Natural Evil vs. Moral Evil: The Problem of Evil Explained
This essay examines the philosophical and theological problem of evil by distinguishing between natural evil—such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and disease—and moral evil arising from human wrongdoing. Drawing on Walter Elwell's Evangelical Dictionary of Theology and Gottfried Leibniz's concept of the "best possible world," the paper argues that human free will explains why God permits evil without being morally responsible for it. The essay also addresses whether one can challenge beliefs about God without attacking God, and concludes that free will, moral accountability, and the promise of divine judgment together form a coherent theodicy consistent with Christian theology.
- Introduction to the Problem of Evil: Raises central theological question about God and evil
- Natural Evil vs. Moral Evil: Defines and contrasts natural and moral evil
- Free Will and the Existence of Evil: Free will as explanation for God permitting evil
- Leibniz and the Best Possible World: Leibniz argues God created the best possible world
- Elwell's Position: Internal Consistency and Free Will: Elwell's theodicy centered on abuse of free will
- Questioning Beliefs About God: Distinguishing critique of beliefs from attacking God
- Conclusion: Free Will, Judgment, and Divine Justice: Free will and divine judgment summarize the argument
✍️ How to write this paper — guide & tools ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper clearly distinguishes between two categories of evil—natural and moral—before building its theological argument, giving readers a firm conceptual foundation.
- It engages directly with named scholars (Elwell and Leibniz), grounding the argument in recognized philosophical and theological sources rather than relying solely on personal assertion.
- The use of concrete, relatable examples (a homeless man stealing a purse, a mother's cancer diagnosis) makes abstract philosophical concepts accessible to a general audience.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates the technique of using scholarly sources to support a personal thesis. Rather than simply stating a position, the author synthesizes Elwell's free-will defense and Leibniz's "best possible world" argument to build a coherent theodicy, showing how multiple philosophical traditions can converge on a single conclusion.
Structure breakdown
The essay opens by defining and contrasting natural and moral evil, then pivots to the central theological question of why God permits evil. It examines Leibniz's and Elwell's positions in turn, addresses a secondary question about critiquing beliefs about God, and closes with a brief personal statement of belief. The structure moves from definition to analysis to conclusion, following a standard argumentative essay pattern appropriate for an undergraduate philosophy or religion course.
Introduction to the Problem of Evil
One of the oldest and most persistent questions in the philosophy of religion is why a benevolent and all-powerful God would permit evil to exist. Two related questions typically accompany this inquiry: Must a theodicy be internally consistent in explaining the existence of evil? And since God is all-knowing and all-powerful, why does He not simply prevent evil from happening?
Natural Evil vs. Moral Evil
Natural evil is a term that embraces theodicy, in the sense that there are devastating earthquakes, tornadoes, tsunamis, hurricanes, and other terrible weather events that harm people and communities. God created the planet, and in doing so He never promised perpetually fair weather or sunshine every day. The planet is a natural world reality, and besides frightening weather events, natural evil can also be seen in a child's birth defects or a mother's breast cancer. One could argue that a woman developed breast cancer from her diet or lifestyle choices, but when she is stricken with this deadly disease, it can be considered a natural evil that has caused her pain—and perhaps taken her life as well.
On the other hand, moral evil arises from the bad behaviors of a person or organization (Flescher, 2013). Moral evil could be murder or mean-spirited, unjustified public slander of a person who does not deserve such attacks. Adultery is considered a moral evil, and though it is not as serious as armed robbery, it is nonetheless committed by persons who break God's laws as expressed in the Ten Commandments.
Works Cited
Elwell, Walter A. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Second Edition. Edited by Walter A. Elwell. Ada, MI: Baker Academic, 2001: 434–436.
Flescher, Andrew Michael. Moral Evil. Georgetown University Press, October 2013. Retrieved June 28, 2014, from http://press.georgetown.edu.
Philosophy of Religion. "The Argument from Natural Evil." Retrieved June 28, 2014, from http://www.philosophyofreligion.info.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.