Have you ever wondered why God has permitted evil to exist or why He has allowed there to be a completely evil being called Satan?  In light of all the evil and suffering in the world, many people question if God is genuinely good and really cares about the welfare of mankind.  What if God did not allow evil to exist? 

In addressing this issue, the first thing we will consider is that mankind has standards of good that it uses in determining what is evil.  Peter Kreeft, Ph.D., on page 34 of Lee Strobel’s book The Case For Faith, argues that the notion of “what ought to be” is “a reality called the Supreme Good.  Well, that’s another name for God.”  He goes on to ask, “[I]f there is no God, where did we get the standard of goodness by which we judge evil as evil?”

William Craig, Ph.D., on pages 80 and 81 of the same book, says,

[I]f there is no God, then moral values are merely the products of socio-biological evolution.  In fact, that’s what many atheists think.  According to philosopher Michael Ruse: “Morality is a biological adaptation no less than are hands and feet and teeth,” and morality is “just an aid to survival and reproduction. . . .”

Or if there is no God, then morality is just a matter of personal taste, akin to statements like, “Broccoli tastes good.”  Well, it tastes good to some people but bad to others.  There isn’t any objective truth about that; it’s a subjective matter of taste.  And to say that killing innocent children is wrong would just be an expression of taste. . . .

[W]ithout God there is no absolute right and wrong which imposes itself on our conscience.

But, if God is truly good, why does He allow so much evil to exist?  Paul Little, on page 87 of his book entitled Know Why You Believe, quotes J. B. Phillips as stating, “Evil is inherent in the risky gift of free will.”  Little goes on to say,

God could have made us machines, but to do so would have robbed us of our precious freedom of choice, and we would have ceased to be human.  Exercise of free choice in the direction of evil . . . is the basic reason for evil and suffering in the world.  It is man’s responsibility, not God’s.

[M]uch of the suffering in the world can be traced directly to the evil choices men and women make.

On page 37 of Strobel’s book, Kreeft states,

[O]nce God chose to create human beings with free will, then it was up to them, rather than to God, as to whether there was sin or not.  That’s what free will means.  Built into the situation of God deciding to create human beings is the chance of evil and, consequently, the suffering that results.

[God] created the possibility of evil; people actualized that potentiality.  The source of evil is not God’s power but mankind’s freedom. . . . [O]ur freedom includes the possibility of sin. . . .

Webster’s Dictionary defines evil as “sinful,” and defines sin as “transgression of the law of God.”  Micah 7:2 says, “[T]here is no one upright [or righteous] among men.”  And, Romans 3:23 states, “[F]or all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.”  [Note:  When we quote Scripture in this article, we use the wording in the New King James Version of the Bible.] 

These scriptures indicate that everyone who has ever lived has sinned, with the exception of Jesus Christ.  But, what about the man named Job?   The first verse of the book of Job says that Job was “blameless and upright.”  Doesn’t this indicate that Job was sinless?  On page 223 of their book entitled When Critics Ask, Norman Geisler, Ph.D., and Thomas Howe, M.A., state,

God’s praise of Job was not absolute, as is clear from His later condemnation of him (in chapter 38). . . . Further, God only pronounced Job “blameless” before man, whereas Romans is speaking about no one, apart from Christ’s work, being blameless before God (cf. Rom. 3:19).

However, 1 John 3:9 declares, “Whoever has been born of God does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because he has been born of God.”  Does this scripture imply that Christians can live a sinless life? 

In his book entitled Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, Gleason L. Archer states on page 428, “[A] present infinitive in Greek implies continual or repeated action. . . . For this reason some of the more recent translations bring out the true emphasis by rendering it ‘he cannot go on sinning (NIV).’” 

Likewise, on page 539 of their book, Geisler and Howe assert,

John nowhere claims that believers are without sin or never commit a sin.  First John 3:9 is in the present continuous tense and should be translated, “Whoever is born of God does not continually practice sin.”  Conversely, if a person habitually practices sin, he is not born of God. . . . Both a believer and an unbeliever can fall into the same sin, but a believer cannot stay in it and feel comfortable.

First John 3:9 also seems to suggest that, because of our new relationship with God after we become a Christian, we should have the ability to keep from continually committing the same sins.  This does not mean a Christian has the ability not to commit any more sins.

Perhaps, the life of King David illustrates the meaning of 1 John 3:9.  David certainly did not live a completely sinless life – in fact, he was guilty of both murder and adultery.   Nevertheless, David was “born of God.”  David’s sins were exceptions in his life, not his regular way of life.  On page 201 of his book, Archer says,

The glory of God, the will of God, and the loving fellowship of God were what mattered most to King David, even though there were temporary lapses in that relationship.  But even after he had fallen into sin and failure, David knew how to trust God’s grace and forgiving love enough to confess and forsake his iniquity in an attitude of true repentance so as to get back in step with the Lord on the highway of holiness.  Such a believer is certain to be a man or woman after God’s own heart!

The fact is that everyone, except Jesus Christ, has committed many sins.  And, since every person has sinned, there is at least some evil in each one of us.  Webster’s Dictionary indicates that “evil” is a synonym for “sinful,” and that sinful can mean “tainted with” sin.  Because we are tainted (i.e., morally contaminated) with sin, evil exists in everyone, to some degree.  If God did not allow evil to exist, no one who is living today – or anyone who has ever lived -- would have been allowed to continue to live after their first sin.

Many people might argue that some sins are far more serious (i.e., worse) than others, and that therefore God should immediately eliminate the people who commit the worst sins.  But, where should the proverbial line be drawn?  Should only murderers be eliminated?  What about a person who kills but is truly not mentally competent?  What about a person who, in the process of committing a crime, unintentionally kills someone else?  What about a person who participates in an abortion, but believes that abortion is not murder?  What about a person who attempts to murder someone else but is unsuccessful?  What about a person who severely tortures someone, but does not kill them? 

In addition to giving humans free will to commit evil deeds, the Bible indicates that God is also allowing Satan to do evil deeds until such time as God implements His final judgment.  But, why would God allow Satan to continue to tempt people to commit evil acts, including heinous crimes?  Archer states on page 393 of his book,

There can be no such thing as moral goodness unless there is also the possibility of moral evil.  Without a voluntary choice of what is right, there can be no such thing as virtue; but a freedom to choose good necessarily implies a freedom to choose evil. . . .

Ultimately, Satan will be punished for the evil he has instigated.  Revelation 20:10 assures us that he will be thrown into a “lake of fire and brimstone” where he will remain forever.  And, those who have genuinely trusted in Jesus Christ for their eternal salvation will no longer be tempted to sin.

In any case, not all of the suffering that occurs is caused by evil.  There are indications that God often allows suffering to test people or to motivate them to improve their relationship with Him.  On page 41 of Strobel’s book, Kreeft makes the following statements:

Certainly there are times when God allows suffering and deprives us of the lesser good of pleasure in order to help us toward the greater good of moral and spiritual education. . . .

We know that moral character gets formed through hardship, through overcoming obstacles, through enduring despite difficulties. . . .

Scripture tells us that even Jesus “learned obedience through suffering” – and if that was true from him, why wouldn’t it be even more true for us?

Little, on page 88 of his book, says, “At times it is our reaction to suffering, rather than the suffering itself, that determines whether the experience is one of blessing or of blight.” 

But, is there not a limit to the amount of suffering and killing that God will allow?  Why does God not intervene, at least to curtail the worst suffering and mass killings, such as occurred in the Holocaust during World War II?

This raises another question:  If God is expected to protect people from severe suffering or a heinous death, where should the “line” be drawn; i.e., when should He intervene?  When a million people are involved?  When a thousand people are involved?  What about a hundred people or ten people or even just one person?  If God does intervene, He will do so according to His own timing.  Kreeft, on page 43 of Strobel’s book, says,

People aren’t getting away with it [i.e., hurting others].  Justice delayed is not necessarily justice denied.  There will come a day when God will settle accounts and people will be held responsible for the evil they’ve perpetrated and the suffering they’ve caused. . . . God will bring accountability at the right time. . . .

On page 45 of his book, Strobel quotes Augustine as stating, “Since God is the highest good, he would not allow any evil to exist in his works unless his omnipotence and goodness were such as to bring good even out of evil.”  Subsequently, on the same page of Strobel’s book, Kreeft says,

[J]ust about every human being can reflect on his or her past and say, “I learned from that hardship.  I didn’t think I would at the time, but I’m a bigger and better person for having endured it and persevered.”  Even people without religious faith are aware of that dimension of suffering.  And if we can bring good out of evil even without bringing God into the picture, you can imagine how much more, with God’s help, evil can work out for the greater good.

Furthermore, on page 39 of Strobel’s book, Kreeft states that God “has demonstrated how the very worst thing that has ever happened in the history of the world ended up resulting in the very best thing that has ever happened in the history of the world.”  He goes on to explain,

I’m referring to dei-cide [sic].  The death of God himself on the cross.  At the time, nobody saw how anything good could ever result from this tragedy.  And yet God foresaw that the result would be opening of heaven to human beings.  So the worst tragedy in history brought about the most glorious event in history.  And if it happened there – if the ultimate evil can result in the ultimate good – it can happen elsewhere. . . .

An appropriate conclusion to this topic is provided by Little on page 88 of his book.  He states that God “has fully met the problem of evil in giving his own Son, Jesus Christ, at infinite cost to himself.  The consequence of evil for eternity is forever removed; sin is forgiven. . . .”  Little goes on to say that, by not sparing His Son, “God has clearly revealed his character and dramatically demonstrated it to us in the Cross. . . .”