Doesn't the existence of evil disprove God?
Some suggest that the mere existence of evil proves that there isn't a God. I mean, surely if there was, He wouldn't allow all this, right?
"Why does God let bad things happen," doesn't disprove God. It only questions Him.
Some suggest that the mere existence of evil proves that there isn't a God. I mean, surely if there was, He wouldn't allow all this, right?
Look, this argument is a solid one. In fact, it rattles any honest Christian to the core when they face the hardest circumstances in life.
​
But, there are good answers to be found here. First is the "non-good god," theist answer. If there is a god, that god doesn't have to be good.
​
Then, there is the question of if there is a good God...
​
It's at this point that the question of what is evil must be answered. This is a question that has been wrestled with for thousands of years, and it is actually at the heart of the question itself. It's called the "problem of evil."
​
One of the challenges is that for the person who rejects the idea of a good God, the definition of evil must be subjective or relative at its root. That is to say the we as individuals or as a group, self-define evil.
If we question God's goodness in allowing evil, we actually make an assumption that we, apart from God, get to determine what qualifies as evil. It makes an errant assumption that one can put God in a box based on personal and/or societal opinions.
​
However, if we choose to address the question by the very definition that the Christian operates by, we do so with integrity, as our question seeks to show the Christian their contradictory values. Yet, such an argument won't land with the Christian who holds that evil in its most accurate definition is defined simply as - actions and lifestyles that render separation from the Lord.
​
For the Christian, the answer is a simple one, God allows evil in that He doesn't require His creation to love Him.
Regardless of the Christian perspective, one point still holds - God is sovereign, and people have a will. Sure, various Christians explain this differently, but the point is that people's will is either oriented toward God or not, and He allows those who are separate from Him to act as such because they choose to. Were He to force all of creation to act in perfection at all points in time, the human will itself would cease to exist. We would simply be following the programming given us.
​
You see, evil exists because God is not a dictator. Evil doesn't disprove God. Rather, it proves Him all the more.
One might point to Bible passages that describe God doing evil to disprove His goodness. I'll address this in brief. First, there are things He does that people might call evil based on their own personal moral definitions, and such definitions would be getting back to my earlier point about subjectivism/relativism.
​
Others might point to verses like Isaiah 45:7, Amos 3:6, and Lamentations 3:38? To be sure, the English translations might be better rendered "calamity" in a couple of these passages. But, even if one refuses this definition for some reason, what I've said still holds water unto itself. If in fact God created evil, it's not in that He directly did something against His nature. Rather, He openly allowed people to have a will.
​
My wife and I gave birth to a child. Our child's existence necessitates that our child may choose not to follow us or listen to us.
​
The act of creation is an act of love, and that act allows the other to be "apart from" but desires relationship nonetheless. The existence of evil is proof of God, not disproof.
​
Reference Points:
1. It might be argued that humanity's desire and yearning for morality actually prove God also. In that, a moral will must stem out of something absolute. Otherwise, that moral will is without rooted merit--because it will shift with opinions, desires, and fears. Such absolute morality is inherently derived from a Creator. Romans 2:14-15 says that, "Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. So they show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts either accusing or defending them "