God on the Hook

The problem of evil is apparently a problem for God, so much so that Christian theologians have been trying for centuries to get God off the hook, trying to clear his name in all this mess of evil in the world. For, if God is God, then whence comes evil? That is, if God is all-powerful, wise, and good, then how in all the world is there even a smidgen of evil? Unless, of course, God created evil; but then would he still be good, that is, all-good?

Now, in order to argue that God did not create evil, it has been long argued that evil is some non-entity, some non-reality, as it were: the hole in a donut exists so long as the donut ring exists, but once the donut is eaten, the hole is gone. Evil, then, is like that donut hole: it is but an apparent reality that does not really substantiate in reality. Or evil is like a shadow cast by an object illuminated by the sun: a shadow is not a “thing,” as it were, but is the absence of something, namely, light. Or take heat, as another example: the absence of heat is what is known as cold or coldness; and coldness is not something which is or which can be measured but is merely the absence of heat or the slowing down of molecules, which, when slowed, cool. While donut holes, shadows, and cold exist, they exist as nonentities, contingent upon another for their existence.

I do suppose there may be a reality in which there are no shadows or no coldness or no donut holes, but it seems that logically these are but corollaries of the realities that produce them, and so necessarily they exist in conjunction with their causes. Indeed, contingent though they are, they are as much a part of the substance of reality as their prior causes, not being less by simply being the result or effect of some cause. Though being a negation of some reality, they are also positive substantiations of some (other) reality. For though a shadow is the negation of light or cold is the negation of heat or a donut hole is the negation of the donut ring, as such a negation and, indeed, in spite of being such a negation, these are also positive, albeit corollary and contingent, realities.

How can this be?

Ways in which to Consider Evil

Evil as a Positive Negation

Let us consider the nature of a negative reality: in a painting or picture, there may be negative space that is positively filled with a solid color; this negative space is no less a part of the picture than the positive space and, though a negative and thereby contingent space, is, in fact, a positive reality within the painting or picture, being some color or pigment on the canvas. Now, this may seem rather obvious and might seem like a semantical argument regarding perspective on how one views the painting and its colors. And, indeed, it is. But so is the view of shadows, cold, and holes: while these are viewed as negative realities, they might be also considered positive realities, as, for instance, the shade of a tree on a hot summer day or the coldness of a refrigerator or the hole of a well.

Evil as a Useful Fiction

Or again, consider the nature of evil: it may be but a useful fiction, which we use to ascribe to events or actions, and, while not necessarily being a thing in itself, is a real and positive reality. Take, for instance, a number, say, the number four: it is but a useful fiction, a concept borne out by the calculation of two and two or by gathering and then counting a group of individuals of which their number is four. Do we touch or feel or see the number four, abstract as it is? Indeed, we do not. But we do know “four” (dare I say, “fourness”) as a number, as a useful fiction, as a corollary and contingent reality substantiated in reality as a real and positive reality, though not a “thing” in itself.

Evil as a Positive Reality

Evil, indeed, while it may be a privation in some instances, is not in all instances a privation, but is, too, a real and positive reality, substantiated in reality, though not necessarily a “thing,” per se, in itself. To describe evil as simply nonbeing, rather than as possibly having being, is to thereby dismiss evil, which might be a force or cause of so much mayhem and destruction. A city in a pile of rubble due to the destruction by some natural disaster or moral evil is no less real than a city in disrepair than a city that is standing upright and complete. Now, we must distinguish between nature of the city in ruins and the nature of the city’s existence as well as that of the nature of the evil of the ruined city and the existence of the evil of the ruined city.

Evil as a Concept

As a concept, evil might be said to be but a description of reality, thereby being but a kind of metaphor for the state of reality, an adverbial or adjectival descriptor, but not a substance of reality. However, inasmuch as concepts, or words, are descriptors of reality, and therewith match onto reality in a kind of correspondence with reality, they are also substances of reality. For a woman who is ten feet tall is not only thus described but also thus is. Then, a city in ruins is not only thus described but also thus is.

The Concept of Privation Revisited

I do not mean to say that shadow is not privation of light or cold the privation of heat or a donut hole the privation of the the donut ring: I mean to say that these, insofar as they might match onto the reality of evil as adequate analogies, do not fully describe or delineate the truth of the matter. For evil is not mere privation of but is also substance in reality.

Furthermore, to state that evil is but and only a privation of reality, does not thereby acquit God of the problem of evil; it only pushes back the problem a step, so that now the question is why God would allow or permit evil, if he does not cause it?

Of course, there are many theodicies to answer this, as the freewill defense or the soul-making theodicy. As good as these are, they do, however, seem to fall short.

The Creator/Creation Divide

It seems that when God decided to share himself with what is not-God and create, he of necessity had to create that which is not-God. Fundamentally, this means that everything is created, whether it coeternally exists with God in some way or other, as in his mind, before being expressed externally or it pops into his mind at some point in the everlasting eternity that he is and comes into existence: everything is created.

Being created, creation is necessarily not-God. Being that which is not-God, creation, however perfect in and of itself, is therefore not perfect as God is perfect. Since God is without any imperfections at all and since he is essentially uncreated, when he created, he necessarily created created entities, perfect not as he is perfect, being the only uncreated being, however perfect they were/are in and of themselves.

The key to getting creation and the Creator right in reality is this: insofar as creation is perfect, it is only perfect when it is wholly dependent upon the Creator, contingent as creation is.

Thus, anytime anything is independent of God the Creator, trying to function or be or exist on its own, it is evil or in a state of evil. Insofar as an entity is independent of God the Creator, that entity is going against the flow, upstream, against the current, going against the grain. As such, it fails to fall in line as it were in the created order.

Note of Importance Regarding the Created Order

Now, much evil has been perpetrated in line with this sort of thinking, as, for instance, in terms of sexuality or sexual orientation, stating that the natural, created order is one way and not another and that anyone who is against this is agains the Creator. We must here tread lightly, for while this may or may not be true, we must accord our standard of truth not in accord with an interpretation of such but with that which is actually truth.

Neither ought this line of thinking be read to mean that anyone or anything that goes against the grain is wrong, evil, or out of sync with reality or the Creator thereof. Rather, we must, with the use of wisdom and discretion as well as objective realism and rationality, examine each instance, person, or thing that goes against what we believe to be truth, examine our understanding of truth, and seek to align both our understanding as well as that which we are examining with the real and actual truth of reality, as God the Creator has established it.

Evil as a Positive Reality

Evil as a necessary privation accounts for some of the reality of evil, but not all. Evil as a necessary corollary of freewill accounts for some of the reality of evil, but not all. Evil as a necessary means by which the process of creation is completed accounts for some of the reality of evil, but not all. Evil as a positive reality, a real substance, however defined, whether a physical or nonphysical entity, but an entity of sorts nonetheless, accounts for the reality of evil these other three do not.

The Reality of Evil like the Reality of Pain

Take pain, for instance: I smash my right big two with a massive sledgehammer, and I feel pain. The pain, as a kind of thing that is “not-good” is also a good thing, however unpleasant. I do not wish to focus on the pain and its status as either good or evil, but rather on the status of the pain as a “thing” or object of existence. If I were to tear open my toe, I would not thereby be able physically locate the pain in the toe. Neither if I were to locate the pain receptors or the nerve endings in my toe would I be anymore successful in physically locating the pain itself. That’s because pain is not a physical entity, however much it is manifest in the physical.

Evil, too, though being substantial is not, to my knowledge, a physical entity, however much it is manifest in the physical world around us. Like pain, evil exists and is real, though not simply or only as a privation or negation of reality or experience, but also as a positive and real experience or entity.

The Problem of Evil Revisited

We may now well know that evil exists, whether as a privation or positive reality, but still the question remains, whence comes evil, if God is all-good and Creator of all things, or at least the one who permits all things?

It seems that evil comes of necessity in terms of creation, in that, when God created, he had to create a creation that was created. Indeed, being created, creation is contingent upon God for existence. For creation or any creature to cease to maintain fellowship with or dependence upon God the Creator is for that creation or creature to cease existence, whether in part or in fullness.

Thus, the problem of evil is one in which it comes about whenever creation disconnects from its Creator.

A Note on the Nature of Evil and God the Creator

Now, as bad as evil is, it has been stated that God in Christ Jesus has become sin, that is, evil, in order that we, his creatures, members of creation and all creation as well, might become his righteousness, that is, like unto God the Creator. Thus, as evil as evil is, God has become evil, taking it on into his very essence, and thereby and therewith destroyed the power of evil in himself.

How can he do this? Because God is so good and since evil is contingently related to God and his goodness, evil stands no chance against such goodness and is necessarily destroyed in its power, even if not in its essence. That is to say, it is laid low in the dust, dead and defeated, and anyone who messes with evil is as dead and defeated as evil is. But whoever is set free from evil by the Son is free indeed.