Saturday, July 26, 2025

Reimagining the Problem of Evil: What about the Problem of Good?

When someone raised the classic problem of evil—why a good and all-powerful God would allow suffering and wrongdoing—my friend Aaron Tomlinson responded with a disarming but profound question: “Why doesn’t anyone talk about the problem of good?” That simple reversal changes the entire conversation. For if evil challenges our belief in God, goodness challenges disbelief. Why, in a universe that could be indifferent or hostile, do we find love, beauty, kindness, and self-sacrifice? Why should there be moments of transcendent joy, awe at the stars, or a mother’s love for her child?

Goodness is not just the absence of evil; it is a real, positive presence. Think of the countless ways it manifests—acts of heroism, quiet kindness, forgiveness when revenge seems easier, generosity when it is costly, and love that asks for nothing in return. These things are not required for mere survival. They go beyond instinct. They have a depth that feels eternal, as though they point to something beyond themselves. Philosophers and poets alike have noticed this. The Nobel laureate Czesław Miłosz wrote that the very existence of beauty and moral truth in the midst of horror suggests there must be a source beyond the material. Mary Midgley, a moral philosopher, likewise argued that the fact we experience awe, wonder, and moral obligation is more surprising than the fact we experience suffering.

Even if we admit evil exists, we can’t deny that goodness is preferred. Across time, culture, and belief systems, humanity overwhelmingly gravitates toward love rather than hate, peace rather than war, justice rather than oppression. Even those who commit atrocities often twist them into justifications for some perceived “good,” revealing that deep down, the human conscience elevates goodness above all else. This universal preference shows that good is not just one side of a coin. It is the summit, the highest point. Evil simply becomes the necessary polarity that allows good and all its radiant qualities to be known, experienced, and chosen.

This polarity has meaning. Without darkness, there is no contrast for light. Without sorrow, there is no depth to joy. Without the existence of hatred, the power of love cannot be fully recognized. But in the human experience, these dualities are not equal. Love resonates more deeply than hate. Joy lingers in the soul longer than despair. Peace carries a substance that conflict cannot imitate. This tells us something profound: good is not merely the opposite of evil; it is the preferred reality, the one toward which all things move.

The medieval philosopher Maimonides wrote that evil is not a true force but the absence of good. Like darkness, it has no substance of its own; it is merely the lack of light. Everything God created, he argued, was inherently good. What we call evil is a deficiency, a void where fullness of being is missing. And because it is a lack, it is temporary. Goodness, by contrast, is real and enduring. This view makes evil less of an equal power and more of a shadow that disappears when the light fully shines.

Modern moral philosophers echo this. Mary Midgley pointed out that if the universe were truly indifferent or governed only by survival, why would humans have the capacity for awe, kindness, or selfless love? Why would music, art, and beauty matter? Why would compassion appear in moments when natural selection would favor indifference? Goodness, she argued, is the greater surprise. It demands explanation.

This is why some theologians and philosophers speak of the problem of good as a challenge for disbelief. If the universe is random and purposeless, why should love even exist? Why should there be moral beauty that transcends evolutionary utility? Richard Swinburne, William Lane Craig, and Alvin Plantinga have all made versions of this argument: objective moral values, and our recognition of them, point to a source beyond the material. They suggest a moral lawgiver, or at least a deeper reality that anchors goodness itself.

But we can also understand this in the language of polarity and preference. The material world is built on dualities—light and dark, life and death, love and hate. These opposites create contrast so that consciousness can experience meaning. Without shadow, we would not see the brilliance of the light. Without the chill of despair, we could not know the warmth of joy. Yet when we look honestly, good always outweighs evil in its lasting impact. It draws the heart like a magnet pointing to true north. This aligns with the Hermetic principle, “As above, so below”—the polarities of our world exist so that the soul can awaken to the higher reality beyond them.

When we examine humanity’s deepest longings, what do we find? We long for love, for peace, for goodness. Even those who wander in darkness yearn for redemption. Across lifetimes, cultures, and belief systems, the higher pole is always preferred. This reveals that good is not arbitrary—it reflects the essential nature of being itself. Evil is only the foil, the shadow needed for good to be recognized, and because it is rooted in lack rather than fullness, it cannot ultimately endure. Goodness, by contrast, is eternal because it springs from what is real and whole.

Think about the moments that touch you most deeply. Sitting quietly by a body of water. Holding a newborn child. Hearing music so beautiful it brings tears to your eyes. These experiences transcend mere survival—they hint at a deeper purpose. They remind us that the highest aspects of life—love, awe, wonder—are not illusions. They are more real than the suffering that temporarily clouds them. Evil may cause us to ask why, but good answers with this is why. It gives meaning to the journey.

So yes, there is a problem of evil. But Aaron Tomlinson was right to ask about the problem of good. Why should there be love at all in a universe of mere particles and chance? Why should beauty exist if everything is only survival? Why should kindness break through indifference? These are not trivial questions. They point toward a deeper source, something beyond polarity itself—where there is no longer opposition, only the fullness of what we call good.

About Aaron Tomlinson:

My friend Aaron Tomlinson is a former evangelical pastor who once carried a powerful healing ministry. Over time, he deconstructed from the toxic and rigid aspects of evangelicalism, yet his heart for truth and spiritual growth remains as vibrant as ever. These days, he still offers rich, thought-provoking teachings most Sunday mornings on Facebook Live from 11 a.m. to noon Central Time, simultaneously streaming on his YouTubechannel. He also leads a private community called New Day Global, a safe space to explore all-things-spiritual beyond the limits of traditional dogma.

I’m deeply grateful to Aaron for pointing out something that feels so simple yet profound—what should have been obvious all along. While many argue about the problem of evil, strict materialism faces a far greater challenge: the problem of good.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Reimagining the Problem of Evil: What about the Problem of Good?

When someone raised the classic problem of evil —why a good and all-powerful God would allow suffering and wrongdoing—my friend Aaron Tomlin...