04 - Chapter 04
CHAP. IV. ON THE EXISTENCE OF MORAL AND PHYSICAL EVIL. The question attributed at the termination of the preceding chapter to an objector, though apparently restricted to the conduct of the Deity towards a particular class of beings, comprises in the principle on which it rests the far more comprehensive inquiry; If God, the Creator of all things, Omnipotent, Omniscient, perfect in Wisdom, be also a God of love: how can evil, physical or moral, find admission into any part of the Universe?
There are believers in Christianity to whom the existence of evil has been the source of harassing perplexity. Among opponents of the truth of the Christian Revelation, and specially among that class of its philosophical adversaries whose arguments are built on oppositions of science falsely so called^, on imaginary difficulties suggested by a philosophy which does
1 Timothy 6:20. not deserve the name, the objection now to be considered is continually heard. It is brought forward not as a speculation suggesting doubts, not as a topic demanding research; but as a plain matter of fact, triumphantly disproving Scriptural statements concerning the perfection of the Divine Attributes, and in particular as decisively subverting the proposition that God is love. To show that the existence of moral evil is not inconsistent with the Scriptural statements concerning the Divine Attributes, nor with the proposition that God is love, will be the object pursued in the present chapter. It will be my decided endeavour so to conduct the investigation as to avoid sundry metaphysical disquisi- ’ tions, in which similar inquiries have frequently been enveloped. To bring forward proofs of the Divine Attributes of Omnipotence, Omniscience, Wisdom, Justice, Holiness, all in perfection, or of any other Attribute, Love excepted, forms no part of my plan. It is not merely that they have been amply demonstrated by other writers; but that objectors who deny that God is Love, will at once allow the advocate of that proposition to assume the truth to a. certain extent of the other Divine Attributes. The objectors consider, and not without reason, the main strength of their case as resting on the alleged reality of those attributes ; and rejoice that an opponent should load himself with a burden which they trust will be insupportable, and should entangle himself among insuperable difficulties by affirming the reality and the perfection of those Attributes, and yet at the same time maintaining in the face of physical and moral evil that God is Love. Affirming the reality and the perfection of each and of all of those Attributes, let us proceed to the ulterior discussion.
What then are the points, which he who avers that God is Love, and is met by the undisputed existence of evil, can reasonably be required by the objector to prove ?
He may reasonably be required to prove that which is indispensable to the establishment of his proposition: but he cannot reasonably be required to prove any point not indispensable. May he then reasonably be required to show, that the admission of evil into the Creation is an arrangement which in itself furnishes a proof that God is Love ?
No. He cannot reasonably be required to do more than to show, that the arrangement does not furnish a proof that God is not Love ; that the arrangement may be consistent with His being Love.
Reflect on the infinite distance in the scale of being between Man and God, between human intellect and the Divinity. Canst thou by searching find out God ? Canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection ? It is as high as heaven; What canst thou do ? Deeper than Hell; What canst thou know ? 1 Can it be possible for any man so to fathom the profundity of the Divine counsels, so to penetrate into the mysteries of the Divine administration, that he should pronounce at once that it is demonstrable from some single proceeding on the part of the Creator examined simply by itself that God is not Love ? Can it be reasonable that a man, an atom, and fixed to a globe which is but as an atom in the illimitable Universe, should be required to develope the effects which some one arrangement bearing upon himself in the Divine i Job 11:7-8. government, may or may not be intended and instrumental to produce on some other class, nay, on numberless other classes, of sentient and intelligent existences dwelling, or hereafter to be created to dwell, in other provinces of the immeasurable empire of his God ?
Man is an atom, and the globe on which he dwells is but an atom in Creation. He comes not now into perceptible contact with the inhabitants of any region beyond the earth; nor does his abode, traversing in its annual circuit between five and six hundred millions of miles, bring him into communication or contiguity with any other planet. He is practically insulated from all beings which partake of life, the fellow-tenants of his globe excepted. Yet are there the clearest proofs that his existence is in close connection with the existence of other beings; and also that he is the object of contemplation and of constant and deep interest to intelligences of the highest order, stationed in the residence assigned to them by his and their Father and Lord. To the discovery of the connection, between his existence and that of other beings, he is guided by his own observation and by the light of astrnomical science. He immediately perceives that a relation is ordained between the earth and the two great luminaries, of which the one warms and enlightens it by day, the other irradiates it by night. Whether that splendid orb of fire be capable of sustaining inhabitants, or, if capable, be appointed for that additional purpose, he discerns not data for conjecturing. But with respect to the Moon, he gradually notices indications, which appear to render probable, or even to warrant, distinct and affirmative deductions. He observes her varied surface, seemingly analogous to the mountains and the valleys, the land and the seas of the earth. He discovers that she travels annually with the earth round the Sun, and thus experiences like the earth successive changes of seasons. He detects her revolution round her own axis; and her consequent possession of night and day of her own. All these provisions suggest to him that there are beings on her surface, who are to be benefited by them; and assure him, that he is linked by common ties to a visible and habitable sphere. Speedily he advances farther. He learns that there are other planets borne like the earth, each in its orbit and in its allotted period, round the same nearly central Sun ; each revolving on its own axis; each thus experiencing vicissitudes of seasons and alternations of day and night: and that the more distant of these globes are furnished with attendant moons, and one of them with an encircling band of radiance, in order that in every case the requisite proportion of light may be complete. Can he doubt whether these mansions are erected for inhabitants adapted to them ? He doubteth not: he is convinced that he belongs to a system of worlds replete with animated existences, the workmanship of his Creator, of his God. What is the state physical or moral of those beings ; whether the events which have characterised the history of those beings have displayed any resemblance to the calamitous disobedience of Man; whether the prospect of futurity opens on those worlds with views akin to those which it spreads before mankind; whether there is found in any of those widely disjoined regions any knowledge of his existence, any sympathy towards him; whether there have been received among them any tidings of his deplorable Fall, and of the stupendously merciful plan of his Redemption ; whether human transgression and human restoration to the Divine favour are there revealed as practical warning, as practical encouragement, to multitudes of beings individually stationed in their own modes of probation: these things he knows not. But his ignorance on all these points affects not, neither ought it to affect, his conviction, that man is not like a lonely wanderer in an interminable desert, dissociated from every other form of intellectual life: but that he is a link in a chain; that he is a member of a system of beings among the different parts of which there subsist close bonds of union, and amidst numerous diversities, features of general similitude. In this stage of his reflections, Revelation is at hand to supply to him additional information. The Divine Word imparts to him that he is the object of contemplation, and of lively interest, to the highest class of created beings; that the innumerable company of angels, the holy and exalted inhabitants of heaven regard him with unceasing solicitude; that they are all ministering spirits for his protection and welfare; that they are ardently desirous of his salvation, and rejoice in every token of his penitence. Whether his own sin and its fatal consequences, and the glorious restoration purchased for him if he will yet be obedient, have been placed as a momentous lesson before other worlds of moral agents in a probationary state; whether the fall and the recovery of the human race are reserved to impress such a lesson in remote eternity on such agents yet uncreated, he still remains in ignorance. But his conjectures are not left without a rational bias. Revelation has disclosed to him the obedience and the disobedience respectively manifested in the angelic hosts, and the several consequences of each description of conduct; and in disclosing these facts has expressly avowed that they are set forth to man for an example. It is for an aweful admonition to man that the inspired volume sets forth that the angels who kept their first estate of holiness, kept also their first estate of happiness; and that the angels who sinned are reserved in everlasting chains under darkness, unto the judgement of the great day: and thus makes manifest by proofs from another world, that the Lord knoiveth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of Judgement to be punished.1 How reasonable then is it for him to conclude that the history of the human race, and the survey of its results of judgement and of mercy may be rendered most instructive lessons to other classes of beings amidst the endless ages of futurity!
After these statements and observations, the question whether the existence of evil can be compatible with the character of a God, who is identified with love, may fitly subject the objector to another question in return. Is he prepared with proof to demonstrate, that it is incompatible with the character of a Deity identified with love, to place created beings in a state of probation ? If he has no such proof to produce, if he cannot demonstrate that these tilings are necessarily incompatible, I am entitled to assume the possibility that they may be compatible. But this assumption, though on the ground now stated it may legitimately be made without the production of any additional argument in its support, will be found to gain strength [1] Jude 1:6; 2 Peter 2:4. from the examination of reasonings likely to be advanced against it.
Why then, we ask, should it be necessarily inconsistent with the perfection of the Divine Love, to place created beings in a state of probation ? The answer returned perhaps may be, That perfect Love must desire the communication of the greatest happiness; and, when combined with Omnipotence, must be as able as desirous to impart it: and that such love would at once have imparted to some of the beings in question, whose success under probation is foreseen, the happiness ultimately designed for them, and would not have called the rest into existence. On this answer it must be in the first place observed, that it takes for granted the very points on which its validity — if it possess any validity — depends. It takes for granted that the Deity, if perfect in love, must necessarily confer, and must confer at once, on each created being the greatest happiness which that being is capable of receiving. To maintain that proposition consistently with our knowledge of the Divine attributes is impossible. Suppose that the qualities not of the great Creator and Governor of the universe, but of a human being, were the subjects of our investigation. Suppose a particular man to be perfect in valour — in character identified with valour — valour ever unshaken — ever looking round for opportunities of action, superior to every emergency actual or possible :—do you require this man, in order to show that his valour is perfect, to consult nothing but his valour; to be continually exercising it to the uttermost, exclusively and without limit, wisely or unwisely, justly or unjustly? Do you pronounce his valour imperfect if he does not thus exercise it? Suppose the individual a perfect character in another quality also, say Justice. Must not the exercise of his valour stop, when it would interfere with the right exercise of Justice ? Would you pronounce his valour to be imperfect, because it then restrained itself? Suppose him also perfect in love and in wisdom. Must not his valour pause in its exertions, when they would interrupt the right exercise of love or of wisdom ? In the same manner must not his love modify or withhold its manifestations, when they would counteract the dictates of wisdom ? Let us humbly apply this reasoning to the Divine attributes. In considering the perfections of God, while we discuss them separately, we are yet to estimate them conjointly. Each attribute is perfect, if so exercised as to leave every other uninterrupted in the perfection of its own right exercise. Each is perfect, if at every moment it fills its sphere of action up to the points of contact with the right action, at each moment, of every other attribute in its own sphere : points of contact which will be in perpetual variation according to the peculiarities of each particular case. Nor can it be doubted that higher glory will redound to God, and a larger amount of beneficence and happiness will result to his Creation, from the combined and harmonised exercise of all his infinite perfections, than would have ensued from the insulated exertion, however great, however extensive, of any single attribute. In the next place, we cannot but advert to the preposterous and endless extravagance of the conclusions, to which the principle taken for granted by the objector inevitably leads. Perfect Love, as his argument implies and requires, must necessarily confer, and must confer at once, on each created being the greatest happiness which that being is capable of receiving. If love being able, fails so to act, it is not perfect. If an Omnipotent God does not thus act, He is not Love. The disputant, whoever he may be, who shall bring forward such reasoning, will advance it, I trust, without being conscious that he is arraigning every part of the Divine proceedings known to man.
Among all created beings with which we have intercourse, there is not one which we may not rationally conclude to be capable with its existing faculties of enjoying a larger measure of present happiness than it possesses. It is obviously true of every human being. It appears equally true in all cases which our observation can reach, of animals inhabiting the earth, or the air, or the waters. And analogy justifies the same inference respecting those animated tribes whose obscurity or minuteness eludes our research. Therefore, pronounces the objector, God is not Love. But every one of these beings might have been called into existence, and the enjoyment of complete happiness many ages ago, even in the first ages, so to speak, of eternity; and might still be enjoying it at the present moment with the prospect of unlimited continuance. Because these things are not so, God is not Love! But manifestly there is room in the universe for an infinitely greater number of happy beings. Because they exist not, God is not Love! But each particle of insensible matter might have been made sentient and happy. Because it is not so, God is not Love! But each being might be placed in a higher station than that which he now occupies in the scale of existence, and thus be invested with a larger capacity of happiness. A dog might have been created a man; a man made an angel; an angel made an archangel; an archangel, it may be, raised a step nearer towards his Creator. Because these things are not so, God is not Love! But what if these things had been so? Would the objector be silenced ? Would the principle which I am exposing have been satisfied ? Not in the smallest degree. That principle would now demand that the dog which had been raised into a man should forthwith be elevated into an angel; that the man who had become an angel, should instantly be stamped an archangel; that the archangel who had been exalted into a loftier essence whose denomination has never vibrated on a mortal ear, should instantly attain a position nearer to Divinity. Would the demands of the principle then be fulfilled ? Fulfilled ! Commencing afresh with the lowest being in the scale, it would require the elevation of that being, and of every higher created being ; and never would find its work of complaint, or its vigour and activity in censuring impaired, until all created beings were raised to a perfect equality, and that equality as nearly as Omnipotence could arrange it on a level with the throne of God. Because these tilings are not so, God is not Love! Is it needful to add another word on such outrageous and blasphemous absurdities ?