Summary of text [comment] pages 54 and 55

Along with the questions of responsibility and freedom, there is the question of evil itself.

[We already encountered “the idea that metaphysical limitations and physical challenges are implicit to every spontaneous order”. These evils describe “actuality slipping back into possibility”. They are a necessary part of any spontaneous order. Otherwise, a spontaneous order would no longer dynamically bring possibility into actuality. The spontaneous order would become static.]

Summary of text [comment] pages 53 and 54

Why doesn’t God just destroy evil people?

These types of questions were raised in the 16th and 17th centuries, when the so-called Renaissance was trending into the so-called Enlightenment.

[Of course, these questions were misleading. They pretended that God’s freedom and fairness were actualities that could contradict one another.

Instead, fairness puts actions into context. Actions situate freedom.

God’s existence encompasses all modes of causality.

God’s existence includes normal context, actuality, and potential.

God does not induce sin, even though God supports a world in which evil exists.

God supports a world in which we are free.]

[Only in the realm of possibility can a god be fair and unfair at the same time.]

Summary of text [comment] pages 53 and 54

Scripture teaches that evil comes into play as “God continually causes the world to exist”.

All the examples in the previous blogs are about the creatures that God created.

We are autonomic selves acting while God sustains us.

What would happen if God were to withhold his sustaining activity.

What if God stopped supporting the existence of one human creature engaged in evil actions?

We would question our freedom and the fairness of God’s judgment.]