The Problem of Pain: Perfect Paradox

God is perfect, at least that’s what you claim. Tell me how a perfect God can create anything imperfect. Yet, according to your holy book, the very prize of God’s creation fails. The most important of God’s works is also the most depraved and the cause of all suffering in the world. People are selfish. They kill one another. They destroy the earth. They seek self-promotion rather than justice and dream not of showing mercy but proving their superiority. If God is so good, why this suffering? Why this evil? So, here is my proof God doesn’t exist, at least not any sort of perfect god.

1. If God is good, everything He creates must be good.
2. God created everything.
3. There are things that are not good.
4. Therefore, God is not good, and it is likely He does not exist.

The problem of pain seeps into every facet of life. When we experience suffering, we lose faith. In reality, the Bible explains the purpose of suffering and why the Christian faith is the only one without paradox. Before we look at this apparent paradox, we have to understand what claims are actually being made. The beginning of all wisdom begins with the fear of the Lord, so we turn to John 17:17.

“Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth” (John 17:17).

This is Jesus’s prayer over His disciples so they may experience joy (John 17:13). Jesus not only shares His desire for His disciples to know the truth. He sees truth as the path to joy in life. Truth should be liberating for us. Jesus’s main goal isn’t to convert the masses to a religious perspective. He prays for His disciples to be sanctified in the truth for the purpose of their own joy. I fear we fail to connect truth and joy like Jesus did.

Instead, we fight to defend our personal principles, beliefs, and confessions. Too often church people who believe deeply in salvation by grace through faith fail to show grace or have faith. We grow malcontent and begin judging others by their insufficiencies instead of according to the finished work of Christ. Whatever knowledge we think we have puffs us up and makes us prideful. The same is true of the world. Instead of sincerely pursuing truth, we fight to blindly defend what we already think. This path really does lead to frustration and unhappiness.

Jesus has taught us a better way in having faith like children and sincerely coming together to learn the truth rather than assert ourselves. When we are sanctified in the truth, we experience the joy of contentment as we loose the frustrations of always having to be correct or critical. Jesus clarifies, God’s word is truth. It is given so we might be sanctified—changed or set apart. It was given for our good, that our joy may be complete. When we invest in God’s word, we are investing in our relationships with Christ, yes; but we are also investing in our own joy as we are made complete. Jesus taught that there is truth, an absolute claim. He taught that absolute truth is important. He taught that absolute truth brings joy.

Remembering these things, we consider the argument against God’s existence often referred to as the problem of evil. We will first consider whether the argument is sound. We will consider the premises second, and then evaluate the conclusion.

1. If God is good, everything He creates must be good.
2. God created everything.
3. There are things that are not good.
4. Therefore, God is not good, and it is likely He does not exist.

For an argument to be sound, the conclusion must follow logically from the premises. Just because an argument is sound doesn’t mean it is correct. Premises can still be false. To say an argument is sound is simply to say that if the premises are true, the conclusion must also be true.

In its fullness, then the argument presented is not entirely sound. As it is, it does not disprove God’s existence. Consider the first premise, “If God is good, everything He creates must be good.” Then, the conclusion, “Therefore, God is not good, and it is likely He does not exist.” No premise speaks to God’s existence. The argument assumes God’s existence and addresses His goodness. So, it is illogical to conclude that because God’s goodness depends on the innate goodness of the things He makes that God likely does not exist. At best, for a sound argument, the premises simply insist that if there is a God, He is not good. So, half of the conclusion is unsound. The other half is sound. It turns out that the existence of evil does not negate the existence of God. Still, we have to think about God’s goodness. How can God be good if there is evil in the world. Doesn’t that make Him, the creator of everything, responsible for evil?

1. If God is good, everything He creates must be good.
2. God created everything.
3. There are things that are not good.
4. Therefore, God is not good, and it is likely He does not exist.

Let’s consider the first premise. If God is good, everything He creates must be good. In this premise, we see a couple problems. First, we assume that we know what “good” is. Second, we assume that something good cannot make anything not good according to our presupposed definition of good. The first premise is built entirely upon the assumptions of the person making the argument. I simply ask, “What is goodness?”

Even in our church walls and high theological and philosophical conversations, I’m not sure we have an answer to that question. When we speak of good, we always mean it in a relativistic and not an absolute way. I think suffering is not good because I don’t like to feel pain. I think death is not good because I like living. If I were to ask you, “What is absolute goodness?” I’m not sure you could ultimately answer the question. 

It seems silly to refer to goodness like it has been referred to in the first premise in a relativistic way. What if our definition of “good” isn’t reasonable? I think in an argument like the one we are addressing, “good” must refer to an absolute goodness—else it can’t really be a standard. Therein lies the problem for the atheist. Where do you get your idea of what good is? What is your absolute standard for goodness that you can even make an argument like the one you have? Or, are you judging reality based on your own relativistic moral leanings? Even social contract is a relativistic way of approaching what is good, because in that case it simply refers to what is generally and socially acceptable. Social contract is just as weak as personal preference. Just because something offends you or the mob, doesn’t make it absolutely evil. Just because something pleases you or the mob doesn’t make it absolutely good. If we are going to claim that absolute goodness exists at all, we must have a non-relative standard for that law. If we don’t have an absolute standard, we can’t really appeal to a moral law or standard of goodness in our arguments and still be reasonable.

What we are left with is a naturalistic outlook on what makes something good. Entropy leads to chaos, and only the fittest survive. Morality ultimately comes down to social darwinism if one believes there is any good at all. Social darwinism leads to  racism, sexism, selfishness, taking advantage of other people, and everything most people would consider to be unjust and not good.

Some atheists and materialists will then say, “There’s is no good or evil, only what is by naturalistic means.” In this case, you cannot reasonably appeal to “goodness” in any logical argument. The first premise, here, falls unless you can appeal to an absolute standard for goodness. 

Thus, the “problem of evil” is more a problem for the atheist than it is for the theist. The theist is reasonable in believing good exists because he believes in a God who serves as the absolute standard for goodness. The atheist cannot believe there to be good or evil, and thus contradicts himself if he uses the existence of evil as a proof of his claim that God is not good or does not exist. Instead of having a problem of pain, it seems we have a problem of positives.

1. If we are to know what good is, there must be an absolute standard to determine what good is.
2. God serves as the only possible absolute standard for good.
3. Therefore, if we believe there is any way to measure how good anything is, we must also believe in God as the standard for good.

While the theist can easily deal with the supposed problem of pain. The atheist cannot easily deal with the fact that good seems to exist. This is along the same lines as sacrificial love, beauty, abstract thought, creativity, and that human consciousness that seems to tell the brain what to think about and do like a user directing a computer program to interface with the digital universe.

Jesus cared about the truth. He appealed to absolute truth. He said that we are sanctified in His joy when we seek the truth. The source? God’s word.

Through the rest of this series, we are going to look at some difficult things in God’s word, from suffering all the way to death. We are seeking to understand why God would kill and instruct people to kill. We are going to question natural disasters and why God allows evil people to commit war crimes and injustices in His world. Our objective is not simply to get a formula so we can reply to people who disagree with and hate us. We want to understand God more. We want to grow. So, we pray, “Lord, sanctify us in the truth.

---

In this post, you read about the “problem of evil,” and saw that Jesus cares about our pursuit of and sanctification in the truth. You saw that God’s word was given for our benefit and that truth increases our joy. Rather than becoming the sort of cynics that are often associated with religious conversation, we get to seek truth and be encouraged by it. If you have any questions about what you read, here, don’t hesitate to reach out. If you are in Warner Robins, Georgia this summer (2025), join us on Sunday nights.