If God, Why Evil?

I just picked up a copy of Norman Geisler's latest book (If God, Why Evil?) and read a few chapters today. Interestingly, Geisler seems to be a Molinist. At least, his solution to the problem of evil is a Molinist one. Even more interestingly, Geisler's work is endorsed by evangelicals such as Josh McDowell, Franklin Graham, Ron Rhodes, Gary Habermas, Paige Patterson (who also endorsed Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach) and Philip Roberts. More Molinists?

A world of free creatures who never choose to sin is logically possible, for there is no logical contradiction in the basic premise. However, it may be that God in His infinite foreknowledge foresaw that no such world would actually materialise. That is, He knew in advance when He created this world that no such world as one with free creatures, all of whom would never sin, would actually come into being. In other words, He foresaw that every world of free creatures He could ever make would have some who would freely choose to sin.

- Norman L. Geisler, If God, Why Evil?

It is possible that God could not have created a universe containing moral good (or as much moral good as this world contains) without creating one that also contained moral evil. And if so, then it is possible that God has a good reason for creating a world containing evil.

- Alvin Plantinga, The Free Will Defence

The nature of an all-good God assures us that this world, which He did create, is the best one achievable without violating anyone's free will. As has been shown, no other world is morally superior to this one in which all moral agents are free, where sin is permitted, where sin is defeated, and where the greater virtues are attained by the maximum number of people. All other worlds are not moral, not possible, not achievable with free creatures, and/or morally inferior. This present world is not the best of all possible worlds, but it is the best of all possible ways to the best of all achievable worlds.

So if God knew this world would be as evil as it is, then why did He choose to make it? Because He is the best of all beings possible and, as such, He must produce the best of all worlds actually possible (if He is going to create). Permitting this evil world is the best of all possible ways to produce the best of all possible worlds.

Our own societies are an illustration of this point. We permit cars, boats, and airplanes knowing there will be accidents and deaths. Nonetheless, we deem that the end of human freedom, mobility, and happiness justifies permitting (though discouraging) the evils we know will sometimes happen. God does the same with His world.

As for the objection that God is employing an illegitimate "end justifies the means" ethic, we note a crucial difference. God is not producing or promoting evil means to attain a good end. He is permitting them. A good parent permits a possible accident every time he permits his teenager to drive the family car; however, he is not promoting it. Likewise, no reasonable person beats his head on a wall because it feels so good when he stops; however, one does permit the pain of the dentist chair in order to produce the good results. God allows evil to produce the greater good.

- Norman L. Geisler, If God, Why Evil?

"You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done, the saving of many lives." - Genesis 50:20 (NIV)

Link: A Higher Freedom (15 May 11)