Pain, Cain, Evil and Abel
Eleanor Stump, in Philosophy of Religion, edited by William L. Craig (which is the source for my previous post on pain as well), examines the biblical story of Cain and Abel as a case study on the problem of evil. While not pretending to solve all instances of evil in the world, she applies the theodicy which she developed to this particular instance of “evil.” According to Stump:
… the incidents related in the story are such that a twentieth-century atheistic philosopher might have invented them as a showcase for the problem of evil.
Most readers of this blog are probably quite familiar with this story found in Genesis, but I will recount it briefly. Cain and Abel, two brothers, bring offerings to god. God accepts Abel’s offering and rejects Cain’s. The reason for the acceptance of one and the rejection of the other is not provided in the text. Cain becomes very angry and jealous of Abel. God, then, does not leave Cain alone, but intervenes, asking questions of Cain and warning that he is in danger of sin. Cain ignores God’s intervention and murders his innocent brother, Abel. Abel, a righteous man, suffers a violent and untimely death. God again comes to Cain, asking probing questions in an attempt to bring about a confession on the part of Cain. Cain once again resists God’s efforts and God punishes him by miraculous intervention: When Cain tills the ground, it will be barren. Cain complains to God that this punishment is too severe and more than he can bear. God once again comforts Cain and promises a measure of protection, keeping him from any murderous intentions on the part of others.
Stump asks what it is that God actually does in this passage. First, he allowed Abel to be murdered when he could have intervened miraculously (after all he did intervene on the behalf of Cain). God seemingly did nothing to help innocent Abel when he obviously knew what was about to happen. Second, God warns Cain of the danger waiting ahead if he does not repent. After the murder, he again appeals to Cain to repent. He punishes Cain with what appears to be a miraculous intervention. Then, he shows mercy on Cain by offering protection from murder. Stump states:
Clearly, any one of these things done on Abel’s behalf would have been enough to save him. But God does none of these things for Abel, the innocent, the accepted of God; he does them instead for Cain, a man whose offering was rejected and who is murderously angry at his brother. When it comes to righteous Abel, God simply stands by and watches him be killed.
The appropraite question at this point might be, “Why?” The answer Stump provides is her solution to the problem of evil:
If God is good and has a care for his creatures, his overriding concern must be to insure not that they live as long as possible or that they suffer as little pain as possible in this life but rather that they live in such a way as ultimately to bring them into union with God…
God does not rescue Abel because contrary to appearances Abel is not in danger; and God’s failure to rescue Abel, as well as all the other care for Cain recorded in the story, constitutes the best hope of a rescue for Cain, who is in danger, and not just of death but of perpetual living death.
On this account, while it is true Abel died violently and prematurely and is deprived of years of life, from a Christian standpoint, he gained eternal bliss. If God had intervened and caused Cain’s death, Cain would have died in mortal sin while Abel would have continued a life of “painful and spiritually perilous pilgrimage through this life”, dying eventually, perhaps in a less virtuous state.
The bottom line is that on a Christian worldview, much more than the present circumstances must be considered when evaluating an instance of evil. There are considerations much more weighty than living a comfortable, pain-free life on earth.