A question.  I’m just playing with this idea but….join me as I go down this rabbit hole.

Life and death are bound up together.

Suffering and creation are bound together. 

Good and evil are bound together. 

Without death, we would have no life.  If our bodies did not kill off cells daily, we would die.  If nature was not one huge machine recycling death into life and back into death again, there would be no life.

If there were no error on the genome, there would be no evolution or adaptation – and thus no life.

Isn’t this one of the messages of the crucifixion? 

Isn’t that the whole, “in order to live you must die” message?

So my question is this.

Would it be immoral to solve the problem of evil?

Maybe evil is not a problem to be solved.  Maybe nothing is.

(btw - I see that calling it immoral is setting it in the category of evil. So, there’s that contradiction…. )

To comment, click on the header of this post “Would it be immoral to solve the problem of evil?”