The Free Will Defence: A Good God vs The Problem of Evil

We live in a world festering with evil. How could a good God allow this problem of evil? Narrated by Harry Shearer. Scripted by Nigel Warburton.

From the BBC Radio 4 series - A History of Ideas.

This project is made in partnership with The Open University and the animations were created by Cognitive

[Hunz]

anyone else notice that it's Skinners voice?

[relu]

Lads, we all here for homework, let’s not deny it.

[AntiCitizenX]

Free will defense in a nutshell:

Woman:  "Help, help!  I'm being beaten and raped!  Somebody help me!  Please God make it stop!"

God:  "Sorry, miss.  Free will.  Do continue."

Woman:  "But he's violating my free will right now!  I have no choice in this matter.  I'm being forced, and I want it to stop.  You have the power to make this stop!"

God:  "Uh... free will?  Carry on."

[EuroUser]

As humans, our freedom is limited in many ways. The victim, for instance, is often unable to escape torture/rape/murder. Why not make, instead, the tormentor unable to keep the abuse going on?

[Catalistic]

I never really like the idea of God vs Evil, since evil itself is created by God (with the idea that God is an omnipotent), so everything that happen is because of God. Some people might have problem because of this, but for me personally, God did create everything but the universe He created didn't care about us.

[ZephLodwick]

Victim: Help, I'm being murdered!
Cop: I'm sorry. I can't do anything, because it would interfere with the free will of the killer.

[Donteatacowman]

From what I've seen, most religions/philosophies have an explanation for this that is internally consistent. (The religion I grew up with used this defense, and then for natural evil, it's part of a plan that we may not understand but will lead to the greater good.) But (and it took me way too long to realize this!) a model of the world that is internally consistent and matches observable facts is not necessarily true. If I believed I, the only real human, am a brain in a jar hallucinating everything I've ever experienced, well, that's internally consistent and it matches what I observe. But my friend believes that we're all physically real creatures with individual consciousnesses, heck, that's internally consistent and matches the observable universe too. We can't both be right..

[lanazak]

Why do we choose to believe in a diety who allows children to be tortured; who is less compassionate than we are? Where is the free will of the child? It would make more sense to believe that this diety is all good but not all powerful. IMO the amount and distribution of pain and suffering cannot be justified by the allowance of free will for some people, so it is a flawed argument.

[PenDragon-hglg]

"Is God willing to stop evil but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he willing but not able? Then he is not benevolent. Is he both willing and able? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?" - Epicurus of Samos

[thisismodernity]

Is there evil in heaven? (How could it be heaven if there is?) So there's only good in heaven?

So do you lose your free will at heaven's gates? And become a heavenly automaton? Or does God have some way of free will existing and only good being possible (not automatons, but only able to choose good)? If so, why did he not do that on earth and instead save it for heaven?

Conclusion: There is either evil in heaven, or you lose all free will in heaven (and become a slave), or god created evil on earth because.. he likes it?

The free will defence is bunk.

[funnyarabhalalman]

If there was a benevolent god, why not give us free will but not the means to actually harm others?

[HotelEarth]

Free will is the idea that chemistry and physics can be over ridden by some mysterious mental power. Yet that mental power clearly diminishes with the health of the brain.

[irishnich]

Does God have free will? According to the Bible, yes. Can God sin? According to the Bible no. Therefore, God’s very character demonstrates that it is possible for free will to exist without the possibility of sin and evil.

Furthermore, since God created man in his own image, could he not have given man the same ability to exercise free will while at the same time being unable to sin, even as God is unable to sin? It seems like God did a poor job at creating man in his own image.

God’s nature refutes the argument that free will brings the possibility of sin – unless you want to argue that God can choose to sin, in which case we would have to conclude that Bible texts to the contrary are all lies.

[mrtony]

A gunman has the free will to shoot a bunch of people, but what about the free will of thee victims? Why does the shooter's free will trump theirs?

[georgemoncayo]

Everything that happens in history has been decreed/Predestined before the world was created see Eph 1:11, Proverbs 16:33 and Amos 3:6. And yes even when terrible things happen, I know it's hard for some people to accept but look what happened when David sinned against God and one of Davids punishments was that God told him that he was going to use Davids own son to shame his Father by Absalom Absalom doing something immoral to his Fathers concubines in front of all of Israel, see 2 Samuel 12:11-12 God said "Thus says the Lord, ‘Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own household; I will even take your wives before your eyes and give them to your companion, and he will lie with your wives in broad daylight. Indeed you did it secretly, but I will do this thing before all Israel, and under the sun." Notice how God said "I WILL DO THIS THING."That was fulfilled in 2 Samuel 16:21-22. Jesus did not die for every single person ever and Jesus didn't die to make people savable. He died to save his elect. In John 17:9 Jesus said that he does not pray for the world. The word world is used in different contexts, in that context he's talking about the non elect. In John 3:16 world means that he purchased people from every tribe, tongue and nation Rev 5:9 and for the children of God scattered abroad John 11:52. Some have been "long beforehand marked out for condemnation" Jude 4 and "appointed to doom." 1 Peter 2:8. About Pharaoh God said “For this VERY PURPOSE I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires." Rom 9:17-18. Jesus said "I praise You, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that You have hidden these things from the wise and intelligent and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight. All things have been handed over to Me by My Father; and no one knows the Son except the Father; nor does anyone know the Father except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him." Matthew 11:25-27. So, 2 Pet 3:9 the "not willing that any should perish" if you read that letter in context, 2 Pet 1:1 says "To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours." As far as salvation for all men verses, Paul was refuting the false notion of his time that God was only desiring to save just the Jews and 1 Tim 2:2 says to pray "for kings and all who are in authority" because as humans WE DON'T KNOW WHO THE ELECT ARE SO WE PRAY FOR EVERYONE! That's what it means in verse 4 by saying "all men." Amos 3:2 God said "of all the nations of the earth I have only known you." For centuries God passed over the majority of humankind because this verse isn't about knowledge it's about relationship. And it isn't because God foresaw Israel was more righteous then the other nations because sometimes Israel was more sinful then the pagan nations see 2 Kings 21:9. Only those who were predestined to be saved will be see Acts 13:48, Ephesians 1:4-5, Eph 1:11, Romans 9:11-23, John 6:37. 1 Samuel 3:14 God said “Therefore I have sworn to the house of Eli that the iniquity of Eli’s house shall not be atoned for by sacrifice or offering forever.” That's Limited atonement.

[nikowentworth]

Several thoughts:

1. The problem of evil is a big problem for theists, but its not a philosophical problem, for strong rebuttals from theists have been written and left unanswered. But it is an emotional problem, and sometimes, philosophical treatises don't do so well against a more primal gut response that is induced by the problem of evil.

2. However, the problem of evil is actually a larger problem for the atheist. Harry Shearer and Nigel Warburten fall into it when they start listing types of evil. "People inflicting pain on humans and other animals... enjoying others suffering... disease, famine, floods, and earthquakes." How can an atheist say any of these things are evil? All these things do is cause human and animal suffering. But why should causing animal and human suffering be considered evil? One can think like this if one has a very anthropocentric view of the universe as a believer can, but an atheist cannot. That is the problem of evil for the atheist:
A. How to explain the fact that we experience all the things listed above as evil, when we live in a Godless world, where absolute standards of morality do not exist.

3. I am positive all those victims of the dictators mentioned would happily agree that it is better to live in a world of free will because that is what it means to live as a human being. Anyone who wishes to deny free will is denying our humanity, since part of what makes us human is our ability to self-direct through reason (i.e. free will.) And in that respect, such a person would be worse than all those dictators, since those dictators robbed the dignity of a portion of humanity, while the person who wants to get rid of free will wants to deny the dignity of all humanity. 

4. Natural evil often can be explained by free will. Why are earthquakes evil? Not because they happen, but because they kill human beings. Knowing that Earthquakes consistently happen, why do we continue to build and rebuild large cities on fault lines, knowing that our choice to do so, will lead to people getting killed. Is it because we think it's worth the risk, and that a few people dying is outweighed by the financial benefits of building such a city in such a location? If that's our thought process then it seems we are the evil ones, not the earthquake. 

5. Further, let us remember the Genesis story. Man was set as steward of creation. A steward is one who governs according to the will of the King. When man went contrary to the will of the king, he failed to be a good steward. And by failing to be a good steward of creation, he failed to govern creation well. By failing to govern it well, things contrary to the positive will of God came in. Thus, when mankind fell, man dragged all of creation down with him. Should we be surprised then that creation acts as it does, for we have failed to govern it.

6. Finally, what would happen if we were to see evils including natural evils as not just the result of people willing evil, but in fact as necessary at some level for us to reach our telos. For, as beings with free will, our telos is to become virtuous. But one can only be virtuous in a situation where one may be tempted to be vicious. For example, love, when it is virtuous is loving even those who are "unloveable." And who are the most unloveable if not those who refuse to love us and in fact actively harm us. In order for us to love those who hate us and persecute us, there must be people who hate us and persecute us. Similarly, we can only be merciful if we have a cause to seek revenge, which we forsake. But we can only have a cause to seek revenge if someone has wronged us. Thus, in order for us to be merciful, there must be people who harm us. Courage can only be practiced in the face of fear. Evil is tolerated to exist in this world, so that we may become courageous against it. Therefore, there must be something we ought to be fearful of. And faith, can only be practiced when there is cause for unbelief, and therefore, God allows there to be things in this world which seek to turn one from faith, in order to strengthen it. For virtues, like swords, are forged in fire.

[jackhandma]

I don't think free will is a really good argument. We obviously aren't entirely free. There's so much we cannot do. With just our bodies we cannot breathe underwater, fly, turn invisible, breath in space, read people's minds etc.
If our freedom is limited anyway, why didn't God make it so that we still have a great range of freedom but without the ability to sin?

[cryptidliam]

my teacher forced me to watch this and now my watch history is ruined

[curiousasha]

simple. evil was created so that we can see good. and choose it. 

[k.o.]

automata don't evolve. as to what the narrator refers to as 'natural evil' the same principle of evolution applies, sometimes, things happen that don't necessarily benefit humans/animals/general environment seemingly, no matter how cruel it seems, it is evolution in action. random mutations/events are the basis of natural evolution.