Morality, Evil, and the Bible

1. “There are no such things as absolute, objective, and universal morals.”

2. “It is not fair for us to be held responsible for Adam’s sin.”

3. “How can anyone believe in an all-powerful and all-loving God when so much evil and suffering exists in the world?”

4. “God’s response to evil is too slow and capricious.”

5. “If God is love, then why is there an eternal hell? Wouldn’t it be more loving if God simply ‘annihilated’ people?”

6. “Your God is immoral and/or too vengeful. We should not trust and obey a God that sends a flood to judge the whole earth, rains burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah, and commands his people to take the lives of all the Canaanites.”

7. “Slavery is unjust and yet the God of Christianity permits the nation of Israel and Christians to have slaves.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. “There are no such things as absolute, objective, and universal morals”

• In contrast to this view, C.S. Lewis in Mere Christianity argued for a universal moral law.

• There must be a universal moral law, or else:

1. Moral disagreements would make no sense because they demand standards.
2. All moral criticism would be meaningless if nothing is better or worse.
3. It is unnecessary to keep promises or treaties. However, we assume that it is.
4. We would not make excuses for breaking the moral law, yet we all do.

• The moral law is not human instinct, or else:

1. The stronger impulse would always win, but it does not
2. We sometimes act selflessly when we help, rather than from instinct.
3. Instincts would then always be right, but sometimes they are wrong.

• The moral law is not purely social convention.

1. The same moral laws can be found in all societies. For example, a coward is not virtuous.
2. Judgments about social progress can't be made, if society were the basis of judgment.

• Other Problems: This position implies that everything is relative.

1. It is self-refuting It can’t prove it is right if it is relative.
2. It ia an absolute statement. Nothing can be “everything” if it is relative.

(top)

2. “It’s not fair for us to be held responsible for Adam’s sin.”

• Some believe that we do not inherit Adam’s sinful nature. If you are one of them, are you less than perfect from a moral standpoint? If so, then may we not say that you will be judged for your own sins anyway?

• Perhaps your objection is rooted in your/our culture of individualism? Some countries, for instance, in Asia and the Middle East, believe in solidarity; where the group takes precedence over the individual.

• These ideas of “representation” and “solidarity” occur in other contexts as well. For example, children born outside the United States may be granted US citizenship, if their parents possess US citizenship.

• To the person who contends that it is not fair for all to inherit Adam’s sinful nature, I would counter: Isn't it also unfair for one man, Jesus, to pay the penalty for the sins of many and die in our place. The claim of “Adam’s sin” being unfairly inherited, is countered by God’s grace and mercy at the cross (Romans 5.12-21). The question still remains: Do you believe that you have sinned and need to put your trust in Christ for the forgiveness of your sins?

(top)

3. “How can anyone believe in an all-powerful and all-loving God when so much evil and suffering exists in the world?”

• This question implies that humans have more knowledge and wisdom than God when it comes to running the universe. How can a finite human being understand the plans of an infinite and transcendent God?

• This view suggests that because evil is not yet destroyed, then God can not or will not destroy it. Christians reject this assumption because God is all-powerful and all-loving. God can and will defeat evil in the future, at Christ’s second coming.
  
  
• If God was to destroy evil today, then Jesus would be returning to judge humanity today. God’s decision to not “wipe out” evil may also be interpreted as a sign of His grace. God is providing more opportunity for people to repent and be saved (2 Peter 3.9).

• To ask God to destroy evil now from a “non-believer” standpoint, is to ask God to judge them now.

• Although evil and suffering appear to be senseless, there are a few reasons for God allowing some evil and suffering. Sometimes God allows evil and suffering as an act of judgment (e.g., the Flood, Babylon used to punish Israel). The existence of evil also testifies to the brevity of life—leading us to repent, for we never know how long we have to live. Some, such as Joseph, Naomi, Job, and the Apostle Paul have brought God more glory because of how they dealt with their suffering and pain.

(top)

4. “God’s response to evil is too slow and capricious.”

• God created human beings with the capacity to sin or not to sin. The presence of evil in the world is due to the free will of humans and consequences of the fall. Thus God is indirectly but not directly responsible for the origin of human evil. Although this is not the best world, allowing humans the free will to choose, mature, develop character, persevere is the best way to the best world, heaven.

• But why does God wait and allow so much evil? For instance, why does it take six million Jews to die in the Holocaust, in order for God to “stop” evil? Isn’t one million deaths enough for God to respond to our cries? In humanity’s darkest moments, wicked people cause suffering at an enormous level. God is patiently waiting for human beings to work with Him in order to destroy evil. In the case of Nazi Germany during World War II, it did, contrary to our understanding, take six million deaths in order to respond to the crisis. In other words, we complain that God didn’t act fast enough, yet humanity was “slow” to act to the evils perpetrated during WWII.

• God’s answer to sin was to send the Messiah. To understand the importance of God’s answer to evil we must know who the Messiah is, and what the Messiah did, does, and will do. The Messiah is Jesus. He lived a perfect life, died on a cross, and offers salvation to humanity. Jesus is the advocate and Great High Priest, interceding for his people. As King, Jesus spiritually reigns in the heavens and in our hearts, but will one day he will physically return to Earth to destroy evil.

• The Messiah’s death and resurrection paves the way for defeating evil in four ways. (1) The Messiah received a glorified body and so will we. Thus, there will be no cancer, no HIV, no blindness, no Alzheimers, and so forth for those with glorified bodies. (2) In Christ, we are no longer slaves to sin; its power has been broken. Eventually, we will be in heaven in the presence of God, no longer living on earth where sin is proliferated throughout the world. (3) The Messiah has given Satan and his demons a fatal blow to the head. They will be judged and thrown into the lake of fire—never to tempt, lie, and influence people again. (4) Creation is groaning with natural disasters like hurricanes, tsunamis, and fires that wreak havoc on humanity (Romans 8.18-25). With the Messiah’s resurrection, God initiated a global transformation in the universal physical world. Like humanity, the world is waiting for the Messiah to reveal himself again when creation will be recreated, redeemed, and restored. At Christ’s return earthquakes, fires, tsunamis, and hurricanes will no longer cause human affliction.

• God, our Father, can empathize with us because He knows how it feels to lose a “son.” He watched as his Son, the Messiah, was led to a painful and suffering death. The Father knows what it feels like to see an innocent victim suffer and die at the hands of evil perpetrators.

• Let’s not forget that human beings have been given the responsibility and challenge to “stamp out” evil. In this sense God works in, with, and through humanity to overcome evil. For example, we can use political means (e.g., ending slavery), make medical/technological advances (treating diseases, performing operations), and provide comfort (e.g., love, mercy, counseling) for those who are suffering.

(top)

5. “If God is love, then why is there an eternal hell? Wouldn’t it be more loving if God simply ‘annihilated’ people?”

• While God is love, He is also holy. He has a perfect moral standard. One consequence of God’s holiness is that He cannot tolerate imperfection which the Bible calls sin, and thus He must judge sin.

• Let’s assume that someone is guilty of the premeditated torture and murder of five people. The person does not suffer from any psychological problems and has been pronounced fit to stand trial. We have undisputed evidence, including eyewitnesses, DNA testing, technological recordings, etc. The jury and judge, however, allow this guilty person to go free without prison time, community service, or psychological rehabilitation. The jury and judge do this to show compassion to the person because he never felt loved as a child. Do we think that justice has been served?

• It is true that a finite sin against a finite person such as if I steal from someone, deserves a finite punishment (temporal; “eye for an eye”). However, if a person’s sin is ultimately against God and not another human being, then is it not possible to categorize this as an “eternal” and “infinite” sin against God’s majesty? If so, then it makes sense that an eternal hell is predicated on the notion of an “eternal” and “infinite” sin against God.

• No one is in hell that does not want to be there. They have chosen this path instead of the other path prescribed in the Bible. God is impartial He will only send people to hell who have rejected him for their entire life. They also deserve to be there because of the consequences of their sin and God’s holiness.

• If you still think God is unfair for sending some to hell as a general principle, then let’s make it pragmatic and personal. Rather than focusing on God’s judgment and hell we should also consider His mercy, God withholding the judgment we deserve. At the cross both holiness and mercy come together when God pours out his wrath on His son, who becomes our substitute and receives the penalty for our sins.

(top)

6. “Your God is immoral and/or too vengeful. We should not trust and obey a God that sends a flood to judge the whole earth, rains burning sulfur on Sodom and Gomorrah, and commands his people to take the lives of all the Canaanites.”

• We need to first begin with the idea of God’s holiness. Because God is holy, he has an absolute and perfect standard for morality. When people fail to live up to this absolute standard, the Bible calls it “sin.” Every sin deserves punishment. God is majestic, that is, he is magnificent. God’s very being is absolutely and completely full of splendor, brilliance, and grandeur. Sin attacks God’s majesty. When God punishes sin, he is also “restoring” his majesty.

• God has given people the chance to repent and change their ways. The very fact that God did not judge the earth by flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, and Canaan immediately testifies to His mercy and withholding of judgment. God is not immoral in these instances because his creation was guilty and their sins were an abomination to God (Genesis 6.1-7; 18.16-33). The Canaanites were known in history for their wickedness.

• God was very patient and longsuffering towards the “evil” and “sin” in light of human wickedness during the time of Noah, Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Canaanites. We can only catch a glimpse of God’s holiness because of our experience of a tainted moral goodness. We can only begin to comprehend how painful and distressing it is for the Holy God, to observe sin without punishment.

• God’s majesty was insulted by the sins committed during the time of Noah, Sodom and Gomorrah, and the Canaanites. Because we cannot understand God’s majesty, we also can not understand how great is the offense to his majesty caused by sin. When God enacts judgment in these examples, it appears to be a “whimsical” or “knee-jerk” response. In actuality His decision to judge demonstrates His patience, holiness, and majesty. .It has been a long time coming.

(top)

7. “Slavery is unjust and yet the God of Christianity permits the nation of Israel and Christians to have slaves.”

• First and foremost, slavery as an institution (e.g., slave trade with Africa) should be condemned. Anytime one person is owned by another and deprived of personal liberties, we should vehemently oppose such a practice. The Bible, does not support such a practice.

• In the Old Testament, there were two kinds of slaves; a “prisoner of war” and an Israelite who “sold himself” to raise money. Concerning the latter, the underlining purpose was to help the poor not to create slave owners. When an Israelite entered into this agreementit was voluntary. This type of slave could own his own property as opposed togiving all property to the owner. A slave in this situation could work for only a maximum of six years, but they could buy their freedom earlier, and they had one day to rest (Exodus 20.10). They could be set free if there was mistreatment (e.g., hit with a rod leaving an injury; Exodus 21.20-27; Leviticus 25.44-46). In short, this kind of slavery (“selling oneself”) is radically different than the “traditional” understanding of slavery.

• Non-Israelite prisoners of war were permanent slaves of the Israelites, with the same rules of rest, mistreatment, and release if harmed applied to them. Dueuteronomy 25.47 teaches that these non-Israelites could gain wealth and even have an Israelite as a slave who sold himself to the “alien.” Leviticus 19:34 and Deuteronomy 10:19 also declare that Israelites should treat these non-Israelites slaves as if they were Israelites themselves. Again, the practice of having non-Israelite slaves is not similar to the current understanding of slavery.

• Deuteronomy 23.15 teaches that runaway slaves from another country should find freedom and sanctuary in the land of Israel and not be returned to the land from which he fled.

• For “slavery” in the New Testament we must discover what slavery was like under Roman rule. There are several observations worth mentioning (1) Any discussion about slavery is complex because of the variety of ways it was practiced. (2) Slaves lived in a variety of settings such as in dormitories andunder the same roof as their owners. (3) The law restricted the slave owner’s treatment of slaves. (4) Slaves had the right of legal recourse, to represent themselves in a court of law, bring charges against their owners for mistreatment, and request asylum. (5) Slaves could own property, make legal transactions, manage their owner’s property, and own their own slaves. (6) It has been estimated that two to three million people were slaves, 30% to 40% of the total population. Many of these slaves were infants, children, and the elderly. (7) Given such a high percentage of “needy” slaves it would be unwise to simply “free all slaves”. Social services would never be able to cope with such a crisis of needs. It was wiser and more practical to “end” the slavery of the Roman rule through the gradual and progressive improvement of the slaves’ privileges, rights, property, wealth, and status.

• In conclusion, the “practice” of slavery that existed in the Old and New Testament was radically different than our “traditional” understanding of slavery.

(top)