An Honest Debate.com

We live in an age of unbelief, and even though there are many reasons for believing in God many do not believe. Even those who believe often find themselves doubting. Perhaps the thing that causes us to doubt the most is the problem of pain and suffering. Our problem is this: If there is a God of love, and if He is omniscient and omnipotent, how can He allow all of the pain and suffering we see in the world around us?

Bertrand Russell seized upon this question and used it to launch a masterful attack on Christianity. His answer to the question was that either God is not able to do anything about it, in which case He is not omnipotent, or He is unwilling to do anything about it, in which case He is not good.

In, Why I am not a Christian, Russell put it this way, “It is a most astonishing thing that people can believe that this world, with all the things that are in it, with all its defects, should be the best that omnipotence has been able to produce in millions of years. I really can’t believe it. Do you think that if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years to perfect your world you could produce nothing better than the Ku-Klux Klan and the fascists.” Pretty powerful stuff, don’t you think?

Several months ago our Senior Pastor asked me to write a series of articles for our church newsletter addressing the problem Russell raises. I have finished two of these articles and will soon be writing a third. I intend to post them in days to come.

But before I do so I want to address Bertrand Russell’s attack directly. At first glance His logic seems irrefutable. So how can we refute it? There are actually several ways we can attack Russell’s argument. Perhaps the simplest way is to point out that if there is a God of infinite wisdom and knowledge, then “His ways must surely be higher than our ways and His thoughts higher than our thoughts.”[i] This being the case it should not surprise us that sometimes we fail to understand Him. What should surprise, delight and astound us is that sometimes we do.

Also, given God’s wisdom it may well be that He has a purpose in the bad things He allows that will be justified when His plan is fully known. An example of this is the cross. I can well imagine the disciples asking on the day after the crucifixion, “How could God allow such a thing?” But after the resurrection, after they came to understand that the cross was not a senseless tragedy but a purposeful part of the plan of God, their attitudes changed. Once the cross was placed in the context of the overall plan of God we see them moving from despair to hope; away from the “why question,” to actually glorying in the suffering of the cross.

In the same way it is not inconceivable that we may one day be able to do the same thing when our pain and suffering is placed in the context of the overall plan and purpose of God. The Bible says He has such a plan. And given the existence of a God of infinite wisdom and knowledge it is not unreasonable to believe it.

But there is another way in which Russell’s argument can be attacked. When I first studied logic I learned that if you know someone is wrong but you cannot find a logical flaw in his argument, check his premises. I would suggest that it is in examining Russell’s unspoken premises that we find the error in his logic.

Russell’s unspoken premises are that the human race deserves a better world than the one we have, and that it is somehow unjust of God to withhold it from us. But in making this argument Russell actually ends up contradicting himself. Remember, his conclusion is that God does not exist. But wait, if there is no God to blame for the flawed condition of the world, who then do we blame for the Ku-Klux Klan, fascism and all of the other terrible things he mentions? Subtract God from the equation and it’s all our fault. This being the case, we have to ask ourselves whether a race of creatures capable of producing such things deserves a better world that the one it has. In our next posting we will ask that question.

[i] Isaiah 55:8-9