The Problem of Evil

“How long, O LORD? Will you forget me forever? How long will you hide your face from me?” — Psalm 13:1 (Hebrew: ‘ad-‘anah (עַד־אָנָה) — “how long?”; netsach (נֶצַח) — “forever, perpetuity”)

The existence of evil and suffering is the most powerful objection to belief in God. If God is all-powerful and all-good, why does He permit pain, injustice, and horror? This question is not merely academic — it is the cry of every grieving parent, every victim of cruelty, every person who looks at the world and wonders whether anyone is in charge.

Christian theology does not offer glib answers. It takes the problem with utmost seriousness — and responds with a vision of reality that is deeper and more hopeful than any alternative. For the biblical treatment, see the companion articles on why suffering exists and the cross as answer.

The Logical Problem of Evil

The logical problem of evil, formulated most sharply by philosopher J.L. Mackie, claims that the following beliefs are logically contradictory:

God is omnipotent (all-powerful)
God is omnibenevolent (all-good)
Evil exists

However, as philosopher Alvin Plantinga demonstrated in his “Free Will Defense,” these three propositions are not logically incompatible. It is possible that God has morally sufficient reasons for permitting evil — reasons that are consistent with His power and goodness. Most philosophers of religion, including many atheists, now acknowledge that the logical problem of evil has been largely resolved.

The Evidential Problem of Evil

The evidential version, associated with philosopher William Rowe, concedes logical compatibility but argues that the sheer amount and intensity of suffering makes God’s existence improbable. The response involves several complementary lines of reasoning:

Cognitive limitations — We are not in a position to judge that God has no morally sufficient reasons for permitting particular instances of suffering. Our perspective is radically limited compared to an omniscient being.
Cumulative case — The evidence for God’s existence (cosmological, teleological, moral, experiential) must be weighed against the evidence from evil. The question is which total picture of reality is most compelling.

The Free Will Defense

God created human beings with genuine freedom — the capacity to choose good or evil
Authentic love, virtue, and moral growth require the possibility of their opposites
Much of the evil in the world is the direct result of human choices: violence, oppression, dishonesty, and neglect
A world of free creatures who always freely choose good may not be feasible — even for an omnipotent God — because the content of free choices is determined by the creatures, not by God

This defense does not explain all suffering (natural disasters, childhood illness), but it accounts for a vast portion of the evil we observe.

Soul-Making Theodicy

Drawing on insights from Irenaeus of Lyon (c. 130–202) — whose vision of humanity progressing toward maturity influenced the doctrine of sanctification through suffering — this approach suggests that:

God’s purpose is not merely to create a comfortable environment, but to form mature, Christ-like persons
Virtues such as courage, compassion, patience, and faith can only develop in a world where genuine challenges and suffering exist
This life is a theater of soul-making — a place where character is forged through trial

“Not only that, but we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, and endurance produces character, and character produces hope.” — Romans 5:3–4

The Cross: God’s Definitive Answer

Christianity does not offer a God who observes suffering from a distance. The central claim of the faith is that God Himself entered into the depths of human suffering:

In Christ, God took on sarx (σάρξ) — “flesh, human nature” — experienced hunger, grief, betrayal, torture, and death
The Cross is not an afterthought but the predetermined plan by which God defeats evil from within (Acts 2:23)
God does not merely explain suffering — He absorbs it, bears it, and transforms it
The resurrection demonstrates that suffering and death do not have the final word

“Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows; yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted.” — Isaiah 53:4 (Hebrew: nasa’ (נָשָׂא) — “to bear, carry away”; makhoveynu (מַכְאֹבֵינוּ) — “our pains, our sorrows”)

No other worldview offers anything comparable. The God of Christianity is not untouched by the world’s pain — He has scars.

The Eschatological Answer

Scripture promises that evil is temporary and that God will bring final justice and restoration:

God will judge all evil and vindicate the righteous (Revelation 20:11–15)
He will wipe away every tear and make all things kainos (καινός) — “new in quality, renewed” — in the new creation (Revelation 21:4–5)
The present sufferings are not worth comparing to the glory that will be revealed (Romans 8:18)
Every wrong will be addressed, every wound healed, every injustice set right

The Christian hope is not escapism. It is the confident expectation that the same God who raised Jesus from the dead will complete His redemptive work in all of creation.

Lament as Faithful Response

The Bible does not demand stoic acceptance of suffering. It provides a language of lament:

The Psalms contain more laments — prayers of tefilah (תְּפִלָּה) — “petition, plea” — than any other genre — raw, honest cries directed at God
Job protests his suffering and demands an audience with the Almighty — and while God challenges Job’s limited perspective (Job 38–41), He ultimately vindicates Job over his friends for speaking rightly (Job 42:7)
Jesus Himself cried out on the Cross, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)

Lament is not the absence of faith. It is faith in action — bringing the full weight of our pain before the God we trust to hear and to act. The Christian response to evil includes honest grief, fierce hope, and the refusal to let go of the God who has promised to make all things right.