I naturally favor empirical evidence over philosophical evidence, but philosophy is important. Philosophy explores the logical implications of beliefs. If analysis of our beliefs leads to logical contradictions, we know there’s a problem somewhere. Philosophical evidence can help us reduce uncertainty and find what’s true. In addition, philosophy can help guide us to goodness.
Truth and Goodness. I look for goodness as I seek truth. Knowing that uncertainty abounds in the questions we are exploring, we should always strive to err on the side of goodness. We look for truth with intellectual integrity, recognizing unpleasant truths when the evidence strongly favors them, but ultimately, we want to use truth for goodness as much as possible. I want to apply whatever truth evidence reveals in a way that will make the world a better place.
Religion magnifies this principle. Followers of various religions and philosophies generally believe that their ideas make the world better. Opponents often counter with flaws in faith practices that lead to oppression and suffering.
Critics of Christianity claim the God of the Bible is a tyrant who encourages sexism, racism, and brutality. Even though evidence indicates that much of the Bible is historically accurate and divinely inspired, do we want to embrace the message if it makes people cruel? Can we interpret uncertain passages of the Bible with a goodness bias, trusting that the message God intended was something good for humanity instead of aggressive interpretations that have led to crusades, inquisitions, etc.? I’ll save some of these questions for the next chapter on theology. In this chapter I want to look at what philosophy can tell us about truth and goodness. You’ll see that calling the God of the Bible evil comes from a hasty-generalization fallacy that focuses strictly on problem passages.
If the Bible is a message from God, you would expect it to have a positive influence on people who read it, and it does. Nothing in the history of the world has changed so many lives as the Bible. We’re surrounded by believers who can share how the Bible has changed their lives for the better. Walk into any Christian church and ask for testimonies of how the Bible has affected people’s lives and you’ll be overwhelmed. Sadly, there are many examples of suffering and oppression handed out in the name of Christianity also. There are some pretty offensive passages in the Bible that seem harsh, even evil. If there is a true and good message there, how do we find it?
In my study of scripture and life I believe God wants us to find love and repentance. Selfishness (putting our own needs and desires first) multiplies pain and suffering and ultimately leads to torment. Selfishness is never satisfied. God wants us to repent from selfishness, turning to love. There are many types of love. I’m referring to altruistic love, choosing to put the needs and desires of others above, or at least equal to, our own.
This philosophy has become my foundational perspective for all that I do. I find it in the Bible, but it also appears in various forms among the teachings of other religions and philosophies. My knowledge of history and sociology tells me that the world is a better place when people live by this philosophy. I even see it in science. Love may not make the world go around, but it does help life to thrive as we spin on this small sphere in our vast universe. If the creator made this expansive universe and our amazingly special planet just so we could live and experience love, that is a grand demonstration of love and goodness.
But what about all the pain and suffering and death? What about the problem passages in the Bible that seem so harsh? How do we reconcile these things with a powerful, loving God? Those are some of the apparent philosophical contradictions we must address if we want to believe Christianity is true and good.
In this chapter I’m exploring the feasibility of the Christian concept of God. Is it possible for a powerful, good, loving Creator as presented in the Bible to exist?
Good Creation. Is the universe really good? I find the universe exceedingly beautiful and good beyond comprehension. It’s a wonder of wonders that grows more wonderous the more we learn.
Creation critics like to point to the emptiness of space, the rarity of life, the brutality of life, etc., as evidence that the universe couldn’t have been created by a loving God. They see the universe as harsh, and if it was created, the creative power must be indifferent.
I strongly disagree.
There’s a cliché that “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.” I would modify that to say, “Beauty is all around us; we just need to learn how to see it.” Perhaps another cliché applies better, “Everything is beautiful in its time.” The writer of Ecclesiastes seems to agree. [92]
There really is no emptiness in our universe. Light (at all electromagnetic wavelengths) permeates all of space. Matter also exists in the vacuum of space, sometimes in very small quantities. Where matter concentrates, we have wonders! Galaxies, stars, planets, nebula, black holes, etc. At this seemingly mundane and remote location in the universe we have the greatest wonders of all—life, intelligence, and love. Death (even extinctions) makes room for new life, more wonderous beauty. Imagine it from the perspective of a timeless creator who sees it all. Time is just a dimension that allows for nearly limitless possibilities.
(For humans to deliberately or negligently kill, destroy and drive to extinction is not good. It’s only good as a natural process in this finite world.)
You can dismiss this all as sentiment if you want, but I think this is the creator’s purpose, the meaning of our existence. God created something very good.
Psychopathic Monster-God? The God of the Bible seems to exhibit conflicting admirable and offensive attributes. Let’s look as some of the admirable attributes first .
1. Creative. “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”[93] God created incomprehensible wonders and beauty in this universe. When I consider its vastness, I’m spellbound. When I consider the intricacies of life down to the molecular machines that run our cells, I’m awestruck. When I consider the physics of subatomic particles and how they produce the chemistry of the universe, I’m overwhelmed. But the most glorious thing in all God’s creation is love, especially when humans with God-given free will, choose to love. The beauty of all that God created leaves me in worshipful admiration.
2. Caring. “The Lord God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him.’”[94] Genesis shows God’s concern for the humans he created by recognizing and providing for our companionship need. That was only the beginning though. All through the Bible God shows concern for his people, working to provide for their needs and redeem them from their selfish condition. The Gospel accounts show God’s caring through frequent healing, teaching, and provision of Jesus Christ.
3. Compassionate. “In the course of time Hannah became pregnant and gave birth to a son. She named him Samuel, saying, ‘Because I asked the Lord for him.’”[95] God often responded to the desperate cries of his people. When we suffer, he longs to deliver us from our suffering. The birth of Samuel clearly displays this attribute. Hannah pleaded for a son out of torment over her barrenness, and God responded with compassion, giving her Samuel. This is just one of many times God’s compassion shines throughout the Bible.
4. Loving. “This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.”[96] God demonstrates his love repeatedly in the Bible, most notably by taking on human form to suffer and die for our salvation!
5. Merciful. “When God saw what they did and how they turned from their evil ways, he relented and did not bring on them the destruction he had threatened.”[97] Jonah warned the people of Nineveh that God was going to punish them for their wickedness. When they repented with great regret and sincerity, God had mercy and spared them from the punishment they deserved. Whether you believe this to be a literal event or an allegorical story, it communicates God’s mercy. God responds mercifully if we repent with contrite hearts. He saves us today through that same merciful response to repentance.
6. Faithful. “’Never again will I destroy all living creatures, as I have done.’”[98] The OT is littered with promises God made and never once does he fail to fulfill his promises. After rescuing Noah and his ark full of animals, God promised never to destroy all living things on earth again, no matter what evils humans persist in. Whether you see this story as a literal event or allegory, the Biblical message gives us a faithful God who keeps his promises.
7. Generous. “So God said to (Solomon), ‘Since you have asked for this and not for long life or wealth for yourself, nor have asked for the death of your enemies but for discernment in administering justice, I will do what you have asked. I will give you a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be. Moreover, I will give you what you have not asked for—both wealth and honor—so that in your lifetime you will have no equal among kings. And if you walk in obedience to me and keep my decrees and commands as David your father did, I will give you a long life.’”[99] Throughout the OT God blesses the Israelites abundantly whenever they make an effort to do what’s right. This eagerness to bless abundantly is clear when God is pleased with King Solomon, offering to grant him a wish. When Solomon asks for wisdom, God is so pleased that he blesses him and the entire nation of Israel beyond anything they had contemplated.
These 7 items make a small dent in listing God’s attributes as described in his creation and in the Bible, but they’re a good place to start. A critical thinker should already be thinking, “Yes, but, what about …,” and you can list a few negative attributes that we might be impressed with as we read the Bible, such as harsh, violent, demanding, etc. God’s promises of terrible suffering for the Hebrew nation if they break their covenant with God cause my heart to shudder. The plagues he poured out on the Egyptians move me to pity for them despite the evil oppression they wrought on the Hebrews. The relentless slaughter faced by Israel at the hands of enemies sent by God to punish them makes me cringe.
When people like Richard Dawkins say the God of the Bible is cruel and expound on his cruelty with long lists of despicable attributes, I can’t fully blame them. Some passages they cite as evidence of God’s cruelty are taken out of context and treated as literal when the language is actually anthropomorphic or metaphorical. But there are some that simply defy moral sensibility.
[92] Holy Bible, Ecclesiastes 3:1-11.
[93] Holy Bible, NIV, Genesis 1:1.
[94] Holy Bible, NIV, Genesis 2:18.
[95] Holy Bible, NIV, 1 Samuel 1:20.
[96] Holy Bible, NIV, 1 John 4:9.
[97] Holy Bible, NIV, Jonah 3:10.
[98] Holy Bible, NIV, Genesis 8:21.
[99] Holy Bible, NIV, 1 Kings 3:11-14.
I’m convinced from personal experience, evidence, and reason that God is real, God is good, and the Bible is a message from God. So how do I reconcile Bible passages that seem abhorrent in my own eyes? I’ve considered a number of possibilities.
1. Not God’s Word. Perhaps the Bible isn’t perfect. Maybe the passages that portray God as harsh, angry, violent, cruel etc., aren’t really God’s word. Perhaps those passages contain human error of authors who drifted from their divine inspiration and misrepresented God.
2. Ancient Mindset. Perhaps those portions are messages from God that spoke to people of a different culture and mindset. Perhaps they carried a message vital to a certain time and place in history. We can understand the messages, but they were only appropriate for the culture of the time. Those messages could be irrelevant to us today.
3. Lost Meaning. Perhaps we can’t even understand those portions of scripture because they were written by and to a people with a cultural mindset so far removed from our modern mindset the meaning is lost.
4. Balance. Perhaps those attributes are the balancing side of a loving, just God. Perhaps, as the ancient Chinese yin-yang philosophy implies, true goodness must be a balance of discipline and mercy, just punishment and forgiveness, forcefulness and compassion, etc.
5. Necessity. Perhaps those passages reflect a necessary part of God’s character. It could be that God is loving, kind, compassionate, merciful, generous, and all those great things, but as creator and master of the universe he must, at times, execute harsh, violent responses to events within his creation in order to be righteous, just and holy.
6. For the Best. Perhaps actions by God that seem unconscionable to us were for the best. We can’t see how, because our vision is limited, but an all-knowing God can foresee all possible futures and know what’s best. His actions could be “like the removal of cancerous growths, threats to Israel’s (or humanity’s) fundamental spiritual health, sometimes requiring radical surgery.”[100]
7. All Knowing Justice. Perhaps the suffering that seems cruel to us is deserved and just. If God sees the hearts of all people, he can administer justice, ensuring no one suffers more than the corruption of their heart deserves. It’s possible that human suffering is just, and anyone who escapes suffering has God’s mercy to thank.
8. Allegory. There’s reason to believe some segments of the OT that Christians traditionally believed literally are actually allegory, such as the first 11 chapters of Genesis and the book of Job, due to the writing style [101] and contradictions with evidence revealed by science.[102] We have reason to trust that even those stories were inspired by God for theological application. Condemning God as a monster for killing everyone in a flood or allowing Satan to wipe out Job’s family commits the error of applying an allegorical story as literal history .
As an evidentialist, I have difficulty considering most of these possibilities because they are philosophical in nature and lack validating or invalidating evidence. Evidence strongly supports the allegory point, but the others rely more on speculation than evidence. Some fit better into my personal value system than others, but that’s not a good standard for truth.
Truth exists, but I will not presume to know the truth in this matter for certain. I believe that some, perhaps all, of the ideas above are true, but the complete truth probably stretches beyond these ideas. It’s okay to, “protest divine acts of violence and question divine actions.”[103] Some of God’s behavior in the Bible seems, “inscrutable and incredible, and even distasteful … but the divine will is not determined by human sensitivities or values.”[104]
For someone on the edge of abandoning their faith, several of these possibilities stand out with sensible reasoning to trust. I’ve long favored the concept that only God knows the future so only he can pass such harsh judgement. He could order complete destruction of pagans in the promised land because he knew how easily the Hebrews would be led astray by their idolatrous beliefs. It’s a terribly harsh judgement, but if God knows all possible future outcomes, we can trust that his actions are for good in the end. Also, he created everything so he has the ultimate right to do as he sees fit with his creation. How can I question the wisdom and goodness of the Creator of this vast universe? Who am I to sit in judgement of him?
This explanation is logical, but doesn’t elicit a warm feeling of satisfaction. It’s a severe, but rational possibility. For people struggling emotionally with the harsh realities of the Bible and even modern life, this answer isn’t very appealing. That’s the way reality is sometimes. We don’t always find truth giving us a nice, comfortable feeling.
The idea that ancient authors may have misrepresented God rests more comfortably in my soul. Maybe they mistakenly thought God directed them to kill women and children. People perceive God from their cultural context and value system. Understanding the OT from the perspective of the ANE culture can give it a better perspective.
Many apparently merciless characterizations of God would not have appeared that way at all to the ancient Hebrews. For centuries God rewarded the Hebrews when they worshiped and obeyed him, but punished them when they disobeyed and worshiped other Gods. When I read those historical books, God seems quite harsh from my modern perspective, but life was different back then. They saw God’s actions as patient and merciful because he never gave up on them. “But in your great mercy you did not put an end to them or abandon them, for you are a gracious and merciful God.”[105] In the culture of the ANE, any people who rebelled so many times could be annihilated. The fact that God merely punished them and tried again shows great restraint from their perspective. What appears to be a contradiction in the character of God to us isn’t a contradiction at all if you understand the message intended between the authors and their readers.
There’s another aspect of the relationship between God and Israel that most modern people don’t understand. God had entered into a covenant relationship with the Hebrews and they agreed, binding themselves in obedient loyalty to God. Within the ANE culture, a covenant relationship was more serious than a modern contract or treaty. It was even more serious than modern marriages. To break such a covenant was the most despicable thing anyone could do. Under their value system, Hebrews who worshipped gods other than their God, Yahweh, the God they had entered into covenant with, deserved the worst suffering and death. Yahweh is just in executing punishment against Israel and merciful by sparing even a remnant.
This perspective sheds light on the OT portrayal of Yahweh being a jealous god. When I first read the OT as a teenager, the frequent references to God being jealous bothered me. I was taught that jealousy is a sin, but people of the ANE understood it differently. The Hebrews had entered a covenant relationship with the Creator of the universe, and then abandoned him to worship fake gods, pieces of wood, stone, or metal.
I had a friend whose wife left him for a man she’d met on the internet. My friend was very jealous and deeply hurt that his wife would abandon him and their 2 children for a man she’d never even met in person. She only knew him from photos, email, and on-line chat! My friend longed to have his wife back and received her eagerly when she did return, some months later. The man she met on the internet was nothing like she’d imagined.
I see God’s jealousy as similar to that. He longs for a relationship that is rightfully his and is actually good for us too. When we abandon God, he suffers because he loves us, but we suffer too because God is good for us. This reality is illustrated very graphically in the book of Hosea when the prophet’s wife abandons him for a life of prostitution and Hosea ends up redeeming her by paying a slave’s price for his wife. This reflects God’s relationship with humanity. That is a fundamental message of the Bible. God, our creator, is wooing humanity into the relationship we were created for.
Some violent passages of the Bible contrast with peaceful passages in extreme ways. When conquering the promised land, the Israelites usually tried to kill all the Canaanites, sparing none (starting at Deuteronomy 2:34), but in the NT, Jesus tells us to turn the other cheek and love our enemies (Matthew 5:38-48). Such contrasts can be consistent with the balance between violence and peace (possibility #4 above). The yin-yang duality makes different actions appropriate for different circumstances. Just because the contrast seems extreme doesn’t mean they are contradictory. Such paradoxical extremes come with the reality of balance between contrasting attributes that can work for good.
Killing everyone during a conquest also falls under the extreme cultural differences I address with possibilities #2 and #3 above. The concepts of God seeing the future to know what’s best (#6) and knowing the hearts of everyone (#7) also apply. Possibility #1 might be the best choice. Genocide was an acceptable practice at that time and the Israelites could have assumed God commanded it when he really didn’t. That’s an attractive possibility for non-fundamentalists willing to accept that the Old Testament may not be a perfect, infallible message from God. That’s the explanation I want to be true in my subjective nature. I prefer to think most of the offensive content in the Bible isn’t really from God at all.
Even as I explain these justifications, my heartstrings tug at my mind, telling me they aren’t good enough. They are logical, and in my mind I believe they can be true. But in my heart, I feel this response still isn’t complete. I believe the complete truth is better than what I’m presenting here, better than my current understanding. But I’m content with this understanding for now. That too, is Biblical, as the Apostle Paul wrote, “For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully …”[106]
[100] M. Daniel Carrol and J. Blair Wilgus. Wrestling with the Violence of God: Soundings in the Old Testament. (Eisenbrauns, 2015), page 50.
[101] Longman, page 11.
[102] Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos.
[103] Carrol and Wilgus. Page 50.
[104] Carrol and Wilgus. Page 49.
[105] Holy Bible, NIV, Nehemiah 9:31.
[106] Holy Bible, NIV, 1 Corinthians 13:12.
Evil, Death, and Suffering. Most people who object to harsh passages in the Bible also object to unpleasant realities of life. Many philosophers have written on this topic. Some books and articles I’ve read are very good, offering insightful perspectives that influenced my search for what’s true and good.
The difficulties of life pose challenging questions, not because there are no reasonable answers, but because our emotions resist accepting some answers, and evidence favoring any specific answer is inconclusive. Atheists propose a logical possibility that perhaps there is no God, and these difficulties exist as a byproduct of life. That prospect seems hopelessly grim and unacceptable to most people. The challenge for Christians is to explain how evil, death, and suffering are compatible with the concept of a powerful, personal, loving God. That’s the big question.
How can evil, suffering, and death exists in a world created by a good, loving, powerful God?
Suffering includes pain, anguish, and anything else humans find extremely unpleasant. Many people consider death and the struggles at the end of life to be evil. I don’t, but it certainly qualifies as unpleasant. Evil is an act, or refusal to act, made by deliberate choice, causing cruelty or injustice. Evil is usually (perhaps always) motivated by selfishness.
Many people consider extreme injustice and quickly conclude a good, all-powerful God cannot possibly exist. Rejecting God based on emotional examples is a rhetorical blend of emotional appeal and hasty generalization fallacies. Atheist antagonists like Richard Dawkins often cite such injustice as if it’s an absolute proof supporting their rejection of God. The Atheist Debater’s Handbook offers an example of an infant burning to death as standard material to disarm theists.[107]
Traditional Christian Philosophy. For centuries Christians have claimed that death, suffering, and evil exist in the world due to human sin. Sin exists because we have free will, which is a very good thing. The goodness of free will far outweighs the evil in the world. This traditional answer is a logically valid argument; if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true, but if even one premise is false, the conclusion may not be true.
Premise 1: God created humans with free will.
Premise 2: Free will is a very good thing.
Premise 3: Evil exists because humans sin, choosing to disobey God.
Premise 4: There was no death, suffering, or injustice of any kind before sin.
Premise 5: Ultimately the good overwhelmingly justifies the struggles of life.
Premise 6: God provides the means for human souls to live forever, free of evil, suffering and death.
Premise 7: It is good to create free will, to allow beings to suffer the consequences of their rebellious choices temporarily, and to ultimately rescue people from their sin.
Conclusion: God is good.
There are many challenges we can make to these premises, but if they are true, then it reasonably follows that a powerful and good God exists. My main difficulty with this argument lies in premise #4. I support premise 2 as a brute fact, a fundamental value. I believe premise 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 are rationally defendable. The fatal flaw in this argument lies in the overwhelming evidence weighing against premise #4.
Evil, as I’ve defined it, comes with injustice through human choice, but I believe death and suffering were part of God’s creation long before humans made any choices at all, before humans even existed. I believe that death and suffering are part of God’s “very good” creation, not byproducts of sin. This may seem difficult, but hear me out.
Genesis Origin Stories. Traditional Christian theology assumes the first 11 chapters of Genesis are scientifically and historically accurate. This traditional theology contradicts overwhelming evidence in cosmology, physics, geology, biology, archeology, paleontology and other fields of science. Organizations like Answers in Genesis (which spends $30-40 million annually )[108] expend great effort from highly motivated idealists to develop scientific theories based on a presupposition that they call a biblical worldview. These theories rely on narrowly selected supporting evidences and speculation while contradicting well established theories strongly supported by large bodies of scientific evidence.
A few cosmology evidences that contradict theories of a short-timeframe universe include electromagnetic radiation and the speed of light, cosmic background radiation, redshift velocities, the supernova database, cosmic density components (especially mass density), helium and deuterium abundance, galaxy spread, cosmic expansion velocity, cosmic cooling rate, cosmic inflation, primordial magnetic fields, and star density.[109] Other fields of science contribute additional lists of evidence supporting billions of years for the universe, earth, and life. These evidences cannot be objectively dismissed, but young-earth proponents openly acknowledge that their ideas come from a presupposed worldview bias.
Proponents of literal Genesis origins focus on justifying their belief in the literal accuracy of the first 11 chapters of Genesis, but the primary motivation for that position is not evidence; it’s philosophy. Ken Ham frequently emphasizes that his “biblical worldview” is essential to the Christian faith because it’s the only way to reconcile death, suffering, and evil in the world if God is really all-powerful and all-benevolent. I’m proposing that there is a better way based on evidence and reason, not presuppositional philosophy.
Atheist Philosophy. Those who reject the notion of God are a small, but vocal and growing, minority in this debate. Like the extremists at the other end of the quarrel, their primary motivation isn’t really based on evidence. Most atheists start with a presuppositional philosophy that God does not exist and nothing supernatural ever happens. They have a philosophical objection to the possibility of an all-powerful, all-benevolent creator while death, suffering, and evil exist.
Evidence supporting an extremely powerful and good creator compels me to rule out the atheist perspective. The extreme improbability of our existence combined with the order, beauty, wonder, and goodness of the universe, especially life on earth, provide irresistible evidence of a powerful, benevolent creator. Death, suffering, and evil weigh against the benevolence factor, but only slightly. Reason reveals that death, suffering, and evil are most likely necessary, even beneficial, characteristics of life in this physical universe and goodness far exceeds these undesirable side-effects.
Evidential Argument for a Good Creator. The fundamental argument is not complex, but supporting the premises can be difficult because people tend to react strongly against some of them, particularly premise 4, based on their emotions or presuppositions.
Premise 1: God created humans with free will.
Premise 2: Free will is a very good thing.
Premise 3: Evil exists because humans choose to disobey God with selfish choices.
Premise 4: Death and suffering are a necessary and good part of life on earth.
Premise 5: Ultimately the good overwhelmingly justifies the struggles of life.
Premise 6: It is good:
o to create free will,
o to allow beings to suffer the consequences of their selfish choices for a limited time, and
o to ultimately rescue people from sin to freedom from death, suffering and evil.
Premise 7: God mercifully provided the means for salvation where human souls can live forever in paradise.
Conclusion: God is good.
The debate over whether God created humans with free will (premise 1) has raged for centuries. Clay Jones presents a strong case and even addresses the logical possibility of free will continuing in heaven without the negative side-effect of evil.[110] I summarize my perspective below in the “Free Will” section. Few people try to argue against premise 2 claiming that free will is bad. Nor will most people dispute premise 3 arguing that evil doesn’t result from of human choice. Even skeptics are usually willing to concede the possibility of the first 3 premises for arguments sake, but premise 4 takes us to territory that most people resist.
[107] B. C. Johnson. The Atheist Debater’s Handbook. (Prometheus, 1983), page 99.
[108] Charity Navigator. Answers in Genesis. Total Revenue and Expenses. https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/330596423. (2022).
[109] Ross, page 33-76.
[110] Clay Jones. Why Does God Allow Evil? Compelling Answers for Life’s Toughest Questions. (Harvest House Publishers, 2017), pages 145-157.
Evil. The debate of evil is really a debate over determinism, which I will address in the “Free Will” section. If you accept that God created people with free will, then evil is a natural consequence of that free will and it makes sense that a good, powerful God allowed for evil to exist in order to create people capable of choosing love with free will. If you don’t accept that free will exists then the debate over the goodness of our creator God is pointless. I would agree that a good God would not create people destined to evil with no ability to choose.
Death. We don’t like death, but if you consider the alternative, you must concede that death is a necessary, even good, characteristic of life on earth. Without death, there would be no children, no new life. The planet would either be void of life, or a stagnant presence of life forms existing in a maxed-out environment that cannot support anything more. Death makes room for fresh, new life, and allows for an endless succession of living beings to experience the wonders and beauty of life. Death allows for change and learning. Death enables more than the birth of new beings; it leads to the creation of new souls.
Most people can accept the necessity of death, but some deaths stand out as particularly unjust and senseless, like the example of a baby dying in a housefire. I address that later under the heading “Injustice.”
In this finite world it makes sense that a good, powerful God created death as a necessary condition of creating life. If spirits live on in an infinite realm, then the finite limits of this world are even less concerning.
Suffering. Generally, people consider suffering a negative aspect of life that we need to avoid as much as possible, but people also recognize positive outcomes from suffering. I have a couple USMC T-shirts with the rhetorical slogan, “Pain is weakness leaving the body.” I don’t believe that slogan as absolute truth, but in the discipline of physical fitness the concept does hold some truth. When my muscles feel sore from exercise, they are usually growing stronger.
A similar concept exists in emotional suffering. When people suffer, if they respond to it positively, they grow stronger in character. Suffering can enhance our personal perseverance, compassion, mercy, and capacity to love. I believe God created suffering as part of his “very good” creation for these beneficial outcomes. I won’t argue that suffering always produces positive outcomes, but I’m convinced that the vast majority of time it does. In the occasional events that suffering may not lead to anything good, I accept that it’s part of creation that God can’t completely eliminate without taking away our free will as I discuss under the “Injustice” heading below.
The idea that suffering improves character turns up in almost every philosophy and religion in the world, and we can observe it in people everywhere. Psychological studies link pain and suffering with depression where they seem to enhance each other, but one doesn’t appear to cause the other. There does appear to be a link to character in that pain and suffering lead to positive outcomes such as “greater appreciation for life and changed priorities, closer relationships, recognition of new opportunities in life, greater personal strength, and spiritual development.”[111], [112], [113]
One common form of suffering is pain. Human life (most animal life too) benefits enormously from pain. Pain very effectively protects us from harm and teaches us to avoid damaging situations. On rare occasions when someone is born without the ability to sense pain, or they lose it due to a disease (such as leprosy), they suffer alarming injuries, infections, and death.[114] But occasionally, like other forms of suffering, physical pain seems to malfunction, causing more harm than good, resulting in apparent unjust suffering, a natural characteristic of life in this physical world. I will argue that goodness outweighs these rare cases of apparently unjust suffering later.
Suffering is a complex topic where outcomes are unpredictable. The same life challenges can produce a person of extraordinary strength and character, or one suffering from serious mental disorders. It seems that if we respond to suffering with selfishness, it brings destruction, but with an attitude of loving sacrifice, especially within a supportive family or community, we can thrive through suffering. Scripture speaks this truth clearly:
“Everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.”[115]
“Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of compassion and the God of all comfort, who comforts us in all our troubles, so that we can comfort those in any trouble with the comfort we ourselves receive from God. For just as we share abundantly in the sufferings of Christ, so also our comfort abounds through Christ. If we are distressed, it is for your comfort and salvation; if we are comforted, it is for your comfort, which produces in you patient endurance of the same sufferings we suffer. And our hope for you is firm, because we know that just as you share in our sufferings, so also you share in our comfort.”[116]
“Consider it pure joy, my brothers and sisters, whenever you face trials of many kinds, because you know that the testing of your faith produces perseverance. Let perseverance finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.”[117]
I find strong encouragement in Romans 5:3-4 where Paul points out that suffering produces perseverance, character, and hope.
The author of Hebrews even says that Jesus was made perfect through suffering (Hebrews 2:10 and 5:8-9). If Jesus was made perfect through suffering, it seems quite reasonable that we need to suffer to grow closer to perfection. It’s quite logical and biblical to treat suffering as part of God’ very good creation, not just a product of sin.
Most people aren’t very receptive to this message when they are suffering, especially if they struggle with anxiety and depression, but given time, many people do accept it when they can consider it with objectivity. That is, until they face gross injustice. How can a powerful good God do nothing while innocent children suffer and die from abuse and natural disasters?
Injustice. Why doesn’t God supernaturally intervene to prevent senseless death, senseless suffering and evil? Clay Jones thoroughly addresses this question,[118] but I’ll briefly mention a few key points that I believe make the case strong.
God created a universe that follows the laws of physics. This is part of the beauty and goodness of creation—it’s self-sustaining and self-regulating. One of the good aspects of our free-will existence comes from the reality that our actions make a difference. If God intervened constantly to prevent undesirable consequences, our free-will would be meaningless and no longer a good thing.
Consider gravity. Sometimes people, including infants and children, fall to their death. If God always intervened to prevent gravity from hurting us, we wouldn’t take gravity seriously. The same is true of housefires and all the other dangers of life. In this very good world where the consequences of our free choices are real, we can take action to prevent falls and housefires and keep our children safe. Our efforts will never be 100% effective, but if God intervened to make them 100% effective, then our efforts would be meaningless. We wouldn’t really be saving lives.
God does intervene supernaturally on rare occasions. I’ve often asked why does he choose to intervene in one case and not another. He is sovereign and I respect his choice. Still, I can’t help but question the logic in his choices. From my observations, it seems God’s supernatural intervention primarily demonstrates his existence, his power, his authority, and his love. Evidence in nature demonstrates the same characteristics, but sometimes supernatural intervention makes the evidence much clearer. These rational observations agree with numerous proclamations in the Bible.[119]
John 14:11, “believe on the evidence of the works,”[120] in particular stands out among these references. Jesus is admonishing his disciples to have faith, and he cites the miraculous works he’s been performing as evidence for that faith. Throughout the book of John, the author repeatedly emphasizes that the miracles of Jesus demonstrate his divine power and his goodness. This purpose for miracles agrees with their use throughout scripture. (Many apologists agree with this assessment of the Bible, the book of John, and John 14:11, including William Lane Craig and Gary Habermas.[121])
The tendency to question God’s power and love flows naturally from our opposition to injustice and suffering, but logic forces us to acknowledge that a good and loving God can’t interfere with our free will all the time. Parents understand this concept because we must lovingly allow our children to suffer the consequences of their choices despite our intense desire to protect them. The goodness of free will carries more weight than the bad of injustice and suffering.
Good Overwhelms Bad. I’ve already supported the premise of my argument that death, suffering, and evil are part of God’s good creation and not incompatible with the concept of an all-powerful, all-benevolent creator, but there’s more. There’s plenty of good in this life to make it worth living, and if we go on to a better existence when we die, then the undesirables in this life can diminish to relatively nothing.
The apostle Paul taught that all our suffering in this life counts for naught in comparison to the glory of heaven.
“I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us.”[122]
If the scriptural promises of heaven are true, then the argument that God can’t be good has no foundation because heaven makes it all worthwhile. If God doesn’t exist, then neither does heaven and the injustices of this life are tragic indeed. If God does exist and really has provided an eternal paradise for those who repent, then the injustices of this life are inconsequential.
Critics often scoff at the concept of heaven, cynically referring to it as a “pie-in-the-sky” deception to manipulate religious fools. This rhetorical device has no supporting evidence though. Those who shame believers for “pie-in-the-sky” faith carry the guilt of shallow manipulation.
I’ll admit that evidence for heaven isn’t strong. We have some credible accounts of near-death experiences that can’t be dismissed as natural mental activity or hoax, but no verifiable empirical evidence. Christians believe in heaven primarily because the Bible speaks about it repeatedly and we have evidence supporting divine involvement in bringing the message of the Bible to us.
But even without heaven, the good in life far outweighs the bad. Life with self-awareness and the ability to learn is a wonder of wonders, full of joy and sorrow, pleasure and pain—countless experiences and opportunities to witness beauty. There’s so much to love about life that even those born into great difficulty can experience joy and happiness. Some individuals suffer from mental disorders inhibiting their ability to experience joy and happiness, but that doesn’t change the fact that creation is full of beauty and opportunity to experience love and much goodness. Even people suffering from depression or other joy-steeling disorders experience intermittent happiness and they can qualify for the glory of heaven.
[111] Tyler J. VanderWeele. Suffering and Response: Directions in Empirical Research. (Social Science & Medicine, March 2019), pages 58-66, Section 5.2 The Effects of Suffering, https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953619300413.
[112] R. G. Tedeschi and L. G. Calhoun. Posttraumatic Growth: Conceptual Foundations and Empirical Evidence. (Psychological Inquiry, vol. 15, 2004), pages 1-18.
[113] C. Ramos and I. Leal. Posttraumatic Growth in the Aftermath of Trauma: A Literature Review About Related Factors and Application Contexts. (Psychology, Community & Health, vol. 2, 2013), pages 43-54.
[114] Dr. Paul Brand and Phillip Yancey. Pain: The Gift Nobody Wants. (HarperCollins, 1993).
[115] Holy Bible, NIV, 2 Timothy 3:12.
[116] Holy Bible, NIV, 2 Corinthians 1:3-7.
[117] Holy Bible, NIV, James 1:2-4.
[118] Jones, (2017).
[119] Holy Bible, NIV, Judges 6:36-40; Job 38:1-42:6; John 14:11; 20:27, 30-31; Romans 1:20.
[120] Holy Bible, NIV, John 14:11.
[121] Steven B. Cowan. Five Views on Apologetics. (Zondervan, 2000), Chapter 1, Role of Argument and Evidence, An Evidentialist’s Response.
[122] Holy Bible, NIV, Romans 8:18.
Free Will.
________________________________
“There are only two kinds of people in the end: those who say to God, ‘Thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, in the end, ‘Thy will be done.’ All that are in Hell, choose it. Without that self-choice there could be no Hell. No soul that seriously and constantly desires joy will ever miss it. Those who seek find.”[123]
________________________________
C. S Lewis clearly believed in free will, and he thought that our free will likely continues for eternity. He proposed that repentant souls might choose eternally to submit to God, while unrepentant souls might continue to choose selfishness and eternally refuse to submit to God. He believed that was the key to eternal joy and glory (heaven with God) or eternal torment (hell, separated from God).
Free will means that we “make self-determined or self-caused choices.”[124] Free will is so precious that the creator of the universe promises to protect it (1 Corinthians 10:13). It’s so valuable that he allows enormous suffering to result from it without interfering. He even allows our free will to corrupt his creation because our free will is more important than the orderly expression of beauty and goodness in his creation. Our freedom to love and do good is so prized by God that he endures rejection and came to earth in human form, suffered, and died to convince us to willingly repent of our selfishness and choose to love him. Nothing in all creation seems more important to God than for us to freely choose love.
We humans instinctively value our free will. Everyone chafes at pressures that inhibit our freedom to do what we choose. Oppression of free choice is viewed as one of the greatest evils anyone can commit. Patrick Henry expressed well a common sentiment among all humanity when he said, “Give me liberty or give me death!”[125]
Human freedom to choose holds a critical role in my philosophical understanding of God and creation. Without free will, my arguments that God is good and powerful collapse like a roof missing a critical support pillar.
Many people have pushed deterministic philosophies at me using physics as their justification. In physics, everything happens by fixed laws of nature. Under any giving conditions, what happens next must flow from the rules of physics. This seems like a logical conclusion based on evidence, but it’s actually a presuppositional conclusion based on materialism.
Science only studies what can be observed in the natural world. Scientists accept as fact the things they can demonstrate using the scientific method. This method requires repeatable testing and experimentation to prove a hypothesis.
Scientists also accept theories supported by empirical evidence and reason, especially if those theories explain a large body of observable evidence. This principle is important because many things cannot be tested or validated through experimentation. The Big Bang singularity may be the most dramatic example, but there are many theories accepted as highly likely true in science that cannot be repeatably tested or validated by experiment. Most of them are supported indirectly by repeatable measurements and observations with rational implications related to the theory.
The point is that science studies the material world through repeatable phenomenon that follow the laws of physics. If you presuppose that only science reveals truth, then you’ve presupposed determinism, because science observes deterministic phenomenon. Using science to dispute free will is circular reasoning, committing a begging the question fallacy.
But science does confront us with this valid question. Scientific observation indicates that brain activity results from electrical and chemical processes that follow the laws of physics. Is it possible for a human mind to transcend the brain’s material processes that are subject to deterministic physics?
Intuitively it seems so. We all make decisions during every conscious moment of our lives. It sure appears that we make our choices freely. Could this be an illusion? I admit that seems like a real possibility, but it’s not certain, as materialistic determinists like to claim. Even physics doesn’t appear to be entirely deterministic.
[123] C. S. Lewis. The Great Divorce. (Macmillan, 1946).
[124] Jones, (2017), page 109.
[125] NCC Staff. On This Day, Patrick Henry’s Most Famous Quote. (National Constitution Center, 2021), first paragraph.
God Plays Dice. Albert Einstein said, “God Doesn’t Play Dice” when scientists developed theories of quantum physics. I liked that. The idea that the fundamental physics of our universe could be driven by random events governed only by probability bothered me. As a Christian and a student of physics it seemed to me that our universe should be more controlled, following well defined laws at its foundation. I’ve changed my mind.
I’ve had doubts for many years because the principles of quantum physics have proven true in many ways. But my faith in God has led me to belief in randomness also. With all due respect to this brilliant man, Albert Einstein was wrong. God does play dice.
It’s actually quite simple. The creator of the universe chose to make something that went beyond his control. Not that it’s out of his control. He can and does intervene, but he prefers to let creation go without constant manipulation. At least that’s what the evidence indicates, and I now see that it’s a good thing. God didn’t create a universe that was entirely determined by initial conditions. The is an element of uncertainty in the universe that’s not predetermined.
I’ve long believed that God chose to give up control over his most treasured and beautiful creation (humanity) by giving us free will. After much contemplation, I’ve decided the freedom to choose altruistic love is the most wonderful thing in all creation. The creator made something capable of thinking and feeling, making decisions, perceiving good and evil, choosing to love or hate, etc. The more I consider this, the more astonishingly wonderful I realize it is. I’ve long wondered why God doesn’t intervene more, but his intervention interferes with our free will. He intervenes just enough to help us choose love and goodness without diminishing the wonderful beauty of our freedom.
Randomness. Freedom to choose isn’t the same as random chance, but it is similar. Consider omnipotence. If God is truly infinite what does that mean? Is he actually aware of every subatomic particle in the universe, every photon, every energy field, throughout all time? Can he change the position and speed of every particle of matter whenever he wants? Can he create and annihilate matter at any time and place too? Can he insert or remove energy in any amount and any time and in any space throughout this vast universe? If God is truly that infinite, does he get bored? What would he create that would be pleasing? Perhaps an infinite God would want to create something beautiful that exists beyond his direct control. An infinite God might be pleased to create a being capable of perceiving good and evil and choosing for itself, free from the creator’s control. That same God may be pleased to create a physical universe where things happen randomly without his planning, intention, or intervention. He can set it up with probability laws that he knows will make beautiful, stunning things, but they will unfold with an element of random chance. Perhaps when God sparked the universe into existence, he set the stage for galaxies, stars, planets and all the other wonders we observe, but allowed for an element of random chance so the exact form of those heavenly bodies would unfold without any direct influence from him, and so human beings could make free choices beyond his control.
Special Intervention. God hasn’t left everything to random chance. He stacked the deck with strong probabilities, but evidence also indicates guided intervention. Perhaps God intervened to create one special planet with beautiful features far beyond the random beauty of the rest of the universe—our earth. Perhaps he intervened on that special planet to create something even more astounding—life. Perhaps he intervened again to create the most astonishing thing of all—humanity. He has certainly intervened in my life, but not enough to inhibit my free will. God appears to be a loving creator who works to help humanity without imposing on our freedom to love by choice. This view of the universe resonates within my mind and heart. It helps so much of what I observe make sense. It’s also beautiful and good beyond measure.
So, the materialistic presumption that science supports determinism fails to pass scrutiny. What does that mean to Christianity? It has far-reaching implications. The Bible is full of references that assume we have freedom to choose, from Adam and Eve’s choice to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil[126] to the gospel’s call to repentance.[127] Joshua’s appeal, “Choose this day whom you will serve,”[128] speaks to all people.
God can’t make his existence and power too obvious because that diminishes our ability to choose to believe and obey him. Clay Jones wrote:
“God could make his presence and power so evident that everyone would always do the right thing—whether they wanted to or not. … The Lord gives enough evidence of His existence so that those who want to believe will have their beliefs justified, but not so much evidence that those who don’t want to believe will be forced to feign loyalty.”[129]
I believe God wants us to choose to love, not by a coercive demonstration of his power. Coerced love isn’t really love. (This is why I think the emphasis that some evangelists put on heaven and hell is a mistake.)
God can’t suspend natural laws or act to prevent all evil every time we make bad choices, because if our actions don’t have real consequences, then we don’t really have free will.[130]
The consequences of our actions teach us and make us wiser. If God protected us from negative consequences, then we would grow more careless instead of learning. Nor could God just give us knowledge and wisdom supernaturally to always make the best choices. Without uncertainty there’s little freedom of choice.[131] Altruistic love is good when the choice is easy, better when challenged, and best when the challenge is extreme .
Every teacher knows that learning by experience is the most effective form of learning.[132] Through our choices in the hostile environment of earth we learn to love and care for each other, to make sacrifices, to persevere, to trust in God when it’s difficult, and many other valuable lessons.
Some people might argue that no existence is better than this life. I firmly disagree. Even if this life is all I get, its joys far outweigh the sufferings. With or without the promise of a better afterlife, there’s no question in my mind that creation is very good!
Jones points out the fallacy in the “sum of all suffering” argument.[133] Only a presuppositional pessimist would add up all the suffering ever experienced on earth to argue that life is complete misery. It makes more sense to spread the suffering out among the many lives and say it’s small on average than to sum it all up as one huge suffering. The only being who might experience everyone’s suffering is the God who created everyone.
In fact, I believe God does experience everyone’s suffering. He experiences everyone’s joy also. If he could reduce the overall balance between evil and good, or suffering and joy, to make creation better overall, I think he’d be motivated to do that. Considering evil and suffering, “How much is too much is outside our ability to discern,” and we don’t know how much God already intervenes to prevent.[134]
Even in special cases such as suffering among children, God can’t intervene to prevent everything because then his existence and power would be so obvious as to remove the uncertainty necessary for free will choice. [135]
I believe God will use our response in this world to draw a dichotomous separation between the repentant and the selfish. These are the sheep and goats of Matthew 25:31-46. Our free will choice may continue for eternity with those repenting of selfishness going to heaven where we can live joyfully according to God’s perfect design, and those choosing selfishness living in eternal torment pursuing their selfish desires which can never be satisfied. Both extremes live with the consequences of their free will choices. At least that’s one possible scenario for eternity. We can’t know what life in the spirit realm is like, but I’m confident souls who repent from selfishness to love will experience a joyful eternity.
Clay Jones provides some great support to the idea that no one will falter in their eternal choice. Heaven with free will makes sense.[136] TThe ideas that Jones proposes (summarized below) are all speculative because we have no way to confirm them, but they illustrate that a heaven with free will where no one sins is possible.
Heaven could be unlimited joy, no selfishness. In our present, finite earth we desire selfish things with a limited supply. In heaven we have repented of selfishness, and we desire only to please God. God blesses us with unlimited joy so we have all we desire and won’t be driven to make sinful, selfish choices.
We could have new bodies, free from the selfish pitfalls of our current physical bodies (1 Corinthians 15:42-44).
There will be no external pressure to sin. (No peer pressure from sinful people, no temptation from Satan, etc.)
We’ve learned from our experience on earth how stupid and self-destructive sin is.
We’ll see how stupid and self-destructive sin is at the judgement when all is revealed.
We will know the torment of selfishness that is so evident in hell.
We’ll see the true goodness of God (1 Corinthians 13:12).
In addition, I’d like to propose another possibility from physics that is a bit challenging to wrap our minds around. We might never change from our repentant condition once we die because change requires linear, forward moving time. Time is a dimension of this created universe, and in our physical state we are bound in time, moving forward relentlessly. God transcends time because he created time and he dwells in a spirit realm without the limits of time. God never changes because he’s God, but also because he’s not bound by time the way we are in this physical world. God lives in the state of perfection for all time by his time-transcending choice.
When we die, I think we enter a spirit realm where we will be more like God than we are now. We won’t be gods, but we’ll be like God in the sense that we are created in God’s image and perfected in heaven (Genesis 1:26-27; Romans 8:16-17; 1 Corinthians 13:9-10; 2 Peter 1:4). If God transcends time and never changes, it makes sense that we might transcend time and never change. If that’s true, we won’t change our minds and decide to sin at some future time.
Free will is an abstract concept that can lead to some pretty abstract, speculative philosophy. Even without the complex philosophies, common sense intuition and evidence point to human freedom in our decisions. The evidential and rational case for free will is very strong. Claims of determinism are not only speculative, they presume a lot of other possibilities can’t be. Free will not only makes more sense logically, it seems far superior in goodness from a philosophical perspective.
[126] Holy Bible, NIV, Genesis 2:15-17; 3:6.
[127] Holy Bible, NIV, Matthew 3:1-2; 4:17.
[128] Holy Bible, NIV, Joshua 24:15.
[129] Jones, (2017), page 112.
[130] Jones, (2017), pages 113-115, 126-132.
[131] Jones, (2017), pages 132-135.
[132] Jones, (2017), page 136.
[133] Jones, (2017), pages 136-137.
[134] Jones, (2017), page 139.
[135] Jones, (2017), pages 140-143.
[136] Jones, (2017), pages 145-157.
Determinism Delusion. I frequently encounter determinists who claim our free will is an illusion. They presume that everything in the universe flows from cause-and-effect principles of physics. They believe every emotion, every thought, and every decision our brains experience comes from electric and chemical activity entirely driven by deterministic physics. They claim the conscious mind and sense of volition are illusions created by the electro-chemical activities of our brains.
In the previous section I explained how quantum physics violates this deterministic model of physics with probabilistic uncertainties. The assumption that everything follows materialistic cause-and-effect laws of nature is not supported by science or evidence. Yes, the laws of physics are reliable as predicted by the extreme probabilities of quantum physics, but science allows for exceptions. Science does not preclude free will.
The irony of determinism is that most proponents of determinism deride theists for having faith in God. Many even ridicule theists for believing on a powerful being that they cannot see or measure or detect with instruments. Yet these determinists have extreme faith in the non-existence of God and the complete universalism of cause-and-effect physics, even though it cannot be seen, measured, or detected with instruments.
We all experience our minds making decisions. We all see other people making decisions. People can choose to act contrary to their impulses and desires. We can even change some of our personality habits by force of will. To deny the reality of what every person on the planet observes every waking moment requires unusual faith. I can understand determinism as a theoretical possibility, but it defies observation, evidence, and reason. Placing confidence in determinism requires extreme faith in theories of deterministic physics that have been discredited by quantum physics.
Why Did Jesus Die? Many people (including myself) have struggled with the idea that Jesus had to die because humans sinned. Christians usually answer this theologically based strictly on what the Bible says in certain passages. They talk about atonement, redemption, paying the price of our sin, etc. If you don’t believe the Bible is true, those answers can be worse than useless; they’re counterproductive. To some non-Christians those concepts sound so presumptuous and irrational that they discredit the faith in their minds, pushing them further away. I offer a sensible philosophical explanation that’s consistent with scripture .
The Bible says that God loves us, but many people are skeptical considering all the difficulties we face in life. The idea that our Creator would take on human form, suffer, and die in an attempt to win our favor demonstrates that he truly loves us. We can debate more subtle and complex ideas like redemption and atonement forever, but regardless of those points, the suffering and death of Jesus Christ reveal God’s love. That’s a simple but powerful philosophical justification for the suffering and death of Jesus Christ.
________________________________
“God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” [137]
________________________________
Philosophy Conclusion. There are many other philosophical contentions related to Christian beliefs or the possibility of a creator. I’ve encountered some that weigh against certain disputable theological beliefs, but none that counter my understanding of the fundamental tenants of Christianity when you reason through the logical implications.
Nearly everyone I encounter who claims there is little or no evidence for God actually has strong philosophical objections to something about life or religion. They reject the concept of God because their concept of God is unpleasant. This may come from their negative perspective on life or distorted theological representations of God. Whatever drives their anti-God philosophy, it results in presuppositional bias to reject God philosophically and believe that evidence supports their rejection.
Evidence and reason supporting a good and powerful God may fall short of absolute proof, but the case is strong. We have philosophical evidence that God created humans with free will to experience life with an endless mix of joy and suffering, love and injustice, peace and conflict, etc., but only for a limited time. He offers abundant life now and for eternity. Some people claim that evil and suffering in the world preclude the possibility of an all-powerful, all-benevolent God. Determinists claim that free will is an illusion. I have demonstrated those claims to be presumptuous, committing hasty-generalization and begging the question fallacies. It’s entirely reasonable to believe that God is good. Even an all-powerful, all-benevolent creator withstands the test of evidence and reason. Viewed through an objective philosophical lens, the Christian concept of God is quite possible, perhaps highly likely.
[137] Holy Bible, NIV, Romans 5:8 (see also John 3:16; 1 John 4:7-11).