Question:
Do you think it is wise to think about the ethical/theological terms ‘good’ and ‘evil’ as being definable or indefinable? Second, if you think the term ‘good’ can be defined, offer a definition, trying to make sure that the statement, ‘God is good,’ or ‘God’s nature is good,’ or ‘God’s will is good,’ etc., is as substantial as possible and not merely circular. Finally, third, what problems are faced when ‘good’ is defined by referring to God as the standard of good?
Answer:
My answer is to be balanced about how we think about the ethical/theological terms of ‘good’ and ‘evil,’ but not in the way that the Adams text was defining ‘balancing off.’ Personally, I found that portion of the text to be philosophical overkill. I do, however, think that we should approach these terms with humility, honesty, and inquisition. It is important to note the context of arguments or conversations and sometimes it might be necessary to cede the philosophical ground when discussing such items.
A definition of the term ‘good’ is tricky. First of all, the word ‘good’ can be an adjective, a noun, and an adverb, not to mention all of the various conjugations that follow. From a purely secular perspective, good is “of the highest worth or reliability.”1 That begs the question: by what standard? A theonomous definition might not be the wisest choice; “What makes an act good is that God reveals that we must do it. Likewise, an act is evil because God reveals that he forbids it. The moral quality of every act depends on God’s will that it be done or not be done, and nothing else.”2 Although I could concur with this definition, it is not one I would make apologetically. Interestingly, the Bible uses the word good several times in its opening chapters, and I think this has theological implications. “The infinite goodness of God is a glorious perfection which preeminently characterizes His nature, and which He, in an infinitely wise, righteous and sovereign manner, exercises toward His creatures in various modes, according to their relations and conditions.”3 In short, God is good.
Finally, there arise potential contradictions by referring to God as the standard of good. This was famously taken up by famous atheist and philosopher Bertrand Russel. He proclaimed that contradictions arise when something is declared right simply because God declares it so, or does God say it is good because He recognizes a moral code superior even to Him? Either God is not good, or He’s not sovereign. This is like ruling by fiat.4 The problem is with the premise of this argument. The moral law is not arbitrary. It is an objectable truth that flows from God; “a law is only as legitimate as the authority upon which it rests.”5 There are no laws above God so, therefore, God could not be held liable to a moral code above His own, He is the moral code. “Morality is grounded in the immutable character of God, who is perfectly good. His commands are not whims but rooted in His holiness.”6 The moral law is God’s divine character of Holiness which flows from Him to us in virtue of commands.
Footnotes:
1 Inc Merriam-Webster, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. (Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster, Inc., 2003).
2 John S. Feinberg, “The Many Faces of Evil,” Lifeway (Liberty University, 2018), https://www.lifeway.com/en/product/the-many-faces-of-evil-P001243768, 40.
3 Alan Cairns, Dictionary of Theological Terms (Belfast; Greenville, SC: Ambassador Emerald International, 2002), 198.
4 Greg Koukl, “Euthyphro’s Dilemma,” Standard to Reason, December 7, 2012, https://www.str.org/w/euthyphro-s-dilemma-1.
5 Greg Koukl, “Euthyphro’s Dilemma,” Standard to Reason, December 7, 2012, https://www.str.org/w/euthyphro-s-dilemma-1.
6 Ibid.
R-Rated Religion 