Ravi Zacharais, one of my very favorite Christian thinkers, provides some food for thought in yesterday’s “Just Thinking” broadcast.
On the question of evil and the existence of God, Zacharias uses logic to examine the issue.
One of the most common and strongest arguments against the existence of God is the question of so much evil and suffering in this world.
But what are the implications of this question, this assumption?
- – If there is evil, there is good (we cannot say something is bad without acknowledging there is something good, or something superior or preferable to evil)
- – If there is good, there has to be a moral law (without a law, everything is malleable, subjective and based on preference, convenience or expediency rather than an actual state of “good”, i.e. superior or preferable)
- – If there is a moral law, there has to be a transcendent moral law-giver (human beings could craft what they call “moral law” but since we are transient beings of limited perception with judgment clouded by self-interest, selfishness, etc., our standard of “good” for a moral law is quite likely to be “good for me” but not “good for you” which really means it is “expedient” rather than “good”)
- – But the question is trying to disprove that there is a transcendent moral law-giver.
- – So if we assume there is no transcendent moral law-giver, there can be no moral law.
- – If there is no moral law, there is no good.
- – If there is no good, there is no evil.
- – What is the question, really?
The strongest argument against the existence of God actually assumes the existence of God in the question.