Jun 5
8:26 AM
Atheist Sam Harris, in his book Letter to a Christian Nation, writes: “Somewhere in the world a man has abducted a little girl. Soon he will rape, torture, and kill her. If an atrocity of this kind is not occurring at precisely this moment, it will happen in a few hours, or days at most…… statistically this girl’s parents believe – as you believe—that an all-powerful and all-loving God is watching over them and their family. Are they right to believe this? Is it good that they believe this? No. The entirety of Atheism is contained in this response.”
Atheist Sam Harris, in his book Letter to a Christian Nation, writes: “Somewhere in the world a man has abducted a little girl. Soon he will rape, torture, and kill her. If an atrocity of this kind is not occurring at precisely this moment, it will happen in a few hours, or days at most…… statistically this girl’s parents believe – as you believe—that an all-powerful and all-loving God is watching over them and their family. Are they right to believe this? Is it good that they believe this? No. The entirety of Atheism is contained in this response.”
The “Problem of Suffering and Evil” (PoSE) has been used by skeptics as an argument against Theism since at least Epicurus in the 4th century BC – and was most famously re-directed against Christianity by David Hume in the 1700s. It remains a major roadblock (and/or excuse) for self-professed Atheists and Agnostics – I’ve heard it countless times myself in many different forms.
The logical and {evidential} forms argue:
- If God exists, He is all-good (omnibenevolent), all-powerful (omnipotent), and all-knowing (omniscient).
- If He is all-good He would want to remove evil from the world.
- If He is all-powerful He could remove evil from the world.
- Suffering and evil exist in the world.
- Therefore, God {most likely} doesn’t exist, or He is not all-good, not all-powerful, and/or not all-knowing.
If premises 1-4 are true, then the conclusion (5) must follow. Can you see how premise 2 is not true? Do you also see how accepting premise 4 implies the God exists, undermining the whole argument?
Even if you could successfully accomplish both of these, it is likely to help someone during a time of personal suffering – but at that point we can point to the incarnation, life, death, and resurrection of Christ to establish how God chose to deal with the evil in the world that results from sin. God doesn’t just conquer evil/suffering He conquers through evil/suffering to answer our all our questions not with an explanation, but with a person, and with a relationship. God chose to enter in to our suffering in the person of Jesus on the cross -- who died for you and for me when we didn’t deserve it.
Derek Rishmawy gives a gospel-centered defense against the PoSE:
- If God raised Jesus Christ from the dead, we have good reason to believe both that He exists, and that He is unfathomably powerful.
- Furthermore, if He is good enough to send His only-begotten Son to die on behalf of a sinful, rebellious world He loves, He is unfathomably good.
- Next, if God is wise enough to use what is objectively the most horrifying, and initially apparently pointless, event in human history – the unjust murder of the Godman – for the salvation of the world, then it is entirely reasonable to trust He has a good enough reason for allowing the evil that He currently does.
- Finally, the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ promises that ultimately evil will be judged, removed, and made right. There is comfort and hope for the future.
If you’d like to improve your ability to contend for the Gospel without being contentious (Jude 3, 1 Peter 3:15), I’d love to hear from you! I’m currently planning—but haven’t yet worked out the details—for an apologetics-oriented study group for high-school age and older starting in August or September of this year.
Lukefeldner@pm.me.
By Luke Feldner