Context of Slavery in the Bible

 

Does the Bible endorse slavery?

What I find most disturbing is when misinformation is spread on a wide scale and accepted by so many as true. Ignorance, well willful ignorance is to blame. People are prone to being lazy thinkers and choose to follow whatever an authoritative figure on their side deems to be true, instead of investigating the claims for themselves. So, with that thought I want to address the issue of slavery in the Bible. Too often I see memes like this one posted by people ignorant on the subject saying something silly like, “If your Holy book tells you how to treat slaves your holy book is disqualified as a source of moral code.” Every ancient religious text has some mention of slavery because all ancient cultures practiced some form of slavery. My first question is, would you rather instead of the Bible instructing on how the indentured servant should be treated with respect and love the text taught the servant should be treated as a sub-human and viewed as property? What is the problem? Why the misunderstanding? You know the answer, it's one word, ignorance. Considering the history of the human rights movement if the Bible was such a great source for endorsing slavery why would Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. cite the Bible as his number one source for arguing against segregation and arguing for equal rights, alongside the constitution?

Summary showing the context of slavery in the Bible.

While the first mention of slavery was a curse in response to a sin Ham committed, clearly slavery was not a part of God's original plan for creation.[1] In the context of the Old Testament for the Israelite people to be a slave meant a contract to serve another until the next sabbatical year to make amends for an outstanding debt (Exo. 21:1-6 NIV).[2] This was not slavery in the traditional manner modern readers might imagine. This kind of slave was not viewed as simply a lesser person and a piece of property. Socially a slave in this context would be a fully equal image bearer of God, and not a possession, but someone who respectfully is making amends for their debt.[3] From a theological standpoint the reason God does not and would not condone the more traditional view of slavery is because humans were made to serve God not man. To even serve God one must do so freely or remain a slave to sin. Thus, not surprisingly the true origins of slavery are rooted in sin. As Stephen Cowan observed about how the Bible presents God's will for the world most certainly, "God did not make the world for slavers and sexists."[4] In the Old Testament readers see the Israelites were supposed to remember how God saved His people from slavery, and accordingly the Israelites were to treat the outsider and those less fortunate with compassion (Lev. 25:38, 42, 55; Deut. 15:15).[5] Israel was reminded by God that because of His grace she was saved and not because of their righteousness, and so accordingly these people were called to be compassionate to those in need and a blessing to the outsider.[6] Nowhere in the Old Testament or the New do readers find any God given justification for enslaving another human being, most certainly not in the sense as humans were once enslaved in America. In context the Bible makes clear that one is not intended to remain in slavery. Slaves who become believers are to find their identity in Christ and not be worried about their slavery, though if they can get their freedom they should do so (1 Cor 7:21). The Lord has set them free to serve others for Christ (1 Cor 7:22), and those who have been bought by Christ should “not become slaves of men” (7:23).[15] Along these lines, Paul calls on Philemon to receive Onesimus back no longer as a slave but as a brother (Phlm 16). Since slavery was no part of God’s good, created order, Paul’s instructions to Philemon provide an example of how relationships within the family of God can overcome evil with good.[7] You see the indentured servant is to be set free by the Christian and accepted as a brother. If an atheist wants to bring up the issue of slavery in the Bible, the Old Testament in particular, the apologist needs to be prepared to explain there is a significant difference between how surrounding cultures inhumanely viewed slaves and the Biblical view. 

Bibliography

Copan, Paul. Is God a Moral Monster?: Making Sense of the Old Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011.

Hamilton, James M. “Does the Bible Condone Slavery and Sexism?” In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetics for the Authority of Scripture, ed. Steven Cowan and Terry L. Wilder, 335-347. Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group, 2013.

---

[1] James M. Hamilton, "Does the Bible Condone Slavery and Sexism?" In Defense of the Bible: A Comprehensive Apologetics for the Authority of Scripture, ed. Steven B. Cowan and Terry L. Wilder, 335-347, (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing, 2013), 341.

[2] Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced are in the New International Version (Indianapolis, IN: Zondervan, 1990).

[3] Ibid., 342.

[4] Ibid., 336.

[5] Paul Copan, Is God a Moral Monster? Making Sense of the Old Testament, (eBook, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2011), Chapter 7, “The Bible's Ubiquitous Weirdness?”

[6] Ibid.

[7] Hamilton, "Does the Bible Condone Slavery and Sexism?" 343.

God Repenting/Relenting?

When we pray, we must desire to see God exalted (Exodus 32:7-12). This 2nd part to this series examines a passage where God seems to be changing His mind. He seems to repent for His plans. However, upon recognizing the character of God and understanding how He communicates on a personal level with those close to Him the truth is revealed.

Abraham Pleads for Sodom : Can a human haggle with God?

 

Why Sex Matters from a Biblical Perspective, and Why the Enemy Hates the Truth

Understanding the theological truth of sexuality happens to be important for understanding the gospel message (Eph. 5:30-32). An apologist may be frustrated to discover the primary concern for young church goers is how to address the subject of homosexuality. What is most frustrating is how often church leaders cannot explain how God views sexuality. You must have a solid foundation before you can properly build up any home. If the church is filled with parents who cannot properly provide a solid foundation for their children, the next generation will grow even more confused. God wanted the two lovers in the marriage covenant to come together in His love with His blessing, becoming one in flesh and spirit (Mal. 2:15). God poses the question, “And why one?” Because he was seeking godly offspring (v. 15). Furthermore, God warns His people, “So guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith with the wife of your youth.” The Lord goes on to declare, “I hate divorce… so, guard yourself in your spirit, and do not break faith (v. 16). The issue is not homosexuality, but all humans have become confused with regards to sexuality in general, and thus many are misled.

Instead of reading Genesis only as literal history the readers must understand the deeper meaning to each act of creation, especially the details involved with the formation of Adam and Eve. One must remember Christ is the beginning and the end (Rev. 21:6). Christ is and always has been the primary protagonist of this story from the very beginning (Col. 1:16). God placed Adam into a deep sleep before taking Eve from his flesh and blood, mirroring Christ sacrifice of His own flesh and blood resulting in the formation of His bride the Church (Eph. 5: 30-32, 2 Cor. 11:2). For from the side (tsela) of Adam came Eve and their sexual unity was and is for all married couples a holy and beautiful act ordained by God and represent of Christ being united with His bride forever (Gen. 2:24, Eph. 5: 30-31, Mal. 19:8, Rom. 7: 2- 3). Therefore, sexual immorality is wrong from a Christian perspective because sex was never intended to be self-centered and about the physical act alone (fornication, divorce, adultery, polygamy, homosexuality, etc.). The individual who finds their identity in their felt sexuality is missing the entire point to why God ever created humanity in the first place. Those who live for the physical act alone will never be satisfied and will be missing out on a more gratifying sexual union with their spouse intended to be both spiritual and physical (Song of Songs).

Many females, being not blind to a world dominated by selfish men, have concluded men are the enemy. Sadly, the honest scholar, whether male or female, must confess in most cultures’ women have not had equal rights, and were often treated like second class citizens. Though laws in Deuteronomy seem to support the idea of men viewing females more as property than equal partners, the Song of Songs simply disregards this idea of the male dominating over the female. The most esteemed biblical scholars cannot ignore how this book of romantic poetry contrasts with an ancient culture that seemingly disregarded the romantic desires of women.[1] In these Holy Spirit inspired writings one must remember the love God has for His beloved. However, readers must recognize they are looking into the mind of a female expressing her passion for her human male lover, while in return her lover unselfishly strives to woo her into his arms.

Song of Songs has a female voice, perhaps corresponding with the voice of wisdom (Sophia), as found in the Proverbs and elsewhere in the Old Testament. Regarding the repeated phrase, “My lover is mine and I am his,” (v. 2:16, 6:3, 7:10), scholar Richard Bauckham states, “Equality and mutuality can only be presented here as the female perspective because the text also presents them as the male perspective.” The point being, regardless of what the surrounding culture deems to be acceptable, in the home the wife must be treated as a cherished partner. In laymen terms, just because the guys at work talk as if women are objects to serve man, this is not to be the case in a Christian home. Truly the selfish man is not loving his wife as Christ loves the church. The idea of women being treated like second class citizens is most certainly not supported by Jesus Christ. The partners in a marriage are intended to serve each other equally. For as Christ serves the church the male not only serves their spouse in like manner, but accordingly the other members in the Church as Christ serves them (Eph. 5: 31-33; Rom. 15).

Adam and Eve were created to be representatives for God to the rest of the world, and the first instructions these partners received were to be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 1: 26-28, Eph. 6:12). Eve was taken out from the side of Adam and the two were to be united in love and become one flesh. Sex is a beautiful and holy act represent of Christ becoming one with the church, His bride (Eph. 6). Sex was made to be enjoyable and without shame between two responsible adults in a monogamous relationship, hence why the Song of Songs was written. The one who fails to let Christ be first in their life and chooses to live for self-centered desires alone, will never be satisfied. An interesting biological fact is if a woman is not gratified when the man releases his seed her body responds by seeking to attack and destroy the sperm.[2] Many who grown up in the modern church become bitter for they have never developed a personal connection with Christ. Many grow unsatisfied and leave the church because so many elders have failed to show how being one with Christ is most gratifying.

One must treat their spouse with dignity, or their child in the same manner may someday fail their partner in marriage. End the cycle and grow up. Adam failed his Queen who was intended to be treated as an equal. Later Christ would be pierced in His side and water and blood flowed as His heart broke for His bride, the true church. Christ literally died for His bride to have hope of spending an eternity in His love free from all danger and despair. This is the Gospel Christians must not fail at teaching others who are new in the faith, for if the foundation is not solid the structure will crumble. Many in the church go through the motions with blind faith, never understanding the gospel, and thus failing to properly share the love of Christ.  

The enemy did not sneak up on Eve while Adam was napping or relieving himself, for the Scriptures make clear Adam was with her (Gen. 3:6). The enemy enticed Eve into mistrusting God, and Adam blamed her for this mistake instead of taking responsibility for failing her (v. 12). In contrast one must love Christ who came to rescue His bride and take direct responsibility for what came of His lover (1 Cor. 15:22; Eph. 5:1-3, Rom. 5:8, 14:9). Throughout history mostly men have dominated over women, though in some cultures the women felt they should lord over men, hence the followers of Artemis, or the Amazonian women. Both extremes, which the confused majority tend to choose between, are wrong. Both Adam and Eve are to blame, yet Christ promised to reveal Himself by the seed of the woman (Gen. 3:15). The bitter liar seemingly believed the woman and her descendants were won over by the persuasive offer for them to become like gods (Gen. 3:4-5). However, the liar was offering the first couple nothing of lasting value. Both Adam and Eve were already intended to be immortal and upon growing in wisdom were meant to bare offspring who would likewise be born again into the family of God (John 3:1-17; Mal. 2:15-16; Mark 10:2-12, Eph. 5:21). Instead of being patient and developing a relationship with their Creator, the first parents decided to listen to the enemy and thus chose to not trust in God (v. 6).

The seed of distrust in the love of God is damaging to all relationships. Readers should reflect on a married couple, where one member is still negatively influenced by the first lie of the enemy, whereas the other has found genuine freedom in the love of Christ. In this hypothetical marriage the sex of each member does not matter, and the truth may apply the same if the sexes were reversed. Imagine the husband (A), only understands love as meaning their partner is devoted, protecting, and serving his every desire and need. The wife, (B), genuinely loves her partner and takes pleasure in serving his needs and unselfish desires. There is an obvious imbalance in such a relationship, and ironically (A) will be the one having trust issues. For (A) never genuinely enjoys the sacrifices he makes for his partner and expects (B) feels the same, for (A) believes this is an unspoken truth between all couples. Although, (A) appreciates how (B) serves his desires, he believes (B) only provides her services because she expects something in return. (A) never truly comprehends the kind of unconditional love (B) has for him. The one who understands love as meaning only how their partner shows devotion and serves their desires fails to understand the love Christ has for the church. The (A) Christian expects God is angry when he does not serve Him well with their sacrifices. God would rather one make no sacrifices at all if the person fails to truly know Him, hence refuses to understand Christ love (Matt. 9:13, 12:7, 5:24; Mark 12:33; John 6:66-67; Psalm 51: 16-17, 40: 6-8; Proverbs 21:3, Amos 5: 21-24; Micah 6:6-8; Hosea 6:6). God is obviously angry when the one He loves misjudges Him as being a selfish lover. Those who fall for the first lie of the enemy and distrust in the word of God, will likewise distrust in His love and care.

The women who knew Christ somehow understood His love and likewise desired to serve Him. They understood Christ loved them unconditionally and He longed to do what is best for them with pleasure. Christ love is patient, is certainly not envious, does not need to boast, and those Christ knows intimately feel protected in His love, they trust in Him, and will persevere in His love (1 Corinthians 13: 1-13). God is Love, but sadly so many depraved minds do not even understand true love (1 John 4: 7-12). Hence one can wonder just how patient God must be when seeing those made in His image use and hurt His little ones. God is fully righteous in His discipline when members of the church decide to manipulate and use each other, while believing their self-centered view of love is the kind of love God has for His people. In the case of the moralists the yeast of the Pharisees comes to mind, strict religious leaders who damaged the faith of those seeking to draw closer to God (Matt. 23). Christ warned these self-righteous leaders of the law, “Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted” (v.12). What a confused church there would be where the leaders fail to understand the gospel message. The enemy clearly has a foothold in such a church which will ultimately fail at leaving a positive impact in their community. The expert on religious laws does not help others grow spiritually. However, those who trust in the Lord like the women who knelt at Christ feet, or the children who humbly came to Him can inspire others to draw closer to Christ.

Since a house divided shall fall the enemy will seek to infiltrate the church and the home with the goal of influencing weak-willed leaders (1 Tim. 6:3-5, 2 Tim. 3: 1-6). Hence, some allegedly well-intentioned Christians push their spouses, children, fellow church members, and those outside the faith further away from understanding the love of Christ. Those who tend to damage the faith of others come from one of two extremes. There is either the hedonistic, resulting from a misunderstanding of God's grace, or the legalistic who misunderstand His righteous anger. Many passages in the Scriptures are misunderstood because the truths shared here about the heart of God are incomprehensible to those with hardened hearts. Regardless of the troubles in this fallen world, the Lord is indeed a compassionate and gracious God, being slow to anger, and abounding in love and faithfulness (Exodus 34: 6). Church Parents tend to be either one extreme or another for their hearts relate more with a wrathful God, or opposite being a gracious God in whom they have far too little reverence. Both cases add problems for the next generation. The one whose heart is set on honoring God and growing closer to Christ will never cease growing in knowledge, but the one set in their ways has limited their growth. The enemy has no power over the one who resists him, thus the one who loves and trusts in Christ through the trials, will not be put to shame (Rom. 10:11, James 4:6-8). 

 Adam and Eve failed to trust the Lord would share more truth with them through the process of a developing relationship, (as any wise parent must with their child.) Instead, they chose to cease trusting in God, and believed He was intentionally keeping them ignorant, (holding out on them.) The enemy planted this seed of doubt in their hearts which has spread to each generation. Like mass hypnosis the enemy has fooled multitudes, but evidently this devil cannot create anything of value. The liar takes what God has already created and seeks to corrupt the art; thus, he seeks to destroy beauty. The chief of liars operates likes a masterful marketing executive. The product is garbage, worthless like a pet rock, but the human mind against God is too easily persuaded. Hence, the need to protect the minds of the children is most important, for with the rise of social media garbage is much easier to promote and receive.

Christ warned in the last days children will revolt against their parents and will put them to death (Matt. 10:21, Mark 13:12). Christ also warned the house will be divided, with son against father, and daughter against mother (Luke 12:53). The enemy finds ways to keep people distracted from noticing something harmful entering the household. Hence, after teaching on how children should honor their parents, and how parents should teach their children the instruction of the Lord, Paul instructs readers to put on their full armor of God (Eph. 6:1-4, 10-17). If one understands how and why the war is not against flesh and blood, their whole perspective will change. The war is against spiritual forces of evil, these rulers and authorities in the unseen realm who seek to wreak havoc in this darkened world (v. 12). Hence the faithful must be motivated to stand their ground and be strong in the Lord and His mighty power (v. 10-13). To wear the armor of God and thus valiantly stand against the enemy one must trust in the authority that comes with being in a relationship with Christ (v. 10). The first essential piece of the armor is the belt of truth which is needed if one is to keep their breastplate of righteousness in place (v. 14-15). If one fails to trust in Truth their righteousness will be out of place, thus the one who does not trust in Christ will be vulnerable to thinking what is wrong is right. Consequently, the parent who fails to trust in Christ will leave their children vulnerable to the influences of the enemy. For example, Critical Race Theory is being taught in schools today, which is blatant racism in accord with the forty first goal of the communist elite.[3] Many schools are directly teaching children to view humans as being separated into two groups, the oppressors (all white people) and the oppressed (all other races).[4] Those who support the goals set against the Christian faith would love for readers to recognize how successful the enemy has been at winning the hearts and minds of the younger generation.[5] If young vulnerable minds are being taught in public schools to believe a certain form of racism is justified, anyone with common sense can see where this slippery slope leads.  

Naturally, God is right to be frustrated when members of the church fail to discern the truth from the lies. God is certainly right to be displeased when His children do not trust in the truth of His love, or when they fail to accurately represent His love and justice (Micah 7:18; Ezra 8:22; 1 John 2:5, 3:10; 4:18). God is wearied by the foolish words a church mumbles when the confused lot tends to go towards one extreme or another. Whether misunderstanding His grace, and contending God is not displeased with those who do evil or being like those who call out for the justice of God with a vindictive heart (Mal. 2:17). Both extremes are wrong. God is not a push over who allows His bride to take His love for granted, hence why no woman genuinely loves a man whom she cannot respect. Neither is God a cruel possessive lover who Lords Himself over those who wrong Him before taking pleasure in the pain or death of those who rebel against His love (Eze. 18:32, 33:11, Isa. 25:8; Deut. 9:4). Hence, the disciple of Christ wears the boots fitted for delivering the gospel of peace, to go and share the reason for their hope with gentleness and respect (Eph. 6:15, 1 Pet. 3:15).

Ultimately, there is nothing worse than when religious leaders use God to manipulate misguided desperate souls into providing sexual favors. The one who claims to be a follower or teacher of Christ is on the most dangerous ground according to Christ, especially when hurting His little children (Matt. 18:6, Mark 9:42). This goes back to the enemy taking advantage of the first young daughter of God. Yet, as the Father promised, from the woman the second Adam came, the One destined to crush the enemy (Gen. 3:15, 1 Cor. 15:21-23). Jesus Christ, the protagonist of this story came to defeat the devil on the cross where He made a public spectacle by disarming the powers and authorities against His children (Col. 2:15). Christ declared, “Now judgment is upon this world; now the prince of this world will be cast out” (John 12:31). Christ said, “I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world” (John 16:33). If there is to be true love, there must be freedom to accept or reject this love. Hence, the disciple of Christ must hold onto the shield of faith, remaining faithful even when the church is shaken, and leaders fall away (Eph. 6:16). With the shield of faith, the disciple of Christ will remain standing even if many others fall around them, for the flaming arrows of the enemy cannot pierce the faithful (v. 16). If faithfulness is not accurately represented in the church her members will be vulnerable to being fooled. Those sinful religious leaders who manipulate the vulnerable are of the enemy who has been sinning since the beginning of this story, but Christ will bring justice (1 John 3:8, 1 John 3:8, Rev. 20:10).

In a world where hope exists one feels compelled to assume there must be a greater good outweighing the evil in the world. In this story those on the side of the sacrificial hero win over those who oppose Him. So, although one might accuse the faithful of reasoning like a child, the wiser choice seems simple enough. Thus, the faithful will not be surprised by the counterfeit wonders the enemy will perform, which will fall short compared to the creating power of the one true God who can and has raised the dead (2 Thess. 2:9, Heb. 2:14). The enemy cannot fool the one whose head is guarded with the helmet of salvation, as those who are saved have guarded their minds with the help of the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God (Eph. 6:17). Hope, and faith sustain the one who understands the love of the Father, but the greatest strength for the disciple of Christ is love (1 Cor. 13:13, Gal. 5:6, 1 Thess. 1:3). Those with the most promising hope are the humble who have received grace for loving their Lord Jesus Christ with an undying love (Eph. 6:24, James 4:7, 1 Pet. 5:6).

The enemy is addicted to what God has allowed him to do, but what the enemy does serves a purpose. Despite the lying, slandering, inflicting disease, opposing, tempting, removing of the seed, and the weeds sowed by the devil, the faithful destined to bring glory to the Author of this story arise victorious (John 8:44, Job 1:9-11, 2:7, Zech. 3:1, Matt. 4:1, 13:19, 38-39). The obstacles and trials in life have helped mold the character of these vessels who remained dependent on the counseling of the Holy Spirit. The enemy does look for whom he can devour, but those who trust in Christ will be self-controlled and alert to the schemes of the enemy (1 Pet. 5:8). There will be suffering in this world but have peace and be of good cheer knowing Christ, the hero of this story, has overcome this world for those destined to trust in Him (John 16:33).

---

[1] Richard Bauckham, Gospel Women: Studies of the Women in the Gospels, (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2002), 13.

[2] Charles Detwiler, Kimberly Mitchell, Norman Reichenbach, Life by Design, (Mason, OH: Cengage Learning, 2014), 399-401.

[3] US Congress, House of Representatives. Current Communist Goals: Extension of Remarks of Hon. A. S. Herlong, Jr. of Florida, Congressional Record – Appendix, pp. A34-A35, January 10, 1963. Mrs. Patricia Nordman of DeFland, in being dedicated against the dangers of communism in America, identifies “Current Communist Goals” as verified in The Naked Communist by former FBI agent Cleon Skousen.

Cleon W. Skousen, The Naked Communist, Ninth ed., (Salt Lake City: Ensign Pub. Co, 1961), Chap. 12.

[4] Alex Newman, “Echoes of Mao: Weaponizing Schools With ‘Critical Race Theory,’” The Epoch Times, April 21-27, 2021.

[5] Skousen, Chap. 7.

---

[1] Lincoln Barnett, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, New York: William Sloane Associates, 1948, p. 106; Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomers New and Expanded Edition, New York / London. W.W. Norton & Company, INC., 1992), 27-28.

[2] Albert Einstein, Out of My Later Years, (New York: Philosophical Library, 1950), 27-28.

Albert Einstein View on the Problem of Evil & God’s Omnipotence

 

"If God is omnipotent how can humans be held responsible for any immoral actions?"

Einstein was openly upset upon discovering the universe had a point of origin, for the implication of there being a Creator, or "Prime Mover" was now unavoidable (Jastrow, God and the Astronomers, p. 27-28).

Einstein attempted to argue for the universe being eternal (cosmological constant), to later confess to this idea being, "...the greatest mistake of his life" (Douglas, A. Vibert, "Forty Minutes with Einstein," in the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, 50. (1956), p. 100).

What Einstein accepted as evidentially true. 

(1) Necessity of the universe having a beginning point (aka big bang) (ibid).

(2) Necessity of "...the presence of a superior reasoning power..." (Barnett, Lincoln, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, New York: William Sloane Associates, 1948), p. 106).

What Einstein denied.

The "doctrine of a personal God" (Einstein, Albert, Out of My Later Years, New York: Philosophical Library, 1950), p. 27-28).

Two obstacles (reasons for not accepting belief in personal God), according to Einstein.

(Obstacle 1) Einstein was bitter towards the clergy and especially the priests (Einstein, p. 26-30). 

And (point we will respond to), 

(Obstacle 2) God's Omnipotence and Human responsibility for their choices paradox.

Einstein Problem of Evil (summary).

(1) Omnipotent God ("...every occurence..." even human thought, feeling, action, aspirations = Omnipotent God's work (Einstein, p. 27).

(2) Omnipotent God holds humans responsible for their thoughts and deeds (giving punishment and rewards) (ibid).

(3) Omnipotent God judging humans would "to a certain extent be passing judgment on Himself" (ibid). 

(4) Goodness and righteousness (as commonly attributed to God) is not possible if God is omnipotent (ibid).

Freewill Defense (Problem of Evil)

Philosopher Plantinga said, “A good God will eliminate evil as far as he can without either losing a greater good or bringing about a greater evil.”

Given this premise, the triad can be reformulated in a perfectly consistent manner:

1.      An omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent God created the world.

2.      God created a good world in which evil was possible and became actual and had a good reason for doing so.

3.      Therefore, the world contains evil.

This strategy has come to be known as a defense, as opposed to a theodicy. A defense defeats an attack on theism by laying out a possible solution that renders theism rational. But a defense fails to give any specifics on what God’s sufficient reasons might be for allowing evil.

Evil has a secondary status in the universe; it is not a direct creation of God but comes about through human mismanagement of people and their environment. Nevertheless, some moral goods are impossible apart from responding to particular evils. Therefore, the Fall (while based on human rebellion against a holy God) opens up possibilities for virtue not possible otherwise. That is, evil serves an instrumental purpose in the providence of God. This particular line of defense is called “the greater-good defense.” William Wainwright explains: “This defense attempts to show (roughly) that (1) evil . . . is logically necessary to some good, that (2) this good outweighs the evil, and that (3) there are no alternative goods not involving those evils that would have been better.” All evils serve some justifiable purpose in God’s economy.

Considering how souls might be perfected through struggle and suffering opens the door to the classic understanding of “the greater-good defense.” God uses certain evils to actualize a good greater than would be possible otherwise. While the first and prototypical humans were without sin, they lacked difficult experiences that could help produce virtue. For example, virtues such as courage, heroism and self-sacrifice require some element of risk or danger.

The apex of sacrificial love was displayed through the physical, mental and spiritual suffering of Jesus Christ on behalf of his enemies. No greater act of love has ever been so demonstrated, nor ever will be so… No other religion is based on the death, burial and resurrection of its divine founder. It is in this supernatural reality that the problem of evil is best understood. If the misunderstanding of his own people could not thwart him, if the powers of darkness could not outsmart him or seduce him, if death itself could not hold him, then we have every reason to trust him as “the Beginning and the End” (Revelation 21:6). In Christ one sees how evil and suffering are subservient to eternal love. Where Christ conquered sin the faithful see love conquers all. For the great love of God to be appreciated and freely accepted by those made in His image this world filled with suffering and death is necessary.

Christ made clear there is no greater love than the love of one who lays down their life for their friends (John 15:13). To make the unchanging love of God known in this realm sacrifice would be necessary. God’s great love is understood by those naturally beneath Him in a world containing the beauty of sacrificial love. The devil made a free choice to rebel against God, but being thrown to Earth was no accident, in fact this was in accordance with God’s will. Before being arrested Jesus told the disciples the enemy was coming for Him, and the reason was clearly stated, “…so that the world may learn that I love the Father and do exactly what my Father has commanded me…” (John 14:31). Everything the enemy did, every evil tolerated, these were necessary sacrifices leading up to the cross, where Christ eternal love for the Father, and God’s love for humanity is made known. In the parable about the shepherd and His sheep, Jesus spoke on how just like His sheep know Him, this is akin to Jesus knowing the Father, and for this reason He was going to lay down His life (John 10:14-15). Earlier in this same passage Jesus mentioned the thief who comes to kill and destroy, and in contrast Jesus came so people could have life to the fullest (v. 10:10). The works of the enemy were and are allowed so in contrast the great love of God can be known. The intellectually honest person will confess the deeper understanding of love in this realm would not be possible if not for the knowledge of sacrificial love. If a human wanted to play judge against God such a person would audaciously demand justice from the One who could have stopped all the injustice. Yet, the faithful Christian understands in Christ God took direct responsibility for how sin affected His creation (1 Cor. 15: 22; Eph. 5:1-3, Rom. 5:8, 14:9). All people now have a choice between the One who died for the sins of the world or eternal separation from the One who proved His love. If a far stronger fighter strategically takes a hit for the greater good this does not mean the stronger was truly weaker. Jesus conquered sin and death by taking on sin and death. Christ proved God is all powerful in being the life which conquers death. Christ proved God is all knowing after He felt the effects of sin and having tasted death. God did what is impossible for humanity and proved to be the greater love all people desperately need. As people have heard testimonies from former Islamic terrorists or even the Apostle Paul who terrorized Christians, one recognizes when Christ faces such a person the love of God is no longer denied.

      Theodicy

(1)   If God is fully just and fully good there must be a just and good reason for Him tolerating suffering and evil.

(2)   If God was willing to suffer in human form in the worst of ways, He must have had a good and just reason for doing so.

(3)   The greatest way Gods’ love could be displayed and recognized is through the suffering Christ endured.

(4)   His great love is understood because of the suffering and evil recognized by humanity.

(5)   If His great love has been accepted by billions and His love is still impacting people today; His goodness, His justice, and His love must be greater than any evil in this world.

(6)   If what is good is better recognized when compared to what is evil than the evil tolerated is for the greater good, otherwise God’s great love would be incomprehensible.

(7)   People can comprehend Gods’ great love because of the suffering and evil He endured/endures, so God is fully just and fully good.

Unlike other worldviews, Christianity claims that vice and natural evil are not intrinsic to or necessitated by human nature or the universe. Evil was not built into creation by God. Our first parents rebelled against the known law of God and thus fell into sin (Genesis 3). This was not on account of God misleading them (the serpent did that) or of God coercing them (they deliberated and acted against God’s instructions). As Francis Schaeffer put it, human beings are now discontinuous with their original condition, not because God created them vicious or because God coerced them against their will, but because humans changed themselves by rebelling against God. “In this case we can understand that man is now cruel, but that God is not a bad God. This is precisely the Judeo-Christian position.” Moreover, evil is not metaphysically necessitated; in fact, evil is dependent on a prior and original goodness. Evil is dependent on goodness in a parasitic way. Evil is not a thing or a substance in and of itself, but the warping and twisting of an antecedent good, which results in a lack of proper goodness. For example, Hitler’s temporary successes stemmed from his oratorical and strategic abilities. These abilities were not evil in themselves since a person may inspire goodness through oratory and lead others into righteous endeavors through proper strategies. But Hitler misused his gifts and lacked virtue, particularly love. Hence, he was dominated by evil.

For the love of God to be known in this realm necessary sacrifices were made. Resulting from Christ sacrifice the honest mind gains a deeper understanding and appreciation for the perfect justice and grace of God. Bear in mind the recognized limits of human imagination. Consider if not for divine revelation one could not imagine a reality before space and time where numerous manifestations of love were shared within the Trinity. Many manifestations of beauty and love were only feelings or thoughts in the mind of God before becoming real for any created being. There is a unique sensation of love and peace the weeping father feels when listening to his daughters’ beating heart in the chest of the one who lives because the daughter died. Another unique sensation of love and peace is felt by two siblings who forgive each other and are united after losing their mother. There is also the unique love mixed with pride a soldier feels for their brother in arms who dies in the battlefield after fighting bravely and saving lives. Before creation there could have been individual words to describe each of these deeply loving sensations in the mind of God. If the Bible is false the greatest example of love is a lie, and any sense of hope during suffering is an illusion, because if only death is certain life is meaningless (1 Cor. 15:18-19). In this temporary world the greatest truths in life are fully recognized and appreciated because of a knowledge of suffering. The crucifix is beautiful today and is seen as a symbol of hope. The horror of Christ on the cross suffering and dying for the sins of the undeserving is at the same time a beautiful truth an adopted child of God is most grateful for. If the idea of sacrificial love were only real in the imagination, such a thought would not truly be as great as the reality of the person who lays down their life for others (John 15:13).

Sources

Barnett, Lincoln. The Universe and Dr. Einstein. New York: William Sloane Associates, 1948.

Douglas, A. Vibert. "Forty Minutes with Einstein," in the Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, 50. (1956).

Einstein, Albert. Out of My Later Years. New York: Philosophical Library, 1950), p. 27-28.

Feinberg, John S. The Many Faces of Evil. Wheaton: IL, Crossway, 2004.

Geisler, L. Norman, and Turek, Frank. I Don’t Have Enough Faith to be an Atheist. Wheaton, IL. Crossway Books, 2004.

Groothuis, Douglas. Christian Apologetics: A Comprehensive Case for Biblical Faith. Downers Grove: IL. InterVarsity Press, 2011.

Jastrow, Robert. God and the Astronomers New and Expanded Edition. New York / London. W.W. Norton & Company, INC., 1992.

           

Plantinga, Alvin. God, Freedom, and Evil. Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1974.

Ross, Hugh. The Fingerprint of God. Orange CA: Promise Publishing Co., 1989.