Some philosophers of religion contend that the mere existence of natural evils gives strong reason to reject the existence of an omnibenevolent God. This brief essay takes the form of a reductio ad absurdum in order to demonstrate that the greatest good may only be achieved through the existence of a natural world, where a natural world may be defined as a possible world comprised of a maximally consistent set of propositions that affirm the existence of both governing, predictable laws, as well as some natural evil that results from the existence of natural causes described by these laws, i.e. physical pain and death. Specifically, this essay works with the concept of the Christian God and theological notions that are unique to Christian belief, and asks if the existence of the natural world is detrimental to Christian theism. The thrust of the argument makes the following contentions: (1) If the atheist’s claim is that the natural world in which we live should not exist, then humanity would exist in a world without pain and death; (2) further, humanity’s sinful nature would still remain in such a world. If this is the case, then (3) no world would exist such that the salvation of humanity, uniquely within Christian theism, might be bought via the vicarious redemptive acts of Jesus. Since pain and death would be eliminated, Jesus could not have died on behalf of humanity.

中文翻译：

---

邪恶的后果：关于自然神学的论文

一些宗教哲学家认为，自然邪恶的存在是有充分理由拒绝无所不知的上帝的存在。这篇简短的文章采取荒谬的还原的形式，以证明最大的利益只能通过自然世界的存在来实现，在自然世界中，自然世界可以被定义为可能的世界，其中包含最大程度一致的命题这肯定了既定的，可预测的法律的存在，以及因这些法律所描述的自然原因（即身体上的痛苦和死亡）而导致的某种自然邪恶的存在。具体而言，本文结合基督教神的概念和基督教信仰独有的神学概念进行探讨，并询问自然世界的存在是否对基督教有神论有害。该论证的主旨有以下争议：（1）如果无神论者声称不应存在我们所生活的自然世界，那么人类将存在于没有痛苦和死亡的世界中；（2）此外，人类的罪恶性质仍将保留在这样的世界中。如果真是这样，那么（3）不会存在任何世界可以通过耶稣的替代性救赎行为来购买人类的救赎，这在基督教有神论中是独一无二的。由于可以消除痛苦和死亡，所以耶稣不可能为人类而死。则（3）没有任何一个世界存在，因此可以通过耶稣的替代救赎行为来购买基督教有神论中唯一的人类救赎。由于可以消除痛苦和死亡，所以耶稣不可能为人类而死。则（3）没有任何一个世界存在，因此可以通过耶稣的替代救赎行为来购买基督教有神论中唯一的人类救赎。由于可以消除痛苦和死亡，所以耶稣不可能为人类而死。