Skeptics try to use the existence of evil to disprove God's existence. The argument goes like this: If an all powerful God existed, he would stop bad things from happening. Since He doesn't, He must not exist. But we have to ask ourselves: Does the existence of evil argue against God's existence or for it?
Some have said (and I agree) that the existence of evil does more to prove God's existence than disprove it. Think about it...For you to be outraged against evil, there has to be such thing as evil. And there can only be true evil is there's such thing as "right" and "wrong". And right and wrong can only exist if God exists too.
C.S. Lewis used to deny God's existence because of the evil and suffering he saw in the world. He reasoned that an all good and all powerful God couldn't exist because if he did, he would surely put an end to all evil. But as he thought about it he realized that the evolutionary process of natural selection couldn't be responsible for his internal moral compass (for natural selection depends on the death, destruction and violence of the strong against the weak). So he came to realize that in the same way creation points towards a creator and a design points towards a designer, so an internal sense of right and wrong points towards Moral-Standard Giver (who Christians call God).
Some have said (and I agree) that the existence of evil does more to prove God's existence than disprove it. Think about it...For you to be outraged against evil, there has to be such thing as evil. And there can only be true evil is there's such thing as "right" and "wrong". And right and wrong can only exist if God exists too.
C.S. Lewis used to deny God's existence because of the evil and suffering he saw in the world. He reasoned that an all good and all powerful God couldn't exist because if he did, he would surely put an end to all evil. But as he thought about it he realized that the evolutionary process of natural selection couldn't be responsible for his internal moral compass (for natural selection depends on the death, destruction and violence of the strong against the weak). So he came to realize that in the same way creation points towards a creator and a design points towards a designer, so an internal sense of right and wrong points towards Moral-Standard Giver (who Christians call God).
You could rightly state that one can't believe in evil without also believing in God. As Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga has written “...A secular way of looking at the world has no place for genuine moral obligation of any sort...and thus no way to say there is such a thing as genuine and appalling wickedness. Accordingly, if you think there really is such a thing as horrifying wickedness then you have a powerful...argument for the reality of God.”
In other words, if evolution explains the origins of life and there is no God, then there’s also no right or wrong. If evolution explains life, we have no obligation to do what’s “right” and no accountability for doing what’s “wrong” because in a universe where God doesn’t exist, there’s no such thing as right or wrong. So again - in order to be outraged against evil and suffering, “right” and “wrong” have to exist. And “right” and “wrong” only exist if God does too.
No comments:
Post a Comment