The Human Limitations of Unreasonable Atheism (Part 14): “The Problem of Evil” (Part A)

In the previous two articles, we examined examples of “definitional disproofs” of God, including: 1) perfection and a man-made definition of imperfect virtue cannot co-exist in God, and 2) a perfect God who deserves complete submission and worship is incompatible with autonomous human moral agency. Of course, no orthodox theologian would disagree with the first claim, but none would ever apply a human and imperfect virtue to a God of perfect power, holiness, and righteousness. The argument does not apply to the God of Scripture. As for the second claim, not only is submission to a perfect moral authority consistent with moral agency, it forms the most reasonable choice among the options continually available to moral agents. We would be foolish to trust the imperfect and sinful over the God of perfect knowledge, wisdom, power, and holiness. Of course, submission to God does contradict autonomous moral agency. Yet, to seek independence from the One who gave us life and all good things, apart from whom we have nothing, and to whom we owe all love, honor, and obedience comprises the essence of sin and should not be desired.

Moreover, fallen and finite man as an autonomous ultimate authority certainly contradicts God as the only supreme authority, but how does this obvious truth make God impossible? It does, however, display the need of repentance for those exalting their own perspective, opinion, and preference to the place of ultimate authority over God. Kant’s claim that “kneeling down or groveling on the ground, even to express your reverence for heavenly things, is contrary to human dignity” speaks volumes about the sinful heart that refuses to love and honor our infinite and benevolent Creator and Sustainer, but says nothing about God’s existence, except that many people do not like it and view God as an obstacle to their presumed authority and independence.

Deductive Evil Disproofs
We come to the second category of arguments against God’s existence, what the editors call “deductive evil disproofs,” or variations of “the problem of evil.” ^[1] In the interest of brevity, the present article provides some helpful background, while future posts will address specifics. In general, denials of God built on the problem of evil enlist the same irrational assumption that underlies and undermines every argument against God—that finite and fallen people can speak with authority about things infinitely beyond them without God’s explanation. Mystery, the limits of human understanding, and unproven or unjustified premises will also demonstrate how logical and theological riddles need not worry believers. We will also see how appeals to the problem of evil to deny God display the unbelievers’ need of the Gospel of Christ.

Noisy Dust
In the opening paragraph of the first disproof appealing to the existence of evil, the author portrays belief in God as unsupportable and irrational, as embracing that which our own beliefs disprove. ^[2] We will see, however, that belief in God is logical and reasonable. Also, the mistaken notion that deductive proofs are the greatest evidence for the existence of God will be examined. Logic is necessary and vitally important for right thinking, yet most things are known before or without a process of deductive reasoning, and often with a greater certainty than a logical argument can provide. Knowing how and why this is true gives a better understanding of the nature of knowledge, proofs, why belief is reasonable, and why unbelief is without excuse.

The assumption that the miniscule can speak with authority about the ultimate, infinite, and transcendent underlies all denials of God’s existence. Alongside this stands the notion that what we cannot understand or logically demonstrate cannot exist or be true. In other words, reality in and beyond the universe is restricted to what we can comprehend. Atheists seem unaware or unwilling to admit that their entire enterprise stands on such an unreasonable idea. And as we will see, this belief governs every expression of the problem of evil.

Focus on the Foundation
Therefore, any serious discussion of God’s existence should consider the assumptions behind the claims and recognize the severely limited vantage point from which people speculate about God and ultimate realities. And again, every argument built on irrational, unjustified, or false assumptions is unsound.

Smaller than Dust
Now, for some perspective…