God in the Concept of Good and Evil
77
Many people today cannot deny that there is evil, but explaining why there is so much of it has been a debate that has been going on for quite some time. For some people, the existence of evil can only mean that a good God does not exist or there is no God. Others are angry because evil has provoked anger in them because of poverty, violence, disease and disasters, etc….. If God is an all-loving God, why would He allow such evil things to happen? The paradox of how a perfectly good God can allow evil is a valid question, but it is definitely not easy to tackle because everyone makes their own rationalization and argument through the lens of their personal experiences in life. Since God cannot be proven or disproved by man, there are those that believe, and those that are skeptical or deny any existence of God whatsoever.
In the realm of theism and atheism, there is a locking of horns on what reality is. There are many instances of once followers of the religion of "Christianity" converting to atheism and atheists being transformed into a relationship with, and a follower of Jesus Christ. The concept of what is good and evil can often be the catalyst or one or more reasons behind the conversions of those on both sides of the fence. Everyone has a story as to why their conclusions may be rational, logical, or reasonable.
The definitions to the words good and evil are relative to the basis of one’s own belief; therefore, the basis of this theme will be from the lens of what I believe, but also will acknowledge that although something may be rational, logical, or reasonable does not always equate to it being true. Something is either true or false, even though we may not have the proof.
Since words are just concepts, we cannot objectively point at good or evil and say that we can go find it in a objective sense at a particular place, or send it in an envelope to someone at a particular location. For example, we cannot see the wind, but we can see that it is similar to good and evil and the effects of it on things that we can see. A cool breeze on a hot summer’s day, or a hurricane’s devastating aftermath, can be defined by its cause and effect, and may be also defined as good or evil, within the context of a certain belief system.
The chart below may give come insight into where one's beliefs may be influenced from.
Here are some valid questions that have been posed in considering the existence of the God in the concepts of good and evil:
- Wouldn't an all-good God destroy evil or why would He even allow it?
- Wouldn't a God, who is all powerful, destroy evil?
The problem with these two questions is that they cannot be proven by man; therefore, asking the question is making an assumption based on your own rationalization that the concepts of good and evil do exist. We assume that if God is good, all powerful, and He does exist, that He would destroy what our concept of evil is on our terms. The problem with good and evil are, who is it that really makes the rules and the terms of their definitions? If we can realize that we are limited and fallible in our knowledge and understanding of our existence up to this point, that it would be arrogant to close any case we may have and deny any further pursuit in the search for clearer revelation. How can we, with our limitations, fully comprehend how God would or should behave? Do we even have the capacity to fathom the full depth and breadth of who God is?
There are those who do not believe, deny, or object to the concept of spirituality; therefore, the ones who believe in it should try to give a reasonable and intelligent response to those who believe otherwise. A belief is either true or false and only exists when an internal (spiritual) or external (objective) influence becomes reality to them.
To a follower of Jesus Christ, there is an assurance, that since there is a belief and relationship with Jesus Christ, that after physical death, there will be no more evil as it is understood to be.
And He will wipe away every tear from their eyes; and there will no longer beany death; there will no longer be any mourning, or crying, or pain; the first things have passed away.”
Revelation 21:4
The answer from a theistic perspective is that a good God is destroying, will destroy, and has victory over evil. Objectively, we can see the effects of evil everywhere today; subjectively and spiritually through His grace. God gives some revelation to His followers as to why evil exists to this day through Scripture, and our relationship with Him.
Atheism also believes in the concept of good and evil, but through a different "lens." Good and evil are derived from the concept of empathy. From this rationality, the concepts are relative, and the effects have led to the survival of the fittest, and the passed genetic traits from one generation to the next. Good and evil are effects derived from the course of measurable time.
The assumption that a good God would destroy evil because we want Him to is not valid; it is a limititation on God to fit personal preferences. God’s purposes are not yet finished, evil has not been fully destroyed because He has His own purposes for all of humanity, and it is not yet the proper time. For example, if someone was putting a race car together for a big race, but it was only assembled half-way, would it be reasonable to assume that the car is not ready, or has not been completed yet for race day. To say that it is completed, when objectively it is not, would give the impression that the person making the decision needs more understanding and knowledge of race cars an diagnosing whether the vehicle would be a good contender in a race. In the same way, God’s purposes for evil have not been finished yet until the return of Jesus Christ.
In our North American culture, we want things right now and have no patience. We want gratification and instant proof without truly and honestly attempting the task of seeking, which often takes a measurable amount of time and patience to resolve.
If evil is in opposition to God, then why has God allowed it to continue? Maybe God has patience and mercy for all of mankind up to this point, without squashing us all out of existence. Could there be a reason? I believe there is.
For the LORD knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the wicked will perish.
Psalm 1:6
Again, the problem with the concepts of good and evil are who or what actually defines the standards and their terms.
- Is the basis on what is pleasant and unpleasant, or painful and un-painful?
As life experience has shown, both good and evil are often defined in the context of the one who is experiencing it. For example, pain can determine whether we avoid something that may hurt or kill us.
- Can evil be properly defined in terms of whether someone has pain, does not like something, or it does not feel good?
- Is personal preference the determiner that there is, isn't a God, or what fully characterizes Him?
To appeal to a code of standard, one must point to the maker of the code for the true meaning or standard of the terms; otherwise, it is relative to personal opinion and empathy.
There are many accounts of skiers or snowboarders in search of the ultimate rush of laying new tracks in fresh virgin powder. In this pursuit, they often take a risk by going into the out-of- bound areas of the mountain, ignorant or defiant of the rules that have been posted. Unfortunately, in the headlines and news broadcasts, there are stories of these individuals who have been stranded down a rock face with a broken body part, but somehow they were miraculously rescued within an inch of their life. Tragically, another ends up dying in the freezing mountain temperatures overnight, before rescuers could locate or reach the missing person.
- If the pain of the one who did survive learned a valuable lesson of the consequences of this self-destructive behaviour, is that evil?
- Is God evil for allowing the stranded one to die by freezing to death without rescue?
- Is it good or evil for the winter enthusiasts to have the freedom to obey or disobey the rules of the mountain?
- Is it reasonable or unreasonable to say that because someone chose to go out of bounds, something nasty or tragic happened as a result, and for this reason, there is no God?
- Could it be, because a choice was made, a consequence was the result?
- Is it reasonable to say that if I don’t approve of God, then He does not exist. or that He is not good?
- Furthermore, what if the only people in the world that were allowed to exist were the ones you approved of? How many would you allow to exist?
Some people torture for fun, babies are aborted because of inconvenience, and extremists strap on explosives and kill in the name of their religion. What you may believe is evil may be good to someone else. The effects of good and evil are the result of the nature of mankind and the choices they make.
- Are good and evil just relative terms, or could it be that there may be an absolute standard for the concepts?
There is nothing outside the man which can defile him if it goes into him; but the things which proceed out of the man are what defile the man.
Mark 7:15
Do we really have the full knowledge and understanding that God may be right or wrong for allowing something that we don’t approve of?
- Can we really know or fully understand why a good God kills and destroys?
- Is something terrible just because we say it is?
- If God allows something, is He answerable to you?
- Is God evil because He does not answer to you?
- Do we assume to know the reasons for what God does?
- Is there a reasonable and logical reason to why God allows evil?
From what Scripture has revealed about God, He uses evil to bring about and accomplish his purposes. When we read about the atrocities in the Bible, we can interpret the event as good or evil through the lens of our limited understanding and knowledge of Him, and agree or disagree on what He has allowed to happen.
- Can we really conclude that God must be wrong because we are in disagreement with Him?
And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose.
Romans 8:28
Without good, evil would have no power. Evil is dependent upon good, but the power of good can and will continue without evil in the end. Evil is not the opposite of good, but the lack of good. The followers of Jesus Christ have the assurance that all evil has been defeated at the cross, and we are part of this victory in of our eternal destiny with Him. If God allows evil, then it must be for a good reason. Evil is anything that separates us from God and He often uses it to humble those to genuine faith and greater revelation of Him.
Here are some character traits that many consider good, but also can be used for evil.
The paradox here is that good traits can be used for the purposes of evil. It takes the power of good traits for evil to be able to accomplish anything at all. In this lens, evil has no power to do anything without good.
- Why do people strike against the hand who feeds them?
- Why do people strike out against the one who is trying to rescue them?
We do not have to fully understand the reasons why God does things, but we can try to understand that it is necessary for our benefit. Pain is necessary in teaching us the understanding of what is beneficial or not for us.
The sentences below can be good or evil in the context one chooses to read them.
- His suffering kept him from becoming prideful.
- When he saw the starving boy, he gave him bread.
- The wounded soldier limped to safety because he was not alone.
- The men put the woman and children in the safety raft ahead of themselves, and then they drowned in the frigid waters as the ship sunk into the depths.
- The man was disciplined for his actions, but learned a valuable lesson.
The appreciation of things in life often comes through a clearer understanding of the concepts we believe in.
- Without a wound, what would heal?
- Without bondage, who would know freedom?
- Without sin, who would forgive?
- Without lack, who would appreciate abundance?
- Without imperfection, who would know perfection?
- Without error, who would know a correction?
- Without dependency, who would know a necessity?
The definition of good and evil are commonly based on the assumptions derived from our own experiences and we make conclusions from them. Our realities are often based and motivated from these conclusions. Good and evil are not as cut and dry concepts as we may assume and may require a continual and/or deeper look into their true meanings. Either there is an absolute truth that we can ultimately attain, or there is just a relative understanding to theses concepts based on what feels or doesn't within the concept of empathy, where traits have been passed through the evolution of the species.
What we believe about good and evil can be true as it is false. Finding the clues that are available and pursuing them, I believe will lead to a greater understanding of our purpose in this world in the context of these concepts.
‘Call to Me and I will answer you, and I will tell you great and mighty things, which you do not know.’
Jeremiah 33:3
Related Hubs
- Free Will Implications
In our natural universe, the structure of our subjective minds and physical bodies must adhere to certain “laws” or the opposite action may lead to an undesirable effect or consequence. - Is True Reality, the Immaterial Influencing the Material?
Science has concluded that our reality is only influenced by our five senses. There is some true truth to this statement, but cannot be promoted as fullness of truth.
Comments AppreciatedLoading...
You left out spirituality.
Good and evil is a spiritual matter.The mine and heart is made of matter, and is interpreted by scientific equations of DNA,ATOMS,neurons,elements and cells.
There is no such equations in a spiritual concept of who we are and how we exist in this world.
Demons is spiritual and so are their affects within our bodies of existence.The mind and heart have Separate functions within our terrestrial bodies.
Just for the record.
@Apostle Jack: I'm not sure that you were addressing me, but I'm going to proceed as if you were.
I don't believe in your supernatural world. This doesn't mean that they don't exist, of course, but it does mean that I discount them in intellectual dialogue.
We are our bodies. There is no soul, and no spirit. There are no demons.
For several years I have also been interested in the question of whether evil is the opposite of good or merely the absence of righteousness. Thanks and keep up the good work.
@PlanksandNails: My nickname is "Chasuk," not "Chasuck." :-)
When humans debate -- which is what we are doing here -- they are (at the very least) engaging in a logical argument. Logic is the codification of the principles of reasoning and inference, and we accept it a priori. Most non-trivial discourse depends on it. Pragmatically, then, we accept that logic is universally applied. If we didn't, then the interaction we are having now would be pointless. Of course, this interaction may indeed be pointless, but I have to believe that it isn't before I invest time or energy on it.
I'm not saying that I don't enjoy exchanging opinions. Not every exchange has to concern factual claims. I prefer author X to author Y, and film X to film Y. For reasons that I haven't analyzed, the mutual sharing of this information -- of opinion -- is deeply satisfying.
I am an atheist, but I don't deny that God exists. Your phrasing -- intentionally or not -- gives the theist the advantage, in the form of the rhetorical presupposition of God's existence. I don't disbelieve in God, but I don't believe in him. The difference is subtle, but -- in my opinion -- important.
To be more precise, I am an agnostic atheist.
I remain agnostic on literally all claims of fact, although for practical reasons I do accept most scientific claims. However, I only accept them provisionally. I happily discard them if a later theory is better supported by the evidence. I would discard heliocentrism with sufficiently convincing evidence.
I'm not concerned with what might be objectively true in another galaxy, only this one. I also don't believe in anything spiritual or immaterial, except in a metaphorical sense.
Thank you for the exchange.
@PlanksandNails: I doubt that we will ever have universal -- or even local -- harmony. If we eventually achieved it, I don't know that I would want to live in such a world. First, because, speaking personally, it is the differences that make life satisfying more than the similarities. Second, because I can't think of any way in which it might be achieved that wouldn't compromise our freedom. I value freedom more than harmony.
As far as conviction goes, I don't believe that all convictions are equally created. I judge by the fruits of conviction.
"By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?" (NIV, Matt. 7:16).










Chasuk Level 5 Commenter 12 months ago
Gottlieb's first mistake is in dividing knowledge into only two categories: Realist (there is one correct answer), and Perspectivist (there are multiple correct answers).
For all questions of fact, there is one correct answer. For all questions of opinion, there are multiple correct answers.
God either exists, or he doesn't. This makes his existence a question of fact.
When we argue questions like the problem of evil, we are arguing claims about God, not the question of his existence. We are presupposing his existence for the sake of that argument. Any conclusions that we draw are conditional upon that assumption.
If I claimed the existence of an entity called an Ethyrgylmpus, arguing about its behavior might be entertaining, but it could not answer the separate question of the Ethyrgylmpus's factual existence.