18 The Problem of Evil: A New Solution Atle Ottesen Søvik Dean of Studies, MF, Norwegian School of Theology [email protected] I have recently presented a new solution to the problem of evil, by expanding on Keith Ward’s ideas about the subject. In this article I present my solution to the problem of evil, but I add several new data and arguments concerning human independence, the indeterminism involved in God’s creation, and animal pain. Introduction ‘genuine’, I mean that it does not serve a n this article I will present a solution higher good which in a wider perspective to the problem of evil, also known as would make the evil good. I shall return Ia theodicy. It has been presented befo - to what is meant by saying that God is re, but several new points will be added in good and omnipotent. this article. I shall notify the reader when Many solutions to this problem deny these new elements are presented. First I that God is either good or omnipotent, or present the problem as it will be defined they deny that there is genuine evil. I in this article. Then I present how Keith accept that God is good and omnipotent, Ward solves the problem, but at different and that there is genuine evil in the world. places I add ideas of my own. Some of The solution I present denies that there is these I have published before, and some a real contradiction, and shows why the are new here. Objections are answered as contradiction is merely apparent by ad - I proceed. I conclude that the theodicy ding an extra claim. That extra claim is presented is a coherent Christian theodicy. that God wanted to create an indepen - The problem of evil can be defined in dent world. This is the starting point for many ways, but here I shall define it as Keith Ward’s theodicy, which I shall now the theoretical problem that there seems present. to be a contradiction between on the one God Wanted to Create an Independent hand believing in a good and omnipotent World God, and on the other hand believing that There is a very difficult Question that there is genuine evil in the world. The many theodicies are unable to answer, term ‘evil’ is here used in a wide sense to and it is this: Why did God create a world include suffering caused by human and in the first place where suffering is pos - other causes. The reason why there seems sible? Ward’s explanation is that God to be a contradiction is that if God is wanted to create an independent world good, he presumably wants there to be no with independent beings. 1 By that he evil, and if he is omnipotent, he presu - means not only independent humans, but mably could cause it to be no evil, and so an independent world in general – a it seems to follow that there should be no world where not everything is controlled evil, but there is. By saying that the evil is by God, but rather a world which itself Theofilos vol. 4 nr. 2 2012 Atle Ottesen Søvik 19 brings forth new and creative values. God This seems to imply that God is handing then becomes an artistic, creative God over control over the earth to the who not only creates things, but who humans, and may therefore well be inter - creates things that create. 2 preted as God giving over some of his Let me specify that by ‘independence’ I own control and giving humans indepen - do not mean that we are not dependent dence. When God creates by using formu - on God for our existence. God keeps eve - las like ”let the earth bring forth…” (Gen rything in being from moment to mo - 1:11 and 24) it also suggests God creating ment, so in that sense we are totally a creative world, instead of God directly depen dent on God. What is meant by producing everything from nothing. ‘independence’ here, is that God has The second argument appeals to the given both humans and the world room point that the world and humans are in to develop themselves on their own. fact Quite independent. If one believes in Ward does not give many reasons to an omnipotent God, it follows that things warrant that this was a goal for God’s will happen the way he wants it to. creation, except from what I have already However, it does not follow with necessi - mentioned: that independence and a crea - ty , since there may be restrictions also on tive creation is something which is valu - the power of an omnipotent being (more able in itself, and which therefore a good on that later), but at least things must fol - God may well create. In my book on the low the will of God often , since God can - problem of evil, I added some arguments not be omnipotent and never get his will from Wolfhart Pannen berg, to support done. Inductively we may therefore rea - the claim that God wanted to create an son that if there is an omnipotent God, independent world. Pannenberg argues and the world is in fact Quite indepen - that humans must have some indepen - dent, it is likely (but not necessary ) that it dence and distance from God in order to is so because God wanted it to be so. be able to live alongside the holy and eter - However, that God wants us to be nal God. 3 He also argues that if we are to independent seems to contradict an become independent persons, in the sense obvious part of Christian belief, namely of being centres of our own activity, we that God wants relationship with us. As a need space and time for ourselves to deve - solution to this problem, I suggest that lop. 4 Both Pannenberg and Richard God wants relationship with independent Swinburne think that God wanting us to beings, and so he must give them some be independent explains why God’s space to become independent, and then existence is not more obvious to us. 5 they can choose to have relationship with Now, these arguments still do not him, and the relationship with God after show that God wanted us to be as inde - death will be the full realization of God’s pendent as we actually are. I shall in this desire for relationship with us. This is like article add three arguments in favour of when we as parents want relationship the claim that God wanted to create an with our children and want them to be independent world. The first argument is safe, and at the same time we want them that this is a Christian understanding of to become independent, and so we must creation. Before the fall, God says to the give up some of our control over them to humans that they should subdue the earth let that happen. and have dominion over it (Gen 1:28). A third argument in favour of God Theofilos vol. 4 nr. 2 2012 20 The Problem of Evil wanting us to be independent is the fact effect of producing natural evils. that such an hypothesis gives a good solu - Philosophers known as compatibilists tion to the problem of evil, namely the disagree that free will reQuires indetermi - solution I am presenting here. It thus gets nism, and think that free will is compa - support by producing a coherent theory tible with determinism. Compatibilists of God. Step one is thus to argue that also argue that indeterminism makes free God wanted to create an independent will impossible, since it seems to make world. Step two is to ask how such a free choices a matter of luck, and they are world must be, and that is the next Ques - sceptical to idealists like Ward, who think tion I shall consider. that there are uniQue, non-physical human souls with free will. 7 In my book, How Must an Independent World be? I argued that Keith Ward was not giving Ward argues that an independent world good arguments in favour of free will must fulfil two conditions: It must be reQuiring indeterminism. I also argued law-like and there must be indeterminism that he did not show why there had to be in it. The reason why it must be law-like indeterminism at the macro level of is that there is no point for humans to humans in the world in order for us to have independence if the world is not to a have free will. I briefly presented a theory large degree predictable. In order to use of free will which could explain that, but my independence I must be Quite certain this Question is too big to discuss in this about what happens if I choose for article. 8 example to grow potatoes under the right Indeterminism is meant as the explana - conditions. Then more potatoes will tion of natural evils, but there is an objec - come up from the earth. If the world was tion to this which I did not discuss in my chaotic and unpredictable and anything book. 9 It seems plausible that indetermi - could happen if I put potatoes in the nism might cause some mutations which earth, there would be no point in acting create diseases caused by viruses and bac - since we would not know what our teria. But what about the fact that our actions would lead to.