Position Paper 2:
The Existence of God and Suffering
A Position Paper
Submitted to Dr. Wilbert Ratledge
In Partial Fulfillment of
The Requirements of
THE 334 Apologetics
Crown College
Bethany Stiller
October 25, 2011
Box 144
The existence of evil, and its corresponding pain and suffering, has created a conundrum
that man has attempted to solve for centuries. By now, one would expect that someone would
have developed obvious answers so such questioning would not repeatedly occur over the
centuries. However, part of the conundrum is just this—the answer to suffering cannot be
merely intellectual. The intellect is forced to take into account pain, attempt to develop an
answer, and apply the answer to present circumstances. The problem involves experience, not
just knowledge, and sometimes the two appear to contradict each other. As one intellectually
explores the problem of evil and its fundamental questions—God’s existence, the origin of evil,
and God’s character—one will find just enough knowledge to make it through the hard times of
life with hope.
With all the many answers that have been given for the problem of evil, one seems
particularly popular today. Many claim that if evil exists, and God is supposedly so good, then
God must not exist. How could a loving God allow such horrible things to happen? As
blasphemous as such a statement is to one who holds to the existence of an awesome God, one
cannot judge another for considering such a thing. Man is taught to look at facts and use the facts
in the discovery of truth. Those who start to lean towards the idea that God does not exist, are
honestly seeking answers to a contrary belief that does not seem to match up with the
experiences found in everyday life.
However, the conclusion is so wrapped up in specifics, that it lacks a broader perspective
with more facts that lead to a different conclusion. At face value, the statement, “God must not
exist, because evil does,” indicates man’s natural sense of what is good, what is right compared
to what is wrong. “All the human beings that history has heard of acknowledge some kind of
morality; that is, they feel towards certain proposed actions the experiences expressed by the
1
words ‘I ought’ and ‘I ought not’ (Lewis 10). When an action or a thing is declared as evil, man
is making a judgment. All judgments require a standard. How could one declare something
wrong without a standard of what is good? “[Pain] would be no problem unless, side by side
with our daily experience of this painful world, we had received what we think a good assurance
that ultimate reality is righteous and loving” (Lewis 14). Without a good god, there cannot be
such a concept of evil, and therefore nothing against which man’s inner nature would resist.
“For if there is no God, there is no authority to define what is absolutely right or wrong.
Suddenly the individual or society becomes the authority” (Knechtle 49). God must exist in
order for man to have the capability of identifying evil. Yet even though God’s existence is now
clear, the nature of pain and suffering still leads to many more confounding questions, namely
concerning God’s character.
The name of “God” implies an all-powerful, all-wise being. That being said, many find it
easy to follow this line of reasoning: If God is all that, why does evil still exist? He has already
been declared to be the very standard of good, and so why does He not just take care of pain and
suffering once and for all? Though man obviously cannot snuff out evil, the all-powerful God
should. However, He has not, and so He is at fault for all that evil.
However, God already has made the world without evil. ‘Then God saw everything He
had made, and indeed it was very good” (Genesis 1:31). “God made the world perfect, and He
made us without sin” (McFarland 194). Yet God also gave man the choice to follow Him, and
man chose to disobey. Since “Adam made the wrong choice… we now live in the world that his
bad choice created” (McFarland, 194).
Surely God would not hold all mankind accountable for the disobedience of one man?
Unfortunately, as McFarland stated, man lives in the results of Adam’s poor choice, and that
2
includes an innate tendency to choose what is wrong. Man does not have to follow that innate
tendency, but every man does. Hence, man makes wrong choices which bring pain and suffering
to others.
What about natural disasters and disease? One surely could not be directly responsible
for that, too? Sickness and natural disasters are not controlled by man, even though everything
possible is done to prevent such horrible things. Some would conclude that God must be blame
in this scenario. Though God is capable of intervening, He is still not the cause of the problem.
“…the moral evil that we committed was such an affront to God’s created order that it affected
even the operation of the universe” (McFarland 195).
Now that it is evident that God is not the origin of suffering, why does He choose to not
intervene and eradicate all evil from the planet now? If He can intervene and does not, is He not
at fault? According to an interview with Peter Kreeft, “’Justice delayed is not necessarily justice
denied’” (Strobel pg 43). At this current moment, if God chose to eradicate evil, He would also
have to eradicate anything imperfect to establish a good world. Since none are perfect, all would
be doomed. Yet, “The Bible reveals, ‘The Lord is patient with you, not wanting anyone to
perish’ (2 Pet 3:9)” (Knechtle 54). So the day of promised perfection and justice has been
delayed until as many as are willing enter into God’s redemptive plan. His redemptive plan
demonstrates that He has intervened, just not necessarily in the manner one would personally
desire.
Why go to all this trouble? Why did God just not make man without a choice? “[God]
created us to enjoy himself, each other, and to celebrate his gift of life” (Knechtle 52). However,
without free will, “That wouldn’t be love. That wouldn’t be a relationship….A relationship
demands love. Love requires a choice” (Knechtle 53).
3
Well then, what way has God intervened? The world, with all the horrendous things that
still exist in it, can look like He never intervened at all. Humans, in their limited power, are only
capable of preventing evil, and so expect God to intervene in the same manner. However, God
in all goodness and power, did what mere mortals can hardly comprehend and never deeply
desire. God chose to come to earth and experience our suffering.
Are we broken? He was broken, like bread, for us. Are we despised? He was despised
and rejected of men. Do we cry out that we can’t take anymore? He was a man of
sorrows and acquainted with grief. Do people not betray us? He was sold out himself.
Are our tenderest relationships broken? He too loved and was rejected. Do people turn
from us? They hid there faces from him as from a leper (Strobel 52).
He did not have to, but He chose to. By His suffering, God provided a way for the soul to
experience a renewed relationship with Him and other people. “Think about it: To accomplish
our salvation, the Creator allowed Himself to be murdered by His creation” (McFarland 198).
Why does that matter? Just as God brought a good thing (restored relationship) out of
His suffering, man’s current suffering can have benefits, too. “[Just] as we can’t fully explain
the heights of God’s love, neither can we fully explain the depth of sin and evil. Indeed, part of
the mystery of God’s love for us is that it more than covers our sin and the suffering in the world.
It gives meaning to the suffering” (McFarland 198). If there was not meaning to the suffering,
why endure it? Why fight to go on? Why fight for life? According to Ecclesiastes 7:3, “Sorrow
is better than laughter, for by a sad countenance, the heart is made better.”
How is the heart made better? There could be many answers, but the ultimate is this:
God chose to suffer like us, and with a renewed relationship with Him, He is there through
today’s suffering. “[God] is what we really need. If your friend is sick and dying, the most
4
important thing he wants is not an explanation; he wants you to sit with him. He’s terrified of
being alone more than anything else. So God has not left us alone’” (Strobel 52). Much like a
friendship made sweeter and stronger when it is tested by hard times, the same is true with a
friendship with God. It grows sweeter as one gets to know God better, and as one gets to know
God better, the heart grows in character and strength. “’That’s [pain and suffering] what we
need most desperately. That’s what will bring us the supreme joy of knowing Jesus. Any
suffering, the great Christians from history will tell you, is worth the result’” (Strobel 44).
Since mankind can innately recognize evil, a standard must exist. This standard is found
in a good God who originally created the world to be perfect. Man had free will so he could
truly love. However, the choice to walk out of a relationship with God brought on moral and
natural evil. Though God is all-powerful, He chooses to withhold the justice for now out of love,
so that those who are still seeking Him may know Him. In the meantime, through His great
might and compassion, He chose to suffer like man. His suffering brought about a renewed
relationship that at least allows man to go through hard times, knowing God understands
suffering intellectually and practically and understanding that pain can draw us closer to Him.
5
Works Cited
Knechtle, Cliffe. Give Me an Answer: That Satisfies My Heart and My Mind. Downers Grove,
Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1986 (pages 48-59).
Lewis, C.S. The Problem of Pain. New York, NY: HarperOne, 1996 (pages 1-15).
McFarland, Alex. The Ten Most Common Objections to Christianity. Ventura, California:
Regal Books from Gospel Light, 2007 (pages 193-205) .
Strobel, Lee. The Case for Faith: A Journalist Investigates the Toughest Objections to
Christianity Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 2000 (pages 25-52).
6