer God. He
suggested that a careful observation of nature shows us that we can get very
complicated forms of life naturally without any need of a designer.
William Paley thought that God was a bit like a watchmaker who carefully designed
and built everything with a clear purpose in mind. Richard Dawkins, a contemporary
and well known academic, published a recent book entitled The Blind Watchmaker. In
it he attempts to argue that evolution has completely destroyed the teleological
argument. According to Dawkins, complex living things result entirely from natural
processes. He even suggests in a more recent book, Climbing Mount Improbable, that
the apparent partnerships in nature, like those between the bucket orchid and the bee,
can be fully explained by the process of evolution. He suggested that the processes of
natural selection and the survival of the fittest are entirely ‘blind’.
32
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Has the design argument been defeated?
Look at the following quote:
‘In the beginning were only germs or causes of the forms of life, which were
afterwards to be developed in gradual course.’
Who do you think said this? Charles Darwin? Richard
Dawkins? You might be surprised to know that it was the
Christian theologian St Augustine of Hippo (354–430AD).
He understood the Genesis account of creation in allegorical
terms. It’s perfectly likely that he wouldn’t have been overly
concerned when the theory of evolution was explained by
Darwin. If the story of Genesis is allegorical then maybe
each ‘day’ stands for millions of years and the best way to
understand creation is to think of it in terms of a slow
evolution.
It’s the idea of blind evolution that most people who believe in God find difficult to
accept. Maybe creation did happen over a very long period of time but surely, they
may suggest, something as immensely complex as the human
brain could not come into existence by chance. Human
consciousness is often cited as a reason why people find evolution
difficult to accept. The writer F R Tennant, in his book
Philosophical Theology, suggested that evolution could easily be
the mechanism that God used to create life.
Discuss
What do you think is meant by the following statement?
‘When God rolled the dice he ensured that the dice was loaded.’
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
33
DOES THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Tennant also suggested that blind evolution can’t really explain why humans spend so
much time enjoying beautiful scenery, or appreciating music and art. The human brain
is so stunningly complex that, for many people, the idea of natural selection and
survival of the fittest as its sole explanation seems difficult.
Before we move on it’s worth looking back to Hume’s second criticism. Although
appearing crude when first read, it does in fact lead us to the main reason why people
struggle to accept that there is a God. If God designed the universe why is it that there
are so many natural disasters and so much disease? Why would God design a
universe that is so full of suffering?
34
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Summary – Does the teleological argument work?
√
David Hume said that a watch and an eye are not as similar as we might first
have thought. A watch is mechanistic whereas an eye is organic. This means
that we can’t be certain, just because we know a watch has been designed, that
the eye had to have also been designed.
√
David Hume also said that at best the argument shows that the universe must
have been designed. It doesn’t, though, guarantee that the designer was God.
√
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution appears to have shown that the
complexity of life can be explained without the need of a designer.
√
Many people think that God could have designed the process of evolution.
√
F R Tennant suggested that evolution can’t really explain why humans can
appreciate beauty or enjoy music. He questioned whether blind evolution could
really explain the human mind.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
35
DOES THE TELEOLOGICAL ARGUMENT WORK?
Questions
1.
David Hume said that there were a number of problems with the design
argument. Under the following titles briefly explain two of them.
(a)
(b)
Problem one – the success of the analogy
Problem two – who designed the universe?
2.
Name two famous scientists associated with the theory of evolution.
3.
Briefly explain why evolution is seen as a threat to the design argument.
4.
Explain why it’s possible that St Augustine might have not rejected evolution if
he was alive today.
5.
What did the modern writer F R Tennant say about evolution?
6.
Does the teleological argument persuade you that God exists? Explain your
answer.
7.
Another argument that is often used to encourage belief in God is known as the
anthropic argument. Try to find out about this idea and write a short summary
note about it. Appendix 2 will get you started.
When you write your notes make sure that you explain why people relate it to
the argument from design. Explain why some people aren’t convinced that it
shows that God must exist.
Does the anthropic argument make you think that God may exist?
36
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND SUFFERING
Section 5
The problem of evil and suffering
Religious belief: The attributes of God – omniscient, omnipotent, and all-loving
Although evolution challenges the design argument, the biggest problem that believers
face when defending it is how to reconcile the evil and suffering that exists in the
world. If belief that God exists is based on our observations of the world, we must be
willing to look at everything. We have seen clearly that the world is incredibly
complex. If we keep looking we will also see without much effort that it is often
incredibly cruel. Some of history’s most influential philosophers, for example David
Hume, John Stuart Mill and Bertrand Russell, challenged the traditional idea of an allpowerful, all-knowing and loving God because of the problem of evil.
Philosophers of religion talk about two particular types of evil:
• Moral evil – caused by human beings themselves
• Natural evil – caused by the way things happen in our world.
Moral evil
‘Man’s inhumanity to man makes countless thousands mourn!’
Robert Burns
Genocide
Moral evil revolves around humans doing evil things to each other. Bullying, theft,
murder, rape, torture – the list is endless. Probably the most shocking example of
moral evil was the Jewish Holocaust where over six million Jews were murdered by
the Nazis. The extent of the suffering experienced by those involved is almost
impossible to conceive. Sadly this genocide is not a unique event. Since World War
Two there have been other examples, most notably:
• Between 1975 and 1979 a genocide in Cambodia resulted in the deaths of
approximately 1.7 million people (21% of the country’s population)
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
37
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND SUFFERING
• In 1994 at least 500,000 Tutsi were murdered in Rwanda (75% of the Tutsi
population). All the killings took place in a three-month period, between the
months of April and June.
• The USA has officially stated its belief that genocide is presently taking place in
the Darfur region of Sudan (2005).
Ivan Karamazov – the suffering of innocent children
One of the most famous comments on the subject of moral evil
is found in Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s classic novel, The Brothers
Karamazov (1880). In one section two of the brothers, Ivan
and Alyosha, discuss the problem of evil. It is in fact not so
much a discussion as an angry rant against God by Ivan.
Alyosha, a deeply religious man, is clearly troubled by his
brother’s argument.
Ivan makes his point by dramatically telling Alyosha about
various examples of incredible cruelty inflicted upon innocent
children. He tells of an eight-year-old boy who accidentally hits and injures a dog with
a stone. It turns out that the animal is the favourite dog of a cruel and powerful
general. The boy is immediately taken away from his mother and locked in a prison
cell. The next morning he is ordered to run as a pack of hounds are deliberately set
after him. The boy is literally torn to pieces in front of his mother’s eyes.
Ivan tells others stories of horrendous cruelty. One of them was about a five-year-old
girl who was subjected to torture and abuse by her own parents. ‘They beat her, kicked
her, flogged her, for no reason that they themselves knew of. The child’s whole body
was covered in bruises.’ The child was frequently locked up in the outhouse, even on
the coldest of nights, ‘unable to understand what was happening’.
Ivan doesn’t actually conclude that God doesn’t exist. He decides, however, that he
wants nothing to do with a God who has designed such a flawed universe, a universe
with suffering children. He says that all he can do is ‘return his ticket’ in protest and
reject God’s creation by killing himself. Many people, after reading the stories Ivan
recounts, choose the more straightforward view that God simply never existed in the
first place.
38
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND SUFFERING
Natural evil
The waste and suffering involved in the process of evolution
Although writers like F R Tennant appear to accept the possibility that the theory of
evolution is compatible with belief in God, others may wish to identify one particular
aspect of the theory which doesn’t appear to fit in with the idea of a loving God. If
evolution is God’s system for creating, why is there so much waste and suffering
involved in the process? Could God not have come up with a system that was more
pleasant, that didn’t involve a constant struggle to survive? The theory also
emphasises that 90% of all living things will not survive. Why would God set up a
system that includes so much waste? The survival of the fittest appears to go against
all ideas of a good God. Why would a loving God create a world that is red in tooth
and claw?
Natural disasters
Natural disasters such as earthquakes, droughts, hurricanes, etc. have also caused
untold suffering to countless people throughout history. The following news stories
describe graphically the suffering caused by natural disasters.12
Bam, Iran – December 26 2003, 5:27 AM
Iran lowers Bam earthquake toll
Iran has significantly lowered the death toll from the Bam earthquake.
The authorities now say 26,271 were killed when much of the city was flattened on 26
December.
Previously it was said that more than 41,000 had died, but apparently some victims
were counted more than once in the chaotic aftermath of the disaster.
Iran’s statistics office said a census had been conducted to determine the exact
number killed and that 525 people were still missing.
Abbas Ali Zali, the head of the statistics office, said the new figure covered the city of
Bam as well as its surrounding areas and districts, where a total of 142,376 people
were living.
Most of the mud brick buildings in the historical city, including its ancient citadel,
collapsed when the massive earthquake struck at dawn.
The quake destroyed 70% of the city’s buildings. Tens of thousands of people were
injured and left homeless.
12
BBC News Website
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
39
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND SUFFERING
Indonesia quake toll jumps again
Indonesia has again raised its estimate of the number of people killed by December’s
earthquake and tsunami.
Health Minister Fadilah Supari said more than 220,000 people died or are missing, bringing the
total killed throughout the region to 280,000.
A month after the disaster, relief workers in Aceh province are still pulling corpses from the
wreckage.
TSUNAMI DEATH TOLL
Indonesia: at least 95,000 dead; 133,000 missing, presumed dead
Sri Lanka: 31,000 dead; 5,637 missing
India (inc. Andaman and Nicobar islands): 10,744 dead; 5,640 missing
Thailand: 5,384 dead; 3,130 missing
Somalia: approx. 150 dead
Maldives: 82 dead; 26 missing
Malaysia: 68 dead
Burma: 59 dead (government figure)
Tanzania: 10 dead
Bangladesh: 2 dead
Kenya: 1 dead
Seychelles: 1 dead
OTHER NATURAL DISASTERS
2004
Asian quake disaster – toll so far exceeds 110,000
2003
Earthquake in Bam, Iran – official casualty figure is 26,271
1998
Hurricane Mitch devastated much of Honduras and Nicaragua killing 10,000 people
1984/5 Famine in Ethiopia killed an estimated 900,000
1976
Earthquake in Tangshan, China, kills 242,000
1970
Cyclone in Bangladesh kills 500,000
1923
Tokyo earthquake kills 140,000
1887
China’s Yellow River breaks its banks in Huayan Kou killing 900,000
1896
Tsunami kills 27,000 in Japan
1815
Volcanic eruption of Mount Tambora on Indonesia’s Sumbawa Island kills 90,000
1556
Earthquake in China’s Shaanxi, Shanxi and Henan provinces kills an estimated
830,000
Atheists often assume that the reality of moral and natural evil is one of the most
important pieces of evidence against belief in God. Throughout the world millions of
human beings are suffering all kinds of physical and emotional pain. In Scotland,
disease, severe disability, anxiety, fear, depression, loneliness and bereavement are
obvious examples. In the face of all this, they argue, how can we possibly think that
the world was created and sustained by a powerful, loving creator God?
40
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND SUFFERING
The problem of suffering can be summed up as follows:



If God is omnipotent (all-powerful) why doesn’t he crush evil and stop suffering?
If God is omniscient (all-knowing) why did he create a world which he knew
would result in such pain and suffering?
If God is all-loving why does he allow innocent children to suffer?
Many people assume that if these questions can’t be answered adequately then the
only reasonable view to hold is that God simply doesn’t exist.
Summary – The problem of evil and suffering
√
Many people don’t believe in God because there is so much suffering in the
world.
√
The suffering that results from moral evil is caused by human actions.
√
Many people think that the suffering of innocent children is the strongest
argument against belief in a loving God. The character of Ivan Karamazov,
invented by the writer Dostoyevsky, is often used to express this idea.
√
The suffering that results from natural evil is caused by the way things happen
in our world, e.g. natural disasters, the process of the survival of the fittest.
√
If God is omnipotent (all-powerful) why doesn’t he crush evil and stop
suffering?
√
If God is omniscient (all-knowing) why did he create the world in the first
place?
√
If God is all-loving why does he allow innocent children to suffer?
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
41
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL AND SUFFERING
Questions
1.
What simple fact about the world persuades many people that there can’t be a
God?
2.
Write a brief report about moral evil. Make sure that you:
(a)
(b)
Give a clear definition of moral evil.
Give examples to illustrate your answer.
3.
Describe one of the stories used by the character Ivan Karamazov to challenge
belief that God is benevolent (good).
4.
Do you think that the suffering of children shows that God either doesn’t exist
or isn’t benevolent (good)? Explain your answer.
5.
Write a brief report about natural evil. Make sure that you:
(a)
(b)
Give a clear definition of natural evil.
Give examples to illustrate your answer.
6.
Explain why the process of evolution is thought to challenge the belief that God
is good?
7.
What three questions are often used to summarise the problem of suffering?
Copy and complete the sentences below:
‘If God is omnipotent …
‘If God is omniscient …
‘If God is all-loving …
42
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES EVIL AND SUFFERING SHOW THAT THERE IS NO GOD?
Section 6
Does suffering and evil show that there is no God?
Sometimes when people are faced with a big problem they choose to hide their heads
in the sand and not face up to the issue. Certainly some people who believe in God
may want to try to ignore the problem of suffering or respond with simple pat answers.
It would, however, be unfair to say this about religions as a whole. It is often forgotten
that Dostoevsky, the creator of the character of Ivan Karamazov, was a very religious
man. We will focus our attention on some Christian approaches to suffering. If you
have time you may want to investigate what some other religious traditions say about
suffering.
The theodicy
When faced with the reality of suffering, theologians have often presented arguments
in defence of God. This type of argument is known as a theodicy. Probably the best
known theodicy is the free will defence. It is rooted in the idea of God creating
humans with free choice. Before we look at it closely it is important to understand
some of the ideas found in the story of Adam and Eve.
Genesis
According to traditional Christian teaching all suffering is
rooted in the story of the first sin, the sin committed by
‘Adam and Eve’ in the Garden of Eden. The story presents a
vision of a perfect world, free from suffering, evil and even
death. This good world becomes very good after the first
humans are created in the image of God13. However, this
world is wrecked by the actions of Adam and Eve when, in
their freedom, they disobey God by eating from the tree of
the Knowledge of Good and Evil.
13
image of God – this does not mean that they were created to look like God. Rather, the idea
is that humans will have some characteristics that resemble God’s nature. For example,
humans have a unique ability to create. Another aspect of this idea is that humans are free
and responsible for creation.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
43
DOES EVIL AND SUFFERING SHOW THAT THERE IS NO GOD?
Some theologians believe this story should be understood literally (i.e. that everything
in it happened exactly as it says). They suggest that the action of Adam and Eve
literally brought guilt and misfortune upon the human race. All natural and moral evils
result from this actual event.
Other theologians believe that the story is better understood as an allegory. This was
certainly the view of the influential early Christian writer Augustine. He believed that
the story of Adam and Eve represents the human struggle between good and evil.
If Genesis is best understood as an allegory then it could be that:
• The serpent represents the temptation to do bad things.
• Adam and Eve’s nakedness represents human innocence (maybe echoing the
innocence of young children).
• Adam and Eve’s desire to ‘cover themselves’ represents human guilt and shame.
Discuss
‘If there is a perfectly good spiritual being (God) then it’s perfectly
possible that there’s also is an evil spiritual being (the Devil).’
The free-will defence
This approach is centred on the belief that humans are radically different from
animals. An animal can only ever act on instinct; humans are free to choose how to
live. This means that we can positively choose to do good things or negatively choose
to do bad things. The story of Adam and Eve is often used to illustrate this human
capacity to freely choose to do either the right or the wrong thing. The message of the
story is that suffering and evil occurs when people deliberately choose to do evil
things. The free-will argument suggests that humans, in their radical freedom, often
choose to do evil rather than good. This choice is at the heart of all moral suffering.
St Augustine
Augustine said that when we choose to do evil things we depart
from being what we should be. In other words we fall short of
being what God intended us to be.
In other words, we can choose to be all that we should be. Or we
can choose to be less than we might be – less than God intended us
to be.
44
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES EVIL AND SUFFERING SHOW THAT THERE IS NO GOD?
St Thomas Aquinas
Aquinas said something similar, arguing that human beings have
fallen short of their true nature. Because of our bad (evil) choices
we ‘defect from being’.
According to these theologians the blame for suffering lies entirely
at the feet of humans.
Discuss
‘Do you think that it’s possible for God to have created humans such
that they would always choose to do the right thing?’
Traditional Christian belief would say ‘no’ to the question above. If the answer was
‘yes’ then it would appear that God would have had to create a race of ‘puppet-like’
creatures who simply obeyed Him without thought or question.
Probably the central idea in Christianity is that humans find meaning and purpose in a
‘love’ relationship with God and each other:
‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your
strength and with all your mind, and love your neighbour as yourself.’14
Most would suggest that love can never be forced or controlled. Love appears to
demand free choice. If God had created puppets instead of human beings then any
possibility to freely love would seem to be impossible. The free-will defence says that
if we are to have real opportunities for choice (and the real potential to love), then we
must also live in a world where pain is a real possibility.
14
Luke 10:27
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
45
DOES EVIL AND SUFFERING SHOW THAT THERE IS NO GOD?
The character Ivan Karamazov was clearly unimpressed with the free-will defence. He
was suggesting that the price of human freedom, the suffering of even one child, is too
high. His thought of suicide is his complete rejection of the freedom offered by God.
Discuss
‘Do you agree with Ivan that the suffering of one child is too high a
price to pay for human freedom?’
There have been other well-known theodicies. If you’re interested you could
investigate how they attempt to suggest why it’s possible to reconcile belief in God
with the reality of evil and suffering. Appendix 3 will get you started.
Other key religious ideas
Many Christians are aware of these theodicies but, if asked about the problem of pain,
they may well focus their answers on other Christian beliefs.
1.
The crucifixion
The central symbol of the Christian religion is the cross, an incredibly cruel device
designed to execute criminals over an agonisingly long period of time. Over the last
2000 years this image has provided people with a powerful symbol of suffering. It also
often gives people hope in terrible situations. Right at the heart of the Christian
religion is a moment of extreme agony and cruelty. The recent film The Passion of the
Christ attempted to show the full horror of the suffering endured by Jesus. The film
begins with a quote from the prophet Isaiah:
‘But he was pierced for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The
punishment that brought our peace was on him; and by his wounds we are healed.’15
The crucifixion of Jesus is interpreted in different ways. However, most Christians
believe that somehow his suffering gives all humanity hope, no matter what they have
to endure on this earth. One of the names given to Jesus was Immanuel (God with us).
Many people find great comfort in the belief that the God of Christianity is somehow
involved in the suffering of the world.
15
Isaiah 53:5
46
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES EVIL AND SUFFERING SHOW THAT THERE IS NO GOD?
2.
Life after death
Dostoevsky’s novel The Brother’s Karamazov ends with the sad
death of a small boy, Ilyushechka. Alyosha oversees the burial and
spends time with the boy’s friends, offering them some advice on
their future lives:
‘Oh, young children, oh, dear friends, do not be afraid of life! How
good is life, when one does some good and upright thing!’
He then enthusiastically tells the boys that maybe there is another life beyond this one:
‘Karamazov!’ Kolya cried, ‘is it really true what religion says, that we shall rise up
from the dead and come to life and see one another again, and everyone, even
Ilyushechka?’
‘Without question we shall rise, without question we shall see one another and joyfully
tell one another everything that has happened,’ half-laughing, half in ecstasy, Alyosha
replied. ‘Oh how good that will be!’ burst from Kolya.
Alyosha, although troubled by his brother Ivan’s rejection of God, never loses his own
conviction that God must exist. His firm belief in the afterlife, in a time when all pain
and suffering will stop, appears to sustain his faith. If God does exist then at least there
is the possibility that there will finally be something better for those who suffer.
Many religious people may want to point out that if God doesn’t exist then suffering is
all there is. The child starving to death in an African famine, the mother in an
emotional agony as she tries to come to terms with the cruel death of her child, the
terminally ill cancer patient, the little girl unsure why her parents are treating her so
badly, the soldier about to die on the battle front … If there is no God then some may
suggest that there is nothing but despair for those who suffer. For those who believe in
God there may be no fully adequate answer to the problem of evil but, like Alyosha
says, there is at least hope that one day all the pain and suffering will be over and once
again all who have experienced suffering will then experience a new and better
existence.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
47
DOES EVIL AND SUFFERING SHOW THAT THERE IS NO GOD?
The Biblical writer called St John the Divine expresses this hope clearly in his Book
of Revelation.
‘And God will wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death,
neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things
have passed away.’16
Discuss
‘Without belief in God and the possibility of the afterlife there can be
no hope for those who suffer.’
Summary – Does evil and suffering show that there is
no God?
√
A theodicy is an attempt to explain why the existence of evil and suffering
doesn’t necessarily show that God doesn’t exist.
√
Most Christian responses to suffering and evil are rooted in the story of Adam
and Eve.
√
The free-will defence explains that suffering results from human choice and
action. It is better that humans were created with real freedom to act and think
than to have been created like a puppet.
√
People who believe in God may point out that if God doesn’t exist then there is
nothing but despair and hopelessness for those who suffer.
√
Some people suggest that the Christian idea of the crucifixion gives hope to
people who suffer.
√
Some people suggest that belief in the afterlife means that there is always hope
for people, no matter how bad their suffering is.
16
Revelation 21:4
48
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES EVIL AND SUFFERING SHOW THAT THERE IS NO GOD?
Questions
1.
What is a theodicy?
2.
Try to write a short explanation of some of the ideas taught in the story of Adam
and Eve.
3.
Explain in your own words the theodicy known as the free-will defence.
4.
St Thomas Aquinas said that humans have fallen short of their true nature.
(a)
(b)
(c)
5.
Try to describe what you think a truly good human being is like.
Try to describe what you think a truly bad human being is like.
Do you agree with Aquinas that humans have fallen short of their true
nature? Explain your answer.
Look at the following two viewpoints:
(i)
(ii)
‘Humans were created to be absolutely free. We are who we choose to
be.’ This means that sometimes humans freely do good things (leading to
happiness) and sometimes freely do bad things (leading to suffering).
‘Humans were created to be like puppets. We have no freedom to choose
our own destiny. This means that we cannot suffer but nor can we choose
our own path in life. Which viewpoint do you prefer? Explain your
answer.
6.
Do you think that the free-will defence successfully explains why God can still
be called omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent? Explain your answer.
7.
The Christian cross
(a)
(b)
8.
Copy the quote that appears at the beginning of the film The Passion of
the Christ (Isaiah 53:5)
Why do some people suggest that the crucifixion helps people who are
suffering?
Belief in life after death
(a)
(b)
Copy the famous quote from the Bible that often gives hope to people
when they suffer (Revelation 21:4).
Why do some people suggest that belief in the afterlife helps people who
are suffering?
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
49
DOES EVIL AND SUFFERING SHOW THAT THERE IS NO GOD?
(c)
9.
Do you think that the possibility of life after death means that you can
still believe in God and accept the reality of evil and suffering? Explain
your answer.
As well as the free-will defence there are many other theodicies. The best
known ones are known as the defence of:
• moral responsibility
• personal maturity
• strength of character
Try to find out about these ideas and write a short summary note about them.
Appendix 3 will get you started.
When you write your notes make sure that you explain whether or not they
provide a good defence for the existence of God.
10.
Do you think that the existence of evil and suffering means that God doesn’t
exist? Explain your answer.
50
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
DOES GOD EXIST?
Section 7
Does God exist?
‘The balance of probabilities, therefore, comes out strongly against the existence of
God.’17
J L Mackie
‘Still the question remains whether there is any more reason to believe in God than
there is to believe that Elvis lives. Are those who believe in God any better justified?
The answer, perhaps, is that they are not.’18
Steven Law
‘The faith position is an altogether more positive and optimistic one than the assertion
of meaninglessness. It maintains that although evil is a terrible reality it can be
overcome and one of our main tasks as human individuals is to fight against it.’19
P Vardy
‘Were there no other evidence at all, the thumb alone would convince me of God’s
existence.’
Sir Isaac Newton
‘I believe that what separates humanity from everything else in the world – spaghetti,
binder paper, deep-sea creatures, edelweiss and Mount McKinley – is that humanity
alone has the capacity to commit all kinds of sins.’20
Opening line in the novel Hey Nostradamus!
‘Do you not think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions
of years to perfect your world, you could produce better than the Ku-Klux-Klan or the
fascists?’21
Bertrand Russell
17
J L Mackie, The Miracle of Theism, p253
S Law, The Philosophy Gym, p78
19
P Vardy, The Puzzle of Evil, p202
20
Douglas Copeland, Hey Nostradamus!, p3
21
B Russell, Why I am Not a Christian, p7
18
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
51
DOES GOD EXIST?
‘There is some force of nature that’s larger than me … it’s the thing that sustains my
being, that sustains my life … I call it God.’
Sir Anthony Hopkins
‘I don’t believe in an old man with a grey beard.’
Ben Elton
‘In the Southern Ocean, because it’s such a wild open place, you do feel that there’s
someone there.’
Ellen MacArthur
Questions
1.
From the foregoing, choose any two quotes that you agree with.
(a)
(b)
2.
Choose any two quotes that you disagree with.
(a)
(b)
3.
Copy them carefully.
Explain why you agree with them.
Copy them carefully.
Explain why you disagree with them.
Do you believe that God exists? Explain your answer in detail.
Make sure that you:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Carefully define God.
Discuss the issues raised in the cosmological argument.
Discuss the issues raised in the teleological argument.
Discuss the issues raised by the problem of evil and suffering.
52
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
APPENDICES
Appendix 1
Aristotle’s four causes
Before you look at Aristotle’s ideas try to think about what they might have been. To
help you with this have a look at a picture of the Statue of Liberty. There was
obviously a point in history when the statue didn’t exist. In order for it now to exist a
number of causes were needed.
Can you identify four separate things (causes) that were needed before
the statue could possibly come into existence?
The author Brian Magee uses an example of a marble statue to explain what Aristotle
meant when he talked of his four causes.22 In order for a statue to finally exist there
must be:
The material cause
– Without the existence of marble we could never have a
marble statue.
The efficient cause
– The marble itself is obviously not the marble statue. For
the statue to come into being it needs to have been carved
out of a block of marble by a person using a hammer and
chisel, and a substantial measure of skill and artistry.
The formal cause
– Random hacking at a piece of marble will not make a
statue; therefore we need a further cause. To be the thing
that it is, the statue needs to take the shape that it does,
that of a horse or a man or whatever.
The final cause
– The only reason that all the other causes take place is
because a sculptor has set out to make a statue in the first
place. All three of the other causes have been called into
operation in order to realise an intention: the overall
reason for the statue’s existence is that it is the fulfilment
of a sculptor’s purposes.
22
Brian Magee, The Story of Philosophy, pp36, 37
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
53
APPENDICES
Aristotle’s notion of a final cause is the key idea behind the teleological argument.
This cause is one which doesn’t push things into effect from behind, but works in
advance by drawing things to a goal or an end. The teleological cause of a thing is
therefore the goal to which it is drawn. The artist has a painting or a statue in mind and
he works at it until he completes the idea that he has in his mind. The goal of the artist
is his work of art. The goal that you have been considering in our attempt to try to
look for evidence for God is the existence of amazingly complex things within our
universe, things that appear to suggest a final cause, or in simple terms things that
appear to have been designed. In the same way as the statue is the artist’s work of art,
everything that exists, including you, is thought to be God’s work of art.
54
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
APPENDICES
Appendix 2
The anthropic argument
Often people assume that the more scientists discover the less likely it is that they will
believe in God. This is not always the case. The universe works because it is ruled by
natural laws. Maybe the best known of these is the law of gravity. Scientists tell us
that there are many ways that these laws could be set. The chances of them being
exactly as they are in our universe are incredibly small. If they were even slightly
different then you simply wouldn’t exist. For example, if the law of gravity had only
been a little stronger then the universe wouldn’t have got started at all. In fact, it
would have lasted only a few seconds. It is really so ridiculously unlikely that the
universe should be governed by laws that allow for the accidental creation of
intelligent, conscious beings like us that many people say that this is another good
reason to believe that God must have deliberately fixed these laws exactly as they are.
Not everyone is convinced by this argument. The simplest response to it has been
called the lottery fallacy. The chances of winning the lottery are so ridiculously
unlikely that buying a ticket is really rather a silly thing to do. However, someone
always wins! The problem you face is that you won’t live long enough to stand a
reasonable chance of winning. If you had an infinite amount of time you would win
eventually. The same principle applies to the universe. It is extremely unlikely that a
finely tuned universe like ours should exist, but, given enough time there is no reason
why it shouldn’t. Maybe there have been countless failed universes before, eventually,
ours came to exist.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
55
APPENDICES
Appendix 3
Moral responsibility, personal maturity and strength of
character
The traditional free-will defence puts the blame for suffering squarely at the feet of
humans and the evil choices we make. This alternative approach implies that God is
actually responsible for suffering. The origins of this theodicy began with the early
Church Father Ireneus (AD 130–202). In recent years the theologian John Hick
followed in the Irenean tradition by suggesting that suffering is a necessary condition
for the development of human souls. He argued that human beings were created as
imperfect creatures that had to be brought to perfection by a process of development
and growth. It is suggested that the natural world with all its dangers and challenges is
not the result of the ‘Fall of Man’ so much as a situation designed by God so that
humans can grow and develop moral responsibility and personal maturity. The
demands and problems of life are an essential part of this process.
Religious believers often argue that suffering can lead us away from our self-centred
lifestyles and help us to focus on others. It seems also that communal suffering in
particular brings people together. This message is well illustrated in a famous poem
found scribbled on a wall of Ravensbruck, one of the Nazi death camps in World War
Two:
‘O, Lord
Remember not only the men and women of good will,
But also those of evil will.
But do not remember all the suffering
they have inflicted on us;
remember the fruits that we have borne
thanks to this suffering –
our comradeship, our loyalty, our humility,
our courage, our generosity,
the greatness of heart
which has grown out of all this;
and when they come to the judgement,
let all the fruits that we have borne
be their forgiveness.’
56
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
APPENDICES
The traditional view of creation sees Adam and Eve as basically good but through
their bad choice corrupting themselves and the world. This approach sees them rather
as immature, as being like children that have to undergo a long period of spiritual
growth and development before they could reach the state which God had intended for
them. The ‘Fall’ never literally happened. Human beings are seen as being part of a
process of creation and on the way to becoming more mature and perfect. Suffering is
somehow a necessary part of creation.
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)
© Learning and Teaching Scotland 2005
57
APPENDICES
Bibliography
Bryson, B, A Short History of Nearly Everything, London: Black Swan Books, 2004
Davis, R, An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion (2nd edition), Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1993
Dawkins, R, Climbing Mount Improbable, London: Penguin, 1996
Dostoyevsky, F, The Brothers Karamazov, London: Penguin, 1993 (first published
1880)
Law, S, The Philosophy Gym: 25 short adventures in thinking, London: Headline
Book Publishing, 2004
Magee, B, The Story of Philosophy, London: Dorling Kindersley, 1998
Russell, B, Why I am not a Christian, London: Routledge, 2004 (first published 1957)
Vardy, P, The Puzzle of Evil, London: Fount Paperbacks, 1992
Vardy, P, The Puzzle of God, London: Fount Paperbacks, 1995
Warburton, N, Philosophy: The Basics (3rd edition), London: Routledge, 1999
58
© Learning an d Teaching Sc otland 2005
THE EXISTENCE OF GOD (INT 2, RMPS)