Early Christian Responses to Evil

The Problem with Evil:

William Rowe’s Evidential Problem of Evil (1979)

Rowe’s argument is an evidential (probabilistic) challenge to the existence of God. He concedes that the presence of some evil might be justified in a world created by an all-good, all-powerful God. However, he argues that there exist instances of gratuitous evil—suffering that serves no greater good or purpose. His famous example is a fawn trapped in a forest fire, suffering terribly before dying. Since such suffering does not seem necessary for any greater purpose, he concludes that it is unlikely that an all-loving, omnipotent God exists.

David Hume’s Logical Problem of Evil (1700s)

Hume presents a logical (deductive) problem of evil, questioning how a God who is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good can coexist with evil. He famously paraphrases Epicurus:

If God is willing to prevent evil but not able, He is not omnipotent.If He is able but not willing, He is not benevolent.If He is both able and willing, why does evil exist?

Hume argues that the presence of evil logically contradicts the traditional attributes of God. While some later thinkers (like Alvin Plantinga) have challenged this as not a strict logical contradiction, Hume’s argument remains influential in highlighting the tension between classical theism and the reality of suffering.

1. Augustine and the Privation Theory of Evil

One of the most influential Christian responses comes from St. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 CE). Augustine argued that evil is not a created thing but rather a privation (lack) of good.

"For what is that which we call evil but the absence of good? In the bodies of animals, disease and wounds mean nothing but the absence of health; for when a cure is effected, that evil which was present does not retreat and go elsewhere, but simply ceases to exist." (Enchiridion on Faith, Hope, and Love, Chapter 11)

Augustine rejected the idea that evil is an independent force. Instead, he claimed that evil is like darkness—it has no real substance, only an absence of light.

Augustine believed that God created the world good, but humans, through free will, chose to turn away from God, leading to suffering and moral evil.

Natural evil (such as diseases or disasters) was often understood as part of divine justice or as a consequence of the Fall.

2. Irenaeus and the Soul-Making Theodicy

A different approach comes from Irenaeus of Lyons (c. 130–202 CE), who saw evil as a necessary part of human development.

"How, if he had no knowledge of the contrary, could he have had instruction in that which is good? … But by experience of both he becomes a perfect man, and being perfect, he can come to God." (Against Heresies, Book 4, Chapter 39)

He argued that humans were created imperfect, with the potential to grow into the likeness of God.

Suffering and evil exist to help us develop virtues like courage, patience, and faith.

This approach is often called the soul-making theodicy—it suggests that evil serves a greater purpose in shaping human character.

Discussion Questions:

Which do you find more convincing: Augustine’s idea that evil is a lack of good or Irenaeus’ idea that suffering helps us grow? Why?

How does Augustine’s idea of free will help explain moral evil? Does it adequately explain natural disasters?

If suffering is necessary for growth, does that justify extreme suffering in the world?

II. Medieval Christian Thought on Evil (15 minutes)

1. Thomas Aquinas and the Greater Good Defense

Moving into the medieval period, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274 CE) built upon Augustine’s ideas and introduced the notion that evil can lead to a greater good.

"As, then, an individual man, in order to have perfect virtue, must not only have the habit of virtue, but also experience the contrary vices, so as to abhor them, thus it is necessary for the perfection of the universe that there should be certain things that fail in goodness, and thereby make manifest the superior goodness of other things." (Summa Theologica, Part I, Question 48, Article 1)

He believed that God's plan is beyond human comprehension, and what seems evil to us may ultimately serve a greater purpose in God's divine order.

For example, suffering might be necessary to bring about redemption, as seen in the crucifixion of Christ.

Discussion Questions:

Do you think the idea of a "greater good" justifies suffering? Why or why not?

If God’s plan is beyond human understanding, can we ever truly question why evil exists?

How does the crucifixion of Christ fit into the medieval understanding of evil?

III. Reformation and Modern Perspectives (15 minutes)

1. John Calvin and the Sovereignty of God

During the Reformation, John Calvin (1509–1564) emphasized divine sovereignty.

"Nothing happens but what God has knowingly and willingly decreed… we must hold that God is the author of all things in such a way that He is free from all fault, and that His will is the highest rule of righteousness." (Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16)

He argued that everything, including suffering and evil, occurs according to God’s will.

Some events that seem evil to us may be part of God’s hidden purposes.

Discussion Questions:

How does Calvin’s emphasis on God’s sovereignty compare with the free will defense?

Does the free will argument sufficiently explain why God allows so much suffering?

Could God have created a world where humans always freely choose good?

IV. Contemporary Christian Interpretations (15 minutes)

1. Process Theology and Open Theism

Some modern theologians, such as those in process theology and open theism, argue that:

"God does not control everything that happens in the world. Rather, God works with creation, responding to the free choices of creatures, seeking to bring about good from their actions." (The God Who Risks, John Sanders)

God is not a distant, all-controlling being but rather interacts with creation dynamically.

Instead of having full control, God experiences time with us and works toward good.

Evil exists because God does not unilaterally override free will or natural processes.

Discussion Questions:

How does open theism change the way we understand God’s role in suffering?

Does the promise of future redemption (heaven) make present suffering more meaningful?

How should Christians respond to evil in the world today, beyond theological explanations?

Conclusion (5 minutes)

Despite differences, most Christian traditions affirm that evil is not the final word—God’s justice and redemption will ultimately prevail.

Thank you! Let’s continue the conversation.