Ouweneel on the Problem of Evil

In the final chapter of his book De schepping in het geding (1981), Dr. W.J. Ouweneel addresses questions related to “the problem of evil.” This may be of interest to you as a visitor to this site. From an evangelical perspective, Ouweneel goes remarkably far, arriving at the following conclusion:

God created moral beings who could fall into sin and who, according to God’s foreknowledge, did in fact do so, because the very best world could only be reached through the stage of a morally corrupt world. (p. 141)

God has factored sin into His plans from eternity (yes, the ultimately perfect world would even have been unthinkable without the fall)… (p. 151)

Here Ouweneel states that God factored sin into His plans and that, in order to reach the best conceivable world, the fall was necessary. In this view, God retains complete control and everything truly unfolds “according to His counsel.” You will understand that I wholeheartedly say “amen” to that! Ouweneel also points out that only by eating the forbidden fruit did man truly come to know the good as well. He writes:

Yet it was not merely a “tree of knowledge of evil”: it was the tree of the knowledge of the good and evil. (p. 145)

Ouweneel argues that the new world to come will not be “back to square one.” No, it will be a better and even the best conceivable world, precisely because of the preceding “stage of a morally corrupt world.” Ouweneel puts it this way:

… in the way of redemption man ultimately receives infinitely more than Adam ever lost. (p. 141)

Wonderful that Ouweneel presents these things this way! It corresponds perfectly with what Scripture teaches, and moreover, it genuinely answers the question of how an almighty, all-knowing, all-good God can create a world that at present still “lies in the wicked.”

What a pity, though – what a pity – that in the same chapter Ouweneel largely backs away again, weakens the statements above, and even contradicts them. He then writes, for example:

Neither may we say that God willed or intended the fall (…)
or that it was part of His counsels. (pp. 141 and 143)

… I repeat that man did not have to fall into sin, nor that his fall was determined by God; that goes too far. (p. 145)

With these statements, the entire preceding argument is effectively undone. First we read that God “factored sin into His plans,” but here Ouweneel says the opposite by denying that the fall was “part of His counsels.” That is a contradiction of the first order! But why this retreat on Ouweneel’s part? Why does he shrink back from his own conclusions? I quote further:

It is then difficult to avoid the thought that God nevertheless, in one way or another, was the author of evil, however indirectly. And that is a dangerous thought… (p. 143)

It seems to me, rather, safe to believe God at His Word when He solemnly declares:

“Former of light and Creator of darkness, Maker of good and Creator of evil, I, YHWH, make all these things.”
(Isaiah 45:7)

Does that make God blameworthy? No, on the contrary! It is precisely to God’s glory when He creates evil (read: the adversary) with the purpose of bringing about the very best world! Indeed, God would have been one who misses the mark (= a sinner) if evil had not been part of His plans. And that is what I call “a dangerous thought.” Ouweneel continues:

Adam would not have been truly free if it had been decided in God’s counsel that he had to sin. And how could he then still be held responsible? (p. 143)

This objection closely mirrors the objection raised by Paul’s opponents in Romans 9. Paul argues there that it was God Who hardened Pharaoh’s heart so that He might display His power. And then Paul writes: “You will be protesting to me, then, ‘Why, then, is He still blaming? for who has withstood His intention?’” And what answer does Paul give to this question? He actually gives no answer. Paul simply denies man the right to call God to account.

“But you, O man! who are you to contradict God? Shall what is molded say to its molder: Why did you make me this way? Or does the potter not have free authority over the clay to make from the same lump one vessel for honor, and another for dishonor?”
(Romans 9:20–21)

This seems like a cruel answer. Unless… you are aware of the ultimate destiny of the whole creation. God knows the course by which the ultimate goal can be reached, and because He has full authority over every creature, nothing prevents Him from actually arriving there. If God did not have full authority over His own creatures (the doctrine of free will), then it would theoretically be possible for a large portion of them never to arrive at the destination God intended.

And that is indeed what Ouweneel (and with him the entire Christian world) teaches. Over Ouweneel’s “very best world” hangs a never-ending, pitch-black shadow. It is the world of hell, in which all who did not choose God will ultimately end up irrevocably. Because Ouweneel holds on to this, he is forced, despite his earlier statements, ultimately to fall back on “man’s free will” and, at the deepest level, to deny that everything unfolds “according to the counsel of God’s will.”

Unless we “glorify God as GOD” (and thus acknowledge that with Him NOTHING goes wrong), all our philosophical and theological reasonings are doomed to be made vain, as Scripture teaches (Romans 1:21). We see this illustrated in Ouweneel’s discussions. As long as he starts from a good God Who determines everything, he makes excellent, biblical, and logical statements about the origin and meaning of evil. But as soon as he abandons this starting point and relies on “man’s free will,” he falls into contradictions and his argument ends in the darkness of a never-ending hell…

Share: