Why would God create a universe with even the possibility of eternal evil?

[Luke_K]

God is perfectly good in and of himself. How then is it compatible with God’s perfect goodness to create a universe with a significant probability of eternal evil? The eternal evil I speak of is that of Satan, demons, and damned humans.

Think of it the comparison between these two worlds:

1. Only God exists. This world has infinite goodness and no possibility for evil.
2. God and free creatures exist. This world has infinite goodness but also the possibility for eternal damnation and evil.

No more goodness can be attained by creating. Only the possibility of evil is added.

 

[gubernova]

I struggle with this often. I think in a spiritual way we most focus on God as a divine being and not quantifying his plan with human standards of planning and construction. It does not make sense to our human mind only and what we are able to percieve. Sound like a cop out…

 

[Spock]

God is perfectly good in and of himself. How then is it compatible with God’s perfect goodness to create a universe with a significant probability of eternal evil? The eternal evil I speak of is that of Satan, demons, and damned humans.

Think of it the comparison between these two worlds:

1. Only God exists. This world has infinite goodness and no possibility for evil.
2. God and free creatures exist. This world has infinite goodness but also the possibility for eternal damnation and evil.

No more goodness can be attained by creating. Only the possibility of evil is added.

Does not make sense at all. Especially since the argument that without evil there would be no “free will” is nonsensical (and I am certain that some nincompoop will bring it up - eventually ). As long as we have the ability to choose to put on our right shoe first before the left one - we do have free will. Free will does not necessitate the physical ability to perform murders, tortures, mayhems etc… any kind of “evil” act. As long as we can freely perform “good acts” or freely abstain from performing “good acts” we are free.

So your little list is incomplete. There is one more possibility:

1. God and free creatures exist. This world has infinite goodness AND NO possibility for eternal damnation and evil.

 

[gubernova]

I agree with your number 3 Spock, but how do you fit that within the traditional paradigm of hell in the Church. I am constantly being criticized for having a lax view on consequences.

 

[Spock]

I agree with your number 3 Spock, but how do you fit that within the traditional paradigm of hell in the Church. I am constantly being criticized for having a lax view on consequences.

I do not even try. I am not a Catholic and I consider the idea of eternal torture to be incompatible with a loving God. Sure, if we do something wrong, a certain amount of punishment is in order - but ONLY if the rules of proper conduct are spelled out precisely and unambiguously. That is logical. But an eternal torture for a finite “transgression” is not what justice is all about. By the way, “sin” means “missing the mark” - good to remember! Justice demands that the punishments be commensurate with the deed.

If you are being criticized by the super-conservatives, you must do something very right. Keep it up.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I do not even try. I am not a Catholic and I consider the idea of eternal torture to be incompatible with a loving God. Sure, if we do something wrong, a certain amount of punishment is in order - but ONLY if the rules of proper conduct are spelled out precisely and unambiguously. That is logical. But an eternal torture for a finite “transgression” is not what justice is all about. By the way, “sin” means “missing the mark” - good to remember! Justice demands that the punishments be commensurate with the deed.

If you are being criticized by the super-conservatives, you must do something very right. Keep it up.

Once, I was told that Hell is like this. God opens its doors and tell everybody (if there is anyone there !!): “You may come out!” . But … no one wants to come out, for it is where they want to stay, as their choice.

But … as someone said, this is too much for my brain …

 

[Karenfern]

W Somerset Maugham asked the same question in “The Razor’s Edge” and had some interesting answers to it. His character, Larry Darrell, rejects Christianity on the basis of jus that question. He says:

"If an all good and powerful God created the world, why would he create evil? The monks said ‘So that man, by conquering the wickedness within him, by resisting temptation, by accepting pain and sorrow and misfortune as the trials sent by God to purify him, might at last be made worthy to receive his Grace.’ " Larry is pained by this and questions whether it is sufficient to believe that God created such barriers or just found a world already in trouble and tried to make the best of it. Why should anyone worship such a God?

It is a difficult question indeed.

 

[JonathonofOhio]

I am not a Catholic and I consider the idea of eternal torture to be incompatible with a loving God

I do wonder about how things will work out in the end…will God be merciful to every human being in the end? Will he just lock up Satan forever and everyone who WANTS to be with him will get to be with him? Or will He really eternally punish people for their shortcomings?

One of the main reasons that Catholics believe in Purgatory is because we believe God is merciful, so not only does scripture support this process of purification after death, but it only makes sense that God would save us even after death.

But certainly there must be consequences for our actions in this life, otherwise how could we call God just? How is it that people can think it would be just and merciful for a murderer to be in heaven with their victim immediately after they die?

 

[silicasandra]

Once, I was told that Hell is like this. God opens its doors and tell everybody (if there is anyone there !!): “You may come out!” . But … no one wants to come out, for it is where they want to stay, as their choice.

But … as someone said, this is too much for my brain …

This is my understanding, too. God gives us the choice. We are not “sent” to hell; rather, we choose to go.

One thing I wonder about is the moment of judgment. Even then, could we be given the opportunity to repent, finally realizing the awesomeness of God? I don’t know. Some people might think that I’m saying it would be fine to just go out and sin all you want and then change your mind at the last minute, but that’s not exactly what I mean. It’s hard to explain.

I do sometimes think Hell could be a lot, lot “emptier” than many people think. Some people may reject God even knowing that he is there and loves us, but I have a hard time thinking that many people would make that choice.

But I suppose it isn’t my job to worry about that.

 

[Julia_Mae]

God is perfectly good in and of himself. How then is it compatible with God’s perfect goodness to create a universe with a significant probability of eternal evil? The eternal evil I speak of is that of Satan, demons, and damned humans.

Think of it the comparison between these two worlds:

1. Only God exists. This world has infinite goodness and no possibility for evil.
2. God and free creatures exist. This world has infinite goodness but also the possibility for eternal damnation and evil.

No more goodness can be attained by creating. Only the possibility of evil is added.

God is the good and only good.

There is God and nothingness. Nothingness is absence of God.

Which is also a fine definition of evil.

Time or Reality or whatever you want to call this was formed of nothingness by God. We bring God/good/light into the nothingness/evil/darkness by fulfilling our vocation to show forth the image of Christ by loving one another through the Grace of God.

Do enough of that, and the nothingness will be converted into the goodness.

Parousia.

 

[danserr]

God is perfectly good in and of himself. How then is it compatible with God’s perfect goodness to create a universe with a significant probability of eternal evil? The eternal evil I speak of is that of Satan, demons, and damned humans.

Think of it the comparison between these two worlds:

1. Only God exists. This world has infinite goodness and no possibility for evil.
2. God and free creatures exist. This world has infinite goodness but also the possibility for eternal damnation and evil.

No more goodness can be attained by creating. Only the possibility of evil is added.

I think it would help to think of God’s goodness in qualitative more than quantitative terms, ie as a qualitative infinite and not an quantitative infinite. This way you understand that when we speak of God’s goodness, we do not mean that God has an infinite quantity or amount of goodness. Rather we mean that God is qualitatively good. He is morally perfect, without moral defect, and is indeed, the paradigm of moral goodness. To speak of God as infinite Goodness is simply to say that he in essence morally perfect, without moral defect, and the paradigm of moral goodness. And so when we call God infinite goodness, we mean infinite in a qualitative sense.

So it is not a question of God having goodness added to Him by creation. He was already morally perfect. Rather in creation, he creates other things that are good as well, but this does not mean that he was not already morally perfect.

And he creates things with the possibility of evil, of course, because creatures freely united to him enjoying heaven forever is worth the risk of evil. And for this, he must create free will. So many philosophers would say that the creation of creatures with free will is a morally sufficient reason for God to allow the possibility of evil.

For example, let’s say God creates a person Bill, and leaves it up to Bill whether or not he will follow God. And let’s say that Bill, if it is left up to him, would not follow God. Can God do anything to make Bill follow him? Not if he is to respect Bill’s free will.

And this freedom of course is why the doctrine of hell is so necessary. Some people may eternally will to reject God. He allows that choice because He allows free will. To ask hell not to exist is to ask that people not be free.

Hell, as Fulton Sheen says, is the final guarantee of human freedom. The guarantee that a damned soul can forever raised his clenched fist at God and say “non serviat.” (I will not serve). Like Milton’s Satan who decided it was “better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.”

 

[Luke_K]

I think it would help to think of God’s goodness in qualitative more than quantitative terms, ie as a qualitative infinite and not an quantitative infinite. This way you understand that when we speak of God’s goodness, we do not mean that God has an infinite quantity or amount of goodness. Rather we mean that God is qualitatively good. He is morally perfect, without moral defect, and is indeed, the paradigm of moral goodness. To speak of God as infinite Goodness is simply to say that he in essence morally perfect, without moral defect, and the paradigm of moral goodness. And so when we call God infinite goodness, we mean infinite in a qualitative sense.

So it is not a question of God having goodness added to Him by creation. He was already morally perfect. Rather in creation, he creates other things that are good as well, but this does not mean that he was not already morally perfect.

And he creates things with the possibility of evil, of course, because creatures freely united to him enjoying heaven forever is worth the risk of evil. And for this, he must create free will. So many philosophers would say that the creation of creatures with free will is a morally sufficient reason for God to allow the possibility of evil.

For example, let’s say God creates a person Bill, and leaves it up to Bill whether or not he will follow God. And let’s say that Bill, if it is left up to him, would not follow God. Can God do anything to make Bill follow him? Not if he is to respect Bill’s free will.

And this freedom of course is why the doctrine of hell is so necessary. Some people may eternally will to reject God. He allows that choice because He allows free will. To ask hell not to exist is to ask that people not be free.

Hell, as Fulton Sheen says, is the final guarantee of human freedom. The guarantee that a damned soul can forever raised his clenched fist at God and say “non serviat.” (I will not serve). Like Milton’s Satan who decided it was “better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.”

I don’t think that makes a difference. The point is that creation does enhance the Good in any way, but only creates the possibility for evil. If creating were better (“more” good) than not creating, then God was not free to create because he must do what is good. It would also mean he was deficient because goodness was not fulfilled in his divinity. As such, creation can only create the possibility for evil.

And on another note, I don’t see how we are free to choose hell. We have no knowledge of the immensity of the horror of hell (or no knowledge of being completely separated from God), and we cannot freely choose that which we do not know.

 

[RobWriter]

This is a very good and honest question and deserves some careful thought. In counterpose, I would suggest that we also contemplate the following question: Why do good Catholics get married, with the primary intention of having children, when they know that there is a significant possibility, even probability, that one or more of them could end up in eternal hell? If you can figure that one out, then you can begin to understand why Our Lord created Adam in His own image

 

[fixxer]

I guess the only way I can make sense of God’s reasoning is to compare it to mine. So I’ll say that like me God wants us to truly love Him not be forced to love Him. I want my loved ones to love me freely not because they have no choice.

 

[Luke_K]

This is a very good and honest question and deserves some careful thought. In counterpose, I would suggest that we also contemplate the following question: Why do good Catholics get married, with the primary intention of having children, when they know that there is a significant possibility, even probability, that one or more of them could end up in eternal hell? If you can figure that one out, then you can begin to understand why Our Lord created Adam in His own image

Having kids gives purpose to one’s life. It fulfills the couple’s vocation to marriage and to “be fruitful and multiply”. It is also joyful and satisfying to raise children. Also, children naturally follow from our strong desire to have sex and companionship.

But the point is that couples gain something from having children. They fulfill their purpose in life. But God’s purpose/essence is already fulfilled in himself without creation. In a sense he is already a family (the Trinity), and one without the possibility that anyone would be eternally damned.

I appreciate your response, though. The third thread I made when I came to CAF was on this very question. I answered it like you did, but it isn’t convincing to me now: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=310609

I also made another thread like this one a while back, but I don’t agree with my rationalization of it there either: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=410093

 

[Scoobyshme]

You forget that the Church has the answer to why God allows evil.

God allows evil in order to bring about a greater good. Perfect example: Jesus dying on the cross. Greatest evil; deicide. From that, though, the salvation of mankind is possible; the greatest good.

 

[Luke_K]

You forget that the Church has the answer to why God allows evil.

God allows evil in order to bring about a greater good. Perfect example: Jesus dying on the cross. Greatest evil; deicide. From that, though, the salvation of mankind is possible; the greatest good.

No goodness is obtained from eternal damnation. And evil cannot bring about a greater good than that which already existed. Otherwise evil would be necessary for the fulfillment of goodness.

 

[Anthony_V]

“Better is one day in your courts than a thousand elsewhere; I would rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God than dwell in the tents of the wicked.”
Psalm 84:10

It would be better for someone to exist, experience a moment of God’s love, but be potentially eternally damned, than to never exist at all.
God’s love is evident is his awesome power of creation. To be denied existence, as well as the inherited glory of God, is foolish.
Our very spirit is made purely of God’s love. We are God’s love, given freedom. If you deny the possibility of eternal damnation, you deny the possibility that God wants you in his house so terribly. If God’s house had no door, then it would hardly be a house. And there certainly wouldn’t be a narrow gate leading to it.

 

[Spock]

Once, I was told that Hell is like this. God opens its doors and tell everybody (if there is anyone there !!): “You may come out!” . But … no one wants to come out, for it is where they want to stay, as their choice.

Impossible. We all abhor pain. Think about those poor humans who are torturted into “confession” of their “misdeeds”. When the pain becomes too much to endure, you WILL confess anything to stop the pain.

But … as someone said, this is too much for my brain …

Your brain is just fine. The fact that it cannot absorb the so called explanation is not argument against the health of your brain, it shows the inadequacy of the arguments .

 

[danserr]

I don’t think that makes a difference. The point is that creation does enhance the Good in any way, but only creates the possibility for evil. If creating were better (“more” good) than not creating, then God was not free to create because he must do what is good. It would also mean he was deficient because goodness was not fulfilled in his divinity. As such, creation can only create the possibility for evil.

And on another note, I don’t see how we are free to choose hell. We have no knowledge of the immensity of the horror of hell (or no knowledge of being completely separated from God), and we cannot freely choose that which we do not know.

On the contrary, a true and full guided tour of hell would prevent human freedom, because it would prevent us from choosing God freely. Think of it this way, if a woman know she will die cruelly if she does not marry me, then is her choice to marry me really free? We are told enough of how bad hell is and how great heaven is, but to safeguard our free will, the immediacy of the threat of hell is lessened.

As for God’s goodness, consider a parallel. It is good for me to become a doctor, but that does not mean that I am obligated to become a doctor, for it is also good for me to become a canon lawyer, a teacher, or a police officer and I cannot become them all. The mere fact that something is good, does not obligate one to do it. It was good for God to create, but he may not have been under obligation to create. (Though some would say, he may have been and that his freedom is different form human freedom. God’s freedom may consist in that he is compelled by no force outside himself and is free to flourish as the type of (greatest conceivable) being that he is free of external encumbrance). Second, the decision to create did not enhance God’s goodness because he was already morally perfect and the standard or moral goodness.

There is a difference between moral values and duties. To whom was God under a duty to create? It was good to create, certainly, don’t you agree that free creatures united to God in love is a very good thing? But God was not necessarily obligated to create, because he owed no duty to anyone to create. Just a thought. I actually haven’t made up my mind on a couple of the issues here, but it’s useful to try to write them out.