‘who wants to be loved does not desire the enslavement of the beloved. He does not want to possess an automaton … If the beloved is transformed into an automaton, the lover finds himself alone.’
What this seems to suggest is that the nature of God’s love necessitates that freedom must always be the main concern. God allows both outcomes to occur – that is to say that people are free to accept or reject the advances of the Divine even though God knows the consequence when humanity rails againstHis goodness which in turn brings about evil and suffering.
As already noted in an earlier post, the reluctance of God to overrule our choices poses an interesting question in regard to how the Creator is considered to operate in our world with many believers holding to the idea that God has the power to overrule our personal freedom by changing our mindset so that we do not pursue a particular course of action. But this makes little sense and seems unreasonable as it goes against the very nature of God’s love that has chosen not to intervene and overrule.
Drawing these threads together, we have thought about some of the problems connected with moral evil in our world. In this, we have considered how evil could be thought of as a logical outcome if humans are to be enabled to make truly free decisions. The nature of God is not lessened by the outcome of evil in the world, but better understood as evidence of a love that allows things to occur independently of God’s nature and all the outcomes good and bad that it will bring.