Objection · Case 06 · Problem of Evil
Doesn’t “God suffers with us” only address the emotional pain of evil, without answering the philosophical problem of evil?
One objection from the free evidence repository at apologetics.pro.
Response
Fair objection: presence is a pastoral answer, not a philosophical one. The philosopher J. L. Mackie argued that an all-powerful, all-good God is logically inconsistent with the existence of evil at all, and William Rowe argued the weaker evidential point that the sheer amount of seemingly pointless suffering counts as evidence against such a God. Neither is answered just by saying God is present in it.
The intellectual replies live elsewhere. Against the logical problem, Alvin Plantinga’s free will defense is widely regarded, even by non-theist philosophers, as showing God and evil are not strictly inconsistent, since a world of free creatures able to choose good is worth the risk that they choose evil -- that case is made in a separate section of this page. Against the evidential problem, a limited observer is not well placed to judge that a given evil is genuinely pointless. This page offers presence rather than a full theodicy on purpose, not because the formal objection has no answer.
About this exhibit
This objection is to The Gospel of John, the raising of Lazarus.
At the tomb of his friend Lazarus, with the man’s sisters weeping around him, Jesus weeps too, even though he is moments away from raising Lazarus back to life. He knows the ending is good and he…
Under Claim 01: The Christian scriptures present God as entering human suffering himself rather than standing apart from it.