Reflections on Evil and Suffering by a Grieving Father

by Pastor Steve Lagoon

Tuesday, February 6, 2001 will stand out as the worst day in the life of my family and myself. It was the day my oldest son Kyle was killed in a car accident at the age of 17. The pain for us is intense and relentless. I do not understand how anyone can endure such tragedy without the comfort and strength of the Lord.

Because of my interest in ministry and apologetics, I had long contemplated the important questions of life regarding the purpose and meaning of evil and suffering.

It is one thing, however, to look at these things academically, and another thing to personally walk "through the valley of the shadow of death," feeling it's full force yourself. Our tragic loss has caused me to reflect anew on these important questions, and this present work flows from the crucible of this experience.

What is Evil?

Let us begin by defining evil. One dictionary defines evil as: "Morally bad or wrong; wicked; malevolent; sinful" (The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, William Morris, Editor, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1978).

Some deny Evil As we look around at our world, it is not hard to find examples of evil. All too frequently, we hear of murders, rapes, thefts, and many other forms of evil. In light of the overwhelming evidence for the existence of evil in our daily experience, it is amazing that some groups, religions, and philosophies actually deny the existence of evil.

For example, the founder of the Christian Science religion, Mary Baker Eddy said this:

"Hence, evil is but an illusion, and it has no real basis. Evil is a false belief" (Mary Baker Eddy, Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures, p. 480; as cited by Walter Martin, Kingdom of the Cults, Bethany House Publishers, Minneapolis, MN 1985, p. 140).

We can wonder how someone can hold to such doctrines in the face of the evil that exists in our world. One often encounters those who try to explain away the existence of evil, by suggesting that acts that appear to be evil have other explanations.

Those who hold to such views (Such as so-called liberals, progressives, and free thinkers) would suggest, for example, that many criminals act out of ignorance, poverty, poor environments, genetic causes, or mental illness.

In this utopian viewpoint, mankind can eventually end all of the acts that appear to be evil. This will be done by eradicating poverty, providing quality education for all, and understanding and solving the genetic and mental causes of "anti-social" and "destructive" behavior. In other words, man is not bad or "sinful" as the Bible suggests. With the right combination of reforms, the problems of the world will disappear.

Now, I have no doubt that there is some truth to the above ideas. Certainly, some of the things mentioned can contribute to evil acts. However, we must face the fact that we live in a world where evil exists, and people perform evil acts. Some of the most heinous criminal acts of human history have been performed by well-educated and wealthy people.

The Bible on Evil

We are reminded of the words of Scripture: "The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it?" (Jeremiah 17:9).

The apostle Paul said about mankind:

"The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness" (Romans 1:18).

He also went on to say (quoting from the Old Testament):

"There is no one righteous, not even one. . . All have turned away. . . there is no one who does good, not even one. Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit. The poison of vipers is on their lips. Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; ruin and misery mark their ways; and the way of peace they do not know. There is no fear of God before their eyes." (Romans 3:10-18).

Biblically, we may speak of sin (and evil) as missing the mark, that is, it is violating God's standards and thereby offending God Himself. All sin is ultimately against God so that the Psalmist could cry:

"Against you, you only, have I sinned" (Psalm 51:4).

The testimony of Scripture is clear; all mankind is soul-sick with the disease of sin and rebellion against God. Outside of the gospel of Jesus Christ, there is no hope for this wicked world.

Problems in ethics for Atheists

Some make the mistake of rejecting the existence of God because of the belief that if God exists, He could not allow all the evil and suffering in the world. Before looking at the question directly, I want to point out the weakness of the atheistic position on the problem of evil.

A practical example of the hopelessness of Atheism

One, what is the point of suffering if there is no God, and no afterlife. Following my Son's death, my family attended a grief support group at an area hospital. Each person in our small group introduced themselves and shared a bit of their experience.

After others had spoken, a woman of about 30-35 spoke of her pain in losing her father. I paraphrase her comments. She said:

"You know, as I listen to each of you talk, I am glad for you in that you say your faith in God is helping you and you have a hope of seeing your loved one again in heaven. Well, this is really hard for me, because my father and I are both atheists. We don't believe in God, in an afterlife, or that we will see each other again. As my father lay there dying, he kept saying to me, 'I am afraid, I am afraid.' I didn't know what to say to him!"

How tragic was this woman's experience. She had no hope of ever seeing her father again. How different it is for Christians who have the hope of the resurrection and eternal life with God. The Christian knows that "in all things God works for the good of those who love him" (Romans 8:28). Like Jesus "who for the joy set before him endured the cross" (Hebrews 12:2), we can also know that there is hope beyond the sufferings of this world.

Another issue is that if there is no God as the atheist claim, then how can there be justice. Hitler could just kill his millions, and die like everyone else with no consequence for his evil actions. On the other hand, the Bible warns that all men will stand before their Creator and God and be judged for their actions.

The impossibility of an ethical system for Atheists

The second problem is the impossibility of the very idea of evil in an atheistic system. If there is no lawgiver, how can there be law. Borrowing an idea from cosmology (that of intelligent Design or ID), and transferring it to ethics, I am coining a phrase called Intelligent Lawgiver or "IL." This is because the very idea of ethics demands an IL, an intelligent Lawgiver. Without an Intelligent Lawgiver (IL), there is no basis for ethics; no basis for the categories of right and wrong, good and evil.

A shovel full of ethics

Let me support this idea with an illustration. A man went shopping one fine fall day. Noticing a snow shovel on sale, he bought it. When he arrived home, he set the shovel in his entryway. A few weeks later, he was called away on business. While he was gone, the first snowfall of the season occurred, and it was quite heavy.

The man's neighbor recalled that he had not yet bought a shovel to replace the one that he had run over with his car last winter. He noticed the new shovel sitting in front of his neighbor's house. When he was sure no one was looking, he casually grabbed the shovel and took it home. In his house, he painted part of the handle and wrote his own name on it. He then went out and shoveled his driveway, and when finished, put the shovel away in his garage.

He reasoned that his neighbor made a lot more money than he did, and on top of that, he always thought the guy was kind of a jerk anyway. The next day, the first neighbor came home. Finding his snow-covered driveway, he went to retrieve his new snow shovel. But of course it was gone.

Now, let's examine this. At face value, almost all would agree that the man's action in taking the shovel was wrong. But why? For the Bible-believer, there is a God who reveals to mankind the laws of right and wrong. "Thou Shalt not steal" says God.

But what of those who deny the existence of God (IL)? On what basis can one determine right from wrong, good or evil, if there is no God? How can one complain about evil if one has no basis to call something evil in the first place?

Four basic ethical systems

There are four basic answers people give as the basis of ethics. One, since there is no basis for ethics, no ethical system can be established. Two, since, there are no absolutes, each person decides and lives by their own ethics. Three, there are no absolutes; society and culture collectively set ethics. Four, (as has been mentioned), God reveals his will to mankind.

These four options can be broken down into two: Those that acknowledge God's existence (the fourth option), and those that do not (the other three).

Absolutely no absolutes

Of those that do not acknowledge God's place in revealing ethics to mankind, one of the other three options is generally held. These all agree that there are no absolute standards or ethics (As has often pointed out, to say that there are no absolutes is self-defeating in that it is an absolute statement itself).

No ethical system possible

Of the three, one option is to simply despair of any basis or possibility for ethics (option one). Very few people opt for this position, for it would lead to a fatalistic nightmare and a world of anarchy. With this option there is no basis for condemning the man for stealing the shovel (or anyone for anything).

To each his own

In option two, each individual forms their own ethical system. In a purely subjective way, each person decides for themselves what is right and wrong, and no one has a right to impose their morals and ethics on others. With this option, there is no basis for condemning the man who stole the shovel, because in his ethical system it was O.K. to take (steal) it.

While most of us would disagree with his ethical decision, on what basis can we criticize him? He has decided for himself what is right and wrong, and what right has anyone else to impose their values on him?

A similar viewpoint widely held is put something like this: "You can do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt others." This would seem to provide a basis for condemning the man for "stealing" the shovel. But does it really?

To begin with, this is an absolute statement. It is proposing an absolute system of ethics (You can do anything you want, as long as you don't hurt others). If there are no absolutes, how can one suggest this absolute system (i.e. you should not hurt others).

Second, if there is no God revealing this ethical system, how does one know it is "true" or the correct one? Isn't this just one's opinion of what is right and wrong?

Third, assuming one arbitrarily chooses to have this as their ethical system, what right have they to impose it on others? For instance, if someone holding this ethic learned of the man who stole the shovel, they might say to him, "Why did you steal your neighbor's shovel? That is wrong because it hurts others." The man might respond, "So what! You do what you want, and I will do what I want. Don't you dare try to force your beliefs on me."

Fourth, Also, as Defoe said, "No man is an island to himself." Each of us effects others (drug abuser hurts family, doesn't contribute to society).

The result of this to each his own ethic is a world in which "every man did that which was right in his own eyes" (Judges 21:25-KJV). A world where wickedness prevails.

Might makes right

The third of the four options (see above) is that society and culture determine what is right and wrong. This would again seem to provide a basis for an ethical system to condemn the man for stealing the shovel. But does it really?

For instance, if one holding this position learned of the shovel-stealing neighbor, he might confront him by saying, "Why did you steal that shovel? Everyone knows that it is wrong to steal. That is why we have laws against stealing."

However, the shovel-stealing neighbor might respond, "So what. I will do what I want. What right have you or anyone else to impose your values on me?"

Our shovel-stealing villain could also point out that societies and cultures are often wrong. For instance, at one time our country tolerated slavery. If the "might makes right" argument that the majority of the people determine right and wrong is true, then morality and truth are not fixed, but constantly changing at the whim of the majority.

Such an ethic would lead to inevitable conclusion that when slavery was legal, it was also moral. When our country outlawed slavery, then slavery must have then become immoral. Of course, in this position, slavery is not intrinsically evil or immoral, and if the majority decides to impose slavery upon African-Americans once again, it would become morally acceptable again.

In other words, truth and morality change with the whim of the majority. Something can be right one day and wrong the next. Further, something could be right in one country and wrong in another, right in one state, and wrong in another. Surely, we need a fixed universal system of ethics, but no such system is possible when God is ignored.

The only option that is a tenable system for ethics is the Intelligent Lawgiver (IL) model (option four above). Since God has made mankind, He has a right, as it's Lord, to determine man's laws and ethics.

For most, the existence of evil is settled. The evidence for it is overwhelming. But this leads to other profound questions: Where did evil come from? Why does God allow it? How could a good God allow such evil? These are fair questions, and we shall proceed to examine them.

The powerful testimony of Elie Wiesel I want to quote at length from the work of Nobel Peace Prize winner Elie Wiesel, as he recounts a personal experience from the holocaust and how it relates to the question at hand:

"One day when we came back from work, we saw three gallows rearing up in the assembly place, three black crows. Roll call. SS all around us, machine guns trained: the traditional ceremony. Three victims in chains-and one of them, the little servant, the sad eyed angel.

The SS seemed more preoccupied, more disturbed than usual. To hang a young boy in front of thousands of spectators was no light matter. The head of the camp read the verdict. All eyes were on the child. He was lividly pale, almost calm, biting his lips. The gallows threw its shadow over him.

This time the Lagerkapo refused to act as executioner. Three SS replaced him. The three victims mounted together onto the chairs. The three necks were placed at the same moment within the nooses. 'Long live liberty!' cried the two adults. But the child was silent. 'Where is God? Where is He?' someone behind me asked.

At a sign from the head of the camp, the three chairs tipped over. Total silence throughout the camp. On the horizon, the sun was setting. 'Bare your heads!' yelled the head of the camp. His voice was raucous. We were weeping. 'Cover your heads!' Then the march past began. The two adults were no longer alive. Their tongues hung swollen, blue-tinged. But the third rope was still moving; being so light, the child was still alive. . .

For more than an hour he stayed there, struggling between life and death, dying in slow agony under our eyes. And we had to look him full in the face. He was still alive when I passed in front of him. His tongue was still red, his eyes were not glazed.

Behind me, I heard the same man asking: 'Where is God now?' And I heard a voice within me answer him: 'Where is He? Here He is-He is hanging here on this gallows. . ." (Elie Wiesel, Night, Bantam Books, 1960, pp. 61-62).

There is so much that can be said in response to this reading. Of course, it is further evidence of man's wickedness. But the questions it raises are profound. Elie Wiesel indicates his belief that no "God," certainly not the all-powerful and loving God portrayed in the Scriptures, could allow such a wicked act. Do you feel the weight of his argument? Do you also wonder how God can stand by and allow a little child to be brutally raped and murdered by a monster of a man? I certainly feel the force of Wiesel's argument. They deserve a thoughtful response.

Is God all-loving and all-powerful?

His (Wiesel's) argument is really one of two that are often proposed by those contemplating this question. They are as follows: One, God is all-loving (and hence, does not want man to suffer), but does not have the power to stop it, or two, God has the power to stop suffering, but is not really all-loving (and therefore does not stop it).

But, are we really limited to these two choices? Is it possible that God can be both all-loving and all-powerful, and that there is some other explanation for evil and suffering?

The Scriptures say that there is. Let us proceed to examine this question in light of Scripture and reason. I offer four general categories to help explain the problems we face in life.

1. God allows accidents or tragedies to occur as a direct consequence for bad decisions or sin.

The drunken man who gets behind the wheel of a car and kills himself is responsible for his own death. God simply allowed the man to bear the consequences of his own actions.

In the big picture, sin and death are a part of man's existence since man's rebellion and fall in the Garden of Eden. God created mankind as good. Our human parents were endowed with a paradisiacal existence, where suffering and death were not existent. Man's nature was good, and all of Adam and Eve's descendants would also share in that good nature. However, because of the fall into sin, the sinful nature has been passed down through all mankind, rather than the good nature man was created with.

As a result, man often misuses his freedom and hurts himself and others. We can take comfort that when man uses his freedom to hurt others; God will hold them responsible. "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord. (Romans 12:19)."

This is true even in the lives of believers. In 1 Corinthians 11: 28-30, the apostle Paul gives guidelines for the observance of the Lord's table. Within that context he warned:

"A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself. That is why many among you are weak and sick, and a number of you have fallen asleep [in death]."

Earlier in that same letter the apostle said:

"Don't you know that you yourselves are God's temple and that God's Spirit lives in you? If anyone
destroys God's temple, God will destroy him: for God's temple is sacred, and you are that temple
(1 Corinthians 3:16-17)."

You may wonder where evil came from and if God knew man would fall into sin, why did he still make them.

Certain things should be observed in these regards. It is true that God could have made man without the possibility of evil and suffering occurring. He could have made mankind as robot-like creatures who always did what God wanted (they could do no other). There would be no sin, no evil, no suffering, and no death. . . and no love!

As an example, if a young man wanted to get married he could make a very complex robot. He could program it to respond to his voice by saying, "I love you." I ask you, would that be real love? The robot could only do what it was programmed to do. Likewise, in marriage, since partners have a choice, (to love or not to love), their words of love are real and sincere.

In the same way, when God created mankind, he created them with the incredible ability of choice. They could really choose to love God or reject Him. Since there was the real possibility they could reject God, their choice would be real. Of course, for this chance of real love, there was also the necessary risk that man could reject God, bringing evil and suffering into the world. In his infinite wisdom, God chose to create mankind in order to enter an eternal love relationship with them.

2. God allows accidents to happen because in a world like ours, a world filled with individuals possessing freedom, accidents simply happen.

We trip over rugs, drop things on our toes, bite our own tongues, and unfortunately, we have automobile accidents. Yes, God could prevent such things, but it is entirely His decision as to when in His wisdom He chooses to intervene. When such accidents happen, we should not hastily conclude that it is punishment from God. Notice Jesus point in Luke 13: 1-5:

"Now there were some present at that time who told Jesus about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mixed with their sacrifices. Jesus answered, 'Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans because they suffered this way? I tell you no! But unless you repent, you to will all perish. Or those eighteen who died when the tower in Siloam fell on them-- Do you think they were more guilty than all the others living in Jerusalem? I tell you no!'"

God allows Satan to afflict man for His own purpose.

This is the whole point of the book of Job. Job 1:6 through 2:10 records what took place behind the scenes unknown to those on earth. In heaven Satan appeared before the throne of God. God granted Satan permission to inflict Job in various ways in order to prove Job's godly character.

Among the afflictions Job suffered at the hands of Satan were the tragic deaths of his children and great physical suffering in his own body. A large portion of the book of Job records the interaction between Job and his "friends" as they wrestle with the meaning behind Job's suffering. Job's counselors reflected the common wisdom of their day. They considered it absolutely clear that Job (and any others that suffer) was suffering for sin in his life. God gave man the book of Job to make clear once and for all that not all man's suffering is a result of sin.

Sometimes, God allows Satan to afflict us for His own purpose.

"In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of
trials. These have come so that your faith-- of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire-- may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory, and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed
(1 Peter 1: 6-7)."

3. God directly intervenes and causes such events for his own purposes. Notice the account in John chapter nine:

"As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, 'Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?' 'Neither this man nor his parents sinned,' said Jesus, 'but this happened so that the work of God might be displayed in his life'" (John 9:1-3). His disciples had made the same mistake as Job's counselors; they assumed the man suffered with blindness for sin (either his own or his parents). But God had a purpose for that blind man's suffering that neither he nor anyone else understood.

God said to Moses, "Who gave man his mouth? Who makes him deaf or dumb? Who gives him sight or makes him blind? Is it not I, the Lord? (Exodus 4:11) We have to simply recognize the sovereignty of God. We have to let God be God. We can't possibly understand all His works. We must simply trust Him. He knows what He is doing.

God is in control

One thing that is common to all the options I presented, however, is that God is in control. God gave mankind freedom and then holds man accountable for their actions. However, His love is powerfully displayed at the cross of Calvary at which God gave his Son to die for man's sins, so that men can be forgiven and receive eternal life.

Good from Evil

Furthermore, God is taking what man and the Devil mean for evil, and turning it for something Good, something wonderful. The life of Joseph is an example of how God can make good come from evil. Joseph's brothers intended to harm him, and their actions truly were evil.

Nonetheless, God masterfully worked something good from the situation. Recounting the experience, Joseph said to his brothers:

"You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good to accomplish what is now being done"
(Genesis 50:21).

James Dobson's illustration

We can never be sure what the reason is for our suffering. I once heard James Dobson give a very helpful illustration on his program that I will never forget. He recounted the experience of a small child who was sick and in need of medical attention. Unfortunately, the child had to undergo some painful procedures. During the procedures, the child looked into the eyes of his parents (as they had to help hold the child still), wondering why they wouldn't stop those who were hurting him, simply to young to understand that it was out of love, that they allowed him to go through the pain. They could understand what he could not; that this pain was for his ultimate good.

In the same way, God allows us to go through suffering in this world that is beyond our understanding. We must simply trust our loving heavenly father who knows what is best for us.

The conclusion of the matter

This is why we have to entrust ourselves to our creator. From my human perspective, my son Kyle's death was a tragedy that cut his life short and robbed him (and everyone who loved him) of all that life has to offer. But I am slowly accepting that in God's plan, Kyle lived a full life and succeeded in all the work for which God created him (Psalm 139:13-16).

Things I know

I know that He knows what is best. I know I have to accept His plan as best. I must repeat Jesus cry of agony the night before the Cross, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will (Matthew 26:39b)."

In my heart I know that God loves us. I know that he knows of our pain and sorrow. I know that He is comforting our soul and strengthening us to make it through the next moment and the next day.

I know that God has made us so that we can experience great love for each other and for Him. I know that God's love for us is beyond what we can imagine.

I know that man was not meant to be separated from his loved ones by death; that death was not in God's original creation; that mankind brought death upon itself by rebelling against God. I know that "God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16)."

I know that one day "I'll cross the river, I'll fight life's final war with pain; And then, as death gives way to victory, I'll see the lights of glory and I'll know he lives (Because He Lives by William Gaither)." I know that when we get there, we will see our son again, and never again will we be separated. For we shall all dwell together forever in the house of the Lord. "

And I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, 'now the dwelling of God is with men, and he will live with them. They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away
(Revelation 21:3-4).'"

Steve Lagoon, December 13, 2003