The consequence of evil: An essay concerning natural theodicy

Abstract

Some philosophers of religion contend that the mere existence of natural evils gives strong reason to reject the existence of an omnibenevolent God. This brief essay takes the form of a reductio ad absurdum in order to demonstrate that the greatest good may only be achieved through the existence of a natural world, where a natural world may be defined as a possible world comprised of a maximally consistent set of propositions that affirm the existence of both governing, predictable laws, as well as some natural evil that results from the existence of natural causes described by these laws, i.e. physical pain and death. Specifically, this essay works with the concept of the Christian God and theological notions that are unique to Christian belief, and asks if the existence of the natural world is detrimental to Christian theism. The thrust of the argument makes the following contentions: (1) If the atheist’s claim is that the natural world in which we live should not exist, then humanity would exist in a world without pain and death; (2) further, humanity’s sinful nature would still remain in such a world. If this is the case, then (3) no world would exist such that the salvation of humanity, uniquely within Christian theism, might be bought via the vicarious redemptive acts of Jesus. Since pain and death would be eliminated, Jesus could not have died on behalf of humanity.