Why God Allows Evil Upon Christian Evangelists?

          34 year old Nabeel Qureshi was a devout Ahmadiyya Muslim. He converted to Christianity almost 12 years ago. He served as an itinerant speaker with RZIM, and is a best-selling author (Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus, No God But One—Allah or Jesus?).

            Last year, the news that Nabeel had been diagnosed with cancer distressed the Christian world. His prognosis remains grim. A few days ago, the RZIM team bid their preliminary goodbye to Nabeel.¹

            God’s blessing upon a very young Nabeel is evident. His ministry has blessed many. Had God blessed Nabeel with a longer lifespan, multitudes might have been drawn to Christ.

            However, God’s plan seems to be different. Ravi Zacharias recalled Nabeel’s goodbye to his colleagues at RZIM, “Our itinerants all gathered, about seventy of us from every continent. Nabeel spoke to us on the opening morning. He told us that the doctors have given up hope and that there will be no surgical intervention (which was to have happened only if the chemo and radiation had worked). Medicine feels it has done all it can…To his fellow itinerants Nabeel came to say, “Thank you. I love you all and if I have hurt anyone, I ask for forgiveness. Most important, my faith is stronger than ever in my Savior and whatever lies ahead, I will take it as God’s will.” Then he said, “You will probably not see me speaking in public anymore and I bid you all goodbye.” He then looked in my direction to share his final words of affection to me and bid us goodbye. I was too overcome to say anything.” (Emphasis Mine).²

            Nabeel’s situation motivates a consideration of these legitimately perplexing questions that confound a thinking mind:

            (1) Why does God allow evil upon Christian evangelists? (Approximately two-thirds of this world does not believe in Christ. Aren’t Christian evangelists the need of the hour?)

            (2) Why does God terminate the life of HIS evangelists while they’re young? (If God extended the ministry of HIS most effective evangelists, many more would have been blessed.)

            (3) Is God not interested in the conversion of non-Christians?

            These questions, if not provided with valid answers, could prompt a misunderstanding about God. Alternatively, a correct understanding could benefit the thinking Christian to appropriately comprehend God and this situation.

Why Does God Allow Evil Upon Christian Evangelists?

            In a world that is largely non-Christian, the need of the hour is Christian evangelists. The Bible mandates preaching of the gospel. If God allows evil upon evangelists (not all, but some), is HE not detrimentally interfering with the spread of gospel? God’s inaction from the perspective of lack of protection seems to contradict HIS Word.

            How do we reconcile this existential and spiritual dilemma?

            This dilemma could be resolved from another vantage point. If we can biblically assert that God is not constrained to protect HIS evangelists, a plausible inference is that God could allow evil upon HIS evangelists in the same manner in which HE allows evil upon anyone.

            Therefore, let us wrestle with the question “Why Does God Allow Evil Upon Christian Evangelists?” from the vantage point of “Is God constrained to protect HIS evangelists?” 

            This question is predicated upon these premises:

            P1. Evangelism is the need of the hour.

            P2. Evangelism is the greatest Christian ministry.

            P3. Christian evangelists are more precious (in God’s sight / plan) than other Christians.

            P4. Hence, it follows that God should protect HIS evangelists (over other Christians).

            If we can invalidate one or more of these premises, the conclusion (P4) could be disputed. Then we could confidently assert that God is not constrained to protect HIS evangelists. Therefore, the situation of evangelists being affected by evil need not be an aberration in God’s plan.

            (P1) is valid, for the Bible affirms this premise (Matthew 28: 19-20; Romans 10: 14-15).

            (P2) could be disputed. There are many Christian ministries or spiritual gifts (Romans 12:6-8; 1 Corinthians 12:4-11; and 1 Corinthians 12:28); evangelism is not mentioned as the greatest Christian ministry. One verse that implies evangelism as the greatest ministry is 1 Corinthians 12:28, wherein the term “apostle” (“apostolos” in Greek) could be misconstrued as evangelist. However, it is worth observing that the New Testament also uses the word “apostolos” to simply mean messenger without referring to any specific church office (Philippians 2: 25; 2 Corinthians 8: 23; John 13: 16 and cf. Ephesians 4: 11). Therefore, the claim that evangelism is not the greatest Christian ministry could be adequately sustained.

            (P3) could also be disputed. The Bible does not dichotomize or provide hierarchy among Christian ministers. Furthermore, God cannot be partial to anyone (Deuteronomy 10:17; Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11; Galatians 2:6; Ephesians 6:9). Hence, the argument that “Christian evangelists are more precious (in God’s sight / plan) than other Christians” is invalid.

            Since (P2) and (P3) are invalid premises, it then follows that God is not constrained to protect HIS evangelists (over other Christians or anyone for that matter).  Therefore, God can allow evil upon HIS evangelists just as how he allows evil upon anyone.

Why Does God Terminate The Life Of HIS Evangelists While They’re Young?

            Unless God reveals, we will not know the precise reason of the untimely death of anyone, let alone an evangelist. But the Bible reveals that the death of God’s saints is precious in God’s sight (Psalm 116: 15).

            (We use the term “untimely” from a human perspective, not from a divine perspective. God takes people out only when HE so desires. Hence no death is untimely from God’s perspective.).

            Our common sense suggests that it is improper of God to terminate the lives of HIS evangelists while they are young. A simple reason behind this line of thought is that if God allowed HIS evangelists to live longer, more people could have been drawn towards Christ. 

            The sovereign God, who raised David instead of Saul and Timothy after Paul, can always raise another evangelist. Therefore, neither does the untimely death of any of God’s evangelists be deciphered as an aberration in God’s plan nor would God’s work be blocked or decelerated by the untimely death of anyone.

Is God Not Interested In The Conversion Of Non-Christians?

            This is an absurd question for a mature Christian. But from within our context of evangelists dying young, this question does gain a semblance of meaning from the perspective that if God had blessed the evangelists with longer life, many more might have been drawn to Christ.

            The untimely death of an evangelist cannot assail God’s desire for people to love HIM. God loves everyone and desires that all may know and believe in HIM (Ezekiel 18:23; Matthew 23:37; 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9).

            An omniscient or all-knowing God knows who would accept and reject HIM. So, at any point in time, there are those who reject God irrespective of the presence of the evangelists. Those who reject God do so out of their own freewill, for God would do everything possible for man to believe in HIM.

Conclusion

            We grieve when our loved one is in death bed. Death or the prospect of death is a matter of great sadness. An untimely death is a matter of greater sadness.

            But while we feel sad, we also rejoice, for the dead or the dying Christian would soon be in God’s presence. Hence we could respond as how Ravi Zacharias responded, “My dearest Nabeel, I love you, dear friend, and my heart aches to see you leaving this world so soon. But if it is of any comfort, you have so far lived the same number of years as our Lord and Redeemer. What is more, the world is a mess. We are still trapped by the fears of living in a world immersed in hate and living for matter, greed, pride, and violence. You will be freed to the joy of life where there are no more fears, no more tears, no more hate, no more bloodshed, because you will be with the One who has already shed his blood for you, where love is supreme, grace abounds, and the consummate joy is of the soul. The smile of God awaits you: “Well done.”

            “Eye has not seen, ear has not heard, neither has entered into the heart of man, the things that God has prepared for them that love him,” 1 Corinthians 2:9 promises.

            Your eyes will now see and your hands will now touch that which is the only Real estate.” ³

Endnotes:

¹http://rzim.org/global-blog/torn-emotions-a-visit-with-nabeel-qureshi/

²Ibid.

³Ibid.

How To Live In Christ Through Pain & Suffering? (Walking Through The Valley Of Shadow Of Death)

            This is my 200^th blog. Our gracious God has enabled me to write every week since January 14, 2013. Since I am continuing to learn much during this period, please permit me to share my most significant learning.

            There are [extended] periods in our lives when God allows us to live through excruciatingly painful moments that the Bible terms as the “valley of shadow of death” (Psalm 23: 4, NASB).  During these painful moments we wonder if God exists and, if so, why HE allows evil upon us.

            We are not perfect. We are sinners. We do not consider ourselves better than others. But if we look around, we observe some of our fellow humans enjoying life to the fullest. In comparison, we are neither very wicked nor more sinful. What have we done to suffer this evil?

            Job’s words reflect our thoughts more appropriately in this context, “If I have sinned, what have I done to you, you who see everything we do? Why have you made me your target? Have I become a burden to you?” (Job 7:20, NIV, Emphasis Mine). These are genuine thoughts consuming our minds during our moments of weakness while we stagger through the horrendous impact of evil.

            However, during our stronger moments we genuinely say, ““…Naked I came from my mother’s womb, and naked I will depart. The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; may the name of the Lord be praised.”” (Job 1: 21-22, NIV, Emphasis Mine).

            Our moments of weakness are more painful and scar us deeply. Hence, in moments of weakness, we are more liable to commit dreadful blunders or sins.

            The greatest sin we could commit during our suffering is to question God and reject HIM. Job’s wife offered a similar counsel to him, “His wife said to him, “Are you still maintaining your integrity? Curse God and die!” (Job 2: 9, NIV, Emphasis Mine).

            Why God?

            This is not to ask why God allowed this catastrophe upon us. But this is to ask why God should take the blame for the catastrophe. Was Job’s wife right to blame God for Job’s situation? 

            It does seem so! God is sovereign i.e. God is supreme over everything. God, if HE so desired, could have prevented evil to hurt us (cf. Job 1: 10). Hence, we do have a certain right to question God.

            Doesn’t the child have the right to question the parent when something cruel happens to him/her, especially if the parent was in a position to prevent that cruelty upon the child? This is the similar situation between God and the person who is suffering.

            But is it right to blame God for our rather unjust pain and suffering? In other words, what would we gain, if we blame God?

            Those who blame God are rather naïve and immature. I use strong terms such as ‘naïve’ and ‘immature,’ since those who blame God are being extremely temporal in their vision.

            Make no mistake, evil is extremely painful, but the life which we live is not the only life that we are to live. This short life on planet earth is the gateway to the longer [eternal] life (in heaven or hell) that awaits us.

            Christians are not called to be temporal; instead we are called to be eternity-minded, ““Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God; believe also in me. My Father’s house has many rooms; if that were not so, would I have told you that I am going there to prepare a place for you? And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come back and take you to be with me that you also may be where I am.” (John 14: 1-3, NIV, Emphasis Mine).

            As Christians we are not called to possess a worldly perspective on life, but we are mandated to sustain a heavenly perspective of life, “Since, then, you have been raised with Christ, set your hearts on things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your minds on things above, not on earthly things.” (Colossians 3: 1-2, NIV, Emphasis Mine). We should obey the mandate to sustain a heavenly perspective of this fleeing life. 

            Our life on planet earth is momentary, the Bible elucidates this truth, “Mortals, born of woman, are of few days and full of trouble. They spring up like flowers and wither away; like fleeting shadows, they do not endure.” (Job 14:1-2, NIV). Apostle James said, “What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes.” (James 4: 14b, NIV).  

            If our life is momentary, our suffering is also momentary. But the pain we endure in this time and age would not seem as momentary but would seem as long and grueling. However, since we are called to live with a heavenly perspective of this earthly life, we should intentionally look heavenward / Godward – towards the throne of grace where God is seated – when we suffer.  

            It is not easy to live with a heavenward or Godward perspective during our earthly life. This is easier said than done. How then do we live such a life? What is the key to leading such a life?

            Prayer and Bible. That’s it!

            The key to leading a life with a perspective of God and heaven while suffering is to immerse ourselves in reading and studying the Bible and soaking ourselves in prayer. We pray that God enables us to focus on HIM and not our temporal pain while we suffer.

            So when we suffer we could be with God, trust HIM fully or question God, blame HIM and ultimately reject HIM. But what would we gain if we reject God?

            The answer is quite simple. God alone can offer us the strength to live through our suffering. When we reject God, we disconnect our only source of strength and place ourselves in an incredibly dangerous situation.

            While we live our life in pain and suffering, we are expected to make routine decisions for the sake of our family and for ourselves. These decisions could be spiritual (e.g. questioning God, not succumbing to temptations…), financial (e.g. medical expenses) etc.

            Our life should be predicated on truth and patience. We are called to do the will of God in and through our decisions. Patience is the key to doing God’s will. We are to be truthful in God’s presence, not succumbing to a willingly sinful lifestyle.  

            We are not to rush our decisions. There are moments when our plans may appear to fail or be delayed, but we are to remain patient in those moments to allow God to work HIS way in our life. In other words, failure (e.g. joblessness, financial downfall, deteriorating health, false accusations etc.) should not deter us.

            This is a hard learning, for none of us desire to fail in life. But God may allow us to fail, which in HIS parlance is for us to “slow down” for a period of time. (There could be instances where God may allow our plans to fail, since it is not in HIS will, even if we have prayed earnestly for them. So we should abandon these plans. We should not foolishly pursue these plans to make a mess of our life.) So let not delays or failures prevent us from doing God’s will.

            God blesses us while we suffer. For instance, while we suffer, we will learn who our true friends are. God will send true friends to our encouragement and comfort. Suffering cleanses our life of all unworthy friendships. Remember these blessings and be grateful to God.  

            The Bible does not make random statements. When God says that we should rejoice in hope and persevere in pain, HE will enable us to rejoice, persevere and pray while we suffer, “…rejoicing in hope, persevering in tribulation, devoted to prayer…” (Romans 12:12, NASB).

            Let us then live by faith in God and not by sight (2 Corinthians 5: 7). If we do not live by faith, then our souls are en route to destruction, “Therefore, do not throw away your confidence, which has a great reward. For you have need of endurance, so that when you have done the will of God, you may receive what was promised. For yet in a very little while, He who is coming will come, and will not delay. But My righteous one shall live by faith; And if he shrinks back, My soul has no pleasure in him. But we are not of those who shrink back to destruction, but of those who have faith to the preserving of the soul.” (Hebrews 10: 35-39, NASB).

            The Lord will bless and keep those who are living by faith while suffering, “Now to Him who is able to keep you from stumbling, and to make you stand in the presence of His glory blameless with great joy, to the only God our Savior, through Jesus Christ our Lord, be glory, majesty, dominion and authority, before all time and now and forever. Amen.” (Jude 1: 24-25, NASB).  

Would A World Without Satan Lack Evil?

            The question, “Would there be less evil in a world without Satan?” could be relevant, for if the answer to this question is a yes, then we could plausibly ask, “Why did God create angels i.e. Satan, if evil in this world would be lesser without Satan?”

            Within this context, if God had not created Satan, evil would have been less, and our world would have been a good world. However, since God created Satan, could we then infer that God erred in HIS decision to create Satan?

            The entailment to this thought process could potentially debunk Historic Christianity. God (as a maximally great being) cannot err. If God erred in creating Satan, HE cannot be God. Hence God’s existence could be disputed. The infallibility of the Bible that reveals God to mankind could also be thus disputed. We could go on and on.

            Let us discuss this theme by considering the following aspects albeit from a biblical standpoint.

The Source of Sin

            Sin is an evil action or motive that opposes and assaults God. Sin replaces God with something or someone in God’s rightful place of supremacy. Sin entails evil.

            Understanding the source of sin is vital to understanding the theme we are discussing now. If Satan is the source of sin and evil, one could argue that God should have not created Satan to keep the world free of sin and evil.

            The “Animal Nature” of man is the source of sin, claimed British Philosopher and Theologian Frederick R. Tennant. Under this notion, humans possess natural animalistic impulses as a means to human survival that have intensified through natural selection based on their evolution from less highly developed forms. Other theologians have posited other sources of sin. However, each of these views has been found to be largely inadequate.¹

            The Bible teaches differently. Sin is not caused by God (James 1:13) but man is responsible for his sins (James 1: 14-15).

            Man possesses certain innate desires. He could either satisfy those desires in moderation or sin by abusing those desires to either hurt himself or the others.

            His ‘desire to enjoy’ could result in an enjoyment of eating in moderation or a sin by being a glutton, whereby he injures himself.  His ‘desire to obtain’ could be satisfied either by legitimately acquiring material possessions or he could sin by exploiting and stealing from others. His ‘desire to achieve’ could be satisfied either through legitimate achievement or he could sin and achieve at the expense of others.

            Man could satisfy these desires in a godly manner by dwelling within the divinely imposed constraints. But man sins when he fails to accept the divine limits to these desires and makes these desires as ends in themselves, which are the cravings of a sinful man (1 John 2: 16).

            While desires are natural, there could be external inducements (Satanic or human) that motivate man to sin. Whatever be the case, man is wholly responsible for his sins. Sin is the choice of the person who commits it.

Function of Satan in Sin

            Satan is a demon (cf. Luke 10: 17-20). He is the tempter and deceiver. Satan opposes God and the work of Christ by tempting and deceiving humans. Satan tempted Adam & Eve, Jesus, Judas etc (cf. Acts 5:3, 1 Corinthians 7:5, 2 Corinthians 2: 11, Ephesians 6: 11, 2 Timothy 2: 26).

            Sometimes we state that Satan is the source of sins. While making such statements, we use the word “source” informally. In this informal usage, “source” refers to an ‘originator’ or an ‘instigatory cause.’

            If we claim that Satan is the source of all sins i.e. if we use the word ‘source’ to mean, in an Aristotelian sense, the material cause (‘that out of which’) or the efficient cause (‘the primary source of…’), then we posit dualism. Dualism contradicts the Bible, for there are no two equally ultimate powers, one good and the other evil.

            God is the only ultimate power and God is good. God is not the source or the originator of sin or evil. Moreover, Satan was originally created good; hence Satan is not the source of sin and evil. 

Potency of Freewill to Sin without Satan

            If asked differently, the title question would be, “Would Adam & Eve have sinned without Satan?” Since man is responsible for his sins, the answer should be yes.

            The premise on which this argument is also predicated on is the freewill-based rebellion of angels in the heavenly realm. (This premise presupposes the metaphysical similarity of the freewill of the angels and humans.)

            The angels that rebelled against God did not have an external inducement (as Adam & Eve had Satan as an external inducer). There were only two entities during the angelic fall – God and Angels. (Even if mankind was created before the fall of Satan, man was totally incapable of influencing Satan’s fall.)

            Since God can neither tempt nor cause evil, the angelic rebellion was an entailment of their freewill. Therefore, it is quite reasonable to conclude that Adam & Eve had the potential to sin or would have sinned irrespective of the presence of Satan.

            Satan merely accelerated the sin of Adam and Eve. Had Satan not existed, Adam and Eve would have sinned (or eaten from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil) sooner or later.

Conclusion

            Satan is not the source of sin. Man’s freewill is the source of sin. Man would have inevitably sinned irrespective of Satan or not.

            Would the quantum and the extent of sins be minimized if Satan was not created? Not necessarily so, for if Satan is to be considered as an accelerant of sin, then there is a possibility that the quantum and the extent of sins would be actualized at a later time. So the quantum and the extent of sins would have been the same with or without Satan, for the potency of man’s freewill to sin is independent of Satan.

            The other possibility is that the quantum and the extent of sins would be lesser without Satan. In which case, the question, “If evil in this world would be lesser without Satan, then why did God create Satan?” gains legitimacy.

            If Satan is the sole cause of evil, then evil would have been absolutely eliminated, had Satan not been created. However, since Satan exists and that Satan is not the sole cause of evil, only God, in HIS omniscient wisdom would be able to determine the extent to which evil would be reduced had angels not been created. 

            But on the other hand, if the good that is to be actualized from the good angels in ministering to people is commensurately immeasurable, then God would be justified to create Satan even with the potential of evil.

            Finally, natural evil, which is devoid of human willing and acting, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, tsunamis etc. and suffering caused by a host of diseases  such as cancer, cystic fibrosis etc. exist independent of Satan and adds substantial numbers to the victims of evil. The pain and suffering caused by natural evil and diseases are innate in the creational design of this world and the human body.

            The fact of the matter is that evil would not cease to exist if Satan were to be non-existent. Hence, numbers need not matter. When evil exists, the terms ‘lesser’ and ‘greater’ do not gain greater significance, for the world we live in would be evil even if only 1% of the total population (1 out of 10 people) are adversely affected by evil. Moreover, if only 1% of the total population is affected by evil, then there is a certain possibility for evil to increase. 

            Therefore, the question, “Would there be less evil in a world without Satan?” would neither debunk nor harm Historic Christianity.

Endnotes:

¹ Other theologians have posited various sources for sin. The “Anxiety of Finiteness” was proposed by Reinhold Niebuhr (1892-1971). The idea of “Existential Estrangement” was proposed by Paul Tillich (1886-1965), the “Economic Struggle” proposed by the Liberation Theology, and “Individualism and Competitiveness” as argued by Harrison Sacket Elliott (1882-1951).

Death, Suicide and Euthanasia.

Until I experienced God through HIS Word and deed, I was fearful, apprehensive and didn’t desire death. But when I believed in Christ and became aware of the glorious life that awaited me, the fear of death vanished. Today, I welcome death anytime, for when I die I will be with my God forever. The fear of death is dead in my life (cf. Psalm 23: 4; Romans 8: 38-39; 2 Corinthians 5: 8; Philippians 1: 21-23), for death is the gateway to a glorious eternity with God.

While I was discussing with a very dear brother about the torment of evil and expectation of a joyous life, we hoped that the Lord’s second coming is imminent, for evil will be annihilated when HE returns in all HIS glory and splendor. So, death can be viewed as a transition from the evil world to a joyous eternity in heaven. If death doesn’t facilitate this glorious transition, then one hopes that the Lord would arrive soon to deliver us from evil and pain. If one fails to desire death from the perspective of a glorious eternal coexistence with God, the existential reality of evil could motivate the frail to die, as an escape mechanism from the pain of suffering.¹

This is the predicament of a suffering man who loses all his means and hope to live on earth. He desires death through suicide as a means of exiting the world of evil and torment. But, is suicide acceptable?

Imagine a world renowned artist painting before a large audience. He finishes the spectacular work of art, and the audience is fascinated. Following are two scenarios: in the first, the artist unexpectedly shreds the painting to pieces! The audience is greatly saddened. In the second scenario, after the art is painted, a man from the audience unexpectedly grabs the art and shreds it. This man is detained by the police.

In both scenarios, the fascinating piece of art is lost. In the first scenario, the art is shredded by the owner. None can complain, but for the fact that the world lost a precious work. In the second scenario, a man shreds the art without the owner’s consent. This being theft and destruction, the culprit is nabbed by the police.

The above illustration serves as an analogy of our life. God is the artist and our life is HIS art. God, being the creator and sustainer, is the owner of every life. As in the scenario of the artist shredding his art, there could be, at most, a feeble concern, when the creator God, the owner of every life, chooses to eliminate that very life HE created. However, if anyone else eliminates that life (through suicide or murder), he is an unauthorized eliminator, for he rebels against God (the owner of life), who alone possesses all authority to eliminate the very life that HE created.

I say this at length to affirm that suicide is a sin against God. God makes and takes life. HE has the sole authority over every life. When man commits suicide, he dethrones God, and sins against HIM. Aquinas teaches that suicide is a sin on account of three violations – nature and self love, community, and God. He states that our freewill (inclination to commit suicide) should submit to God’s authority, who alone can decide our exit from this world.²

Having said this, I believe that a Christian who commits suicide is not hell bound, since we are saved by grace through faith. My rationale for this fact has been presented in my blog, “Way to Heaven? Not By Works!” A man who commits suicide violates God’s will and expedites his journey to the other side of eternity. Therefore, a believer in Christ should not commit suicide, instead he should trust in God for deliverance during moments of excruciating pain.

“The timing and manner of a person’s death belongs ultimately to God (Eccl. 3: 1-2; Heb 9: 27),” writes Scott Rae. ³Although death is considered an enemy (1 Corinthians 15: 55-56), for Christians, death is a vanquished enemy. God gives everyone who believes in Christ, the victory through the sacrifice of the Lord Jesus on the Cross of Calvary. Thus, it is mandatory that death not be resisted or expedited.

Let us look at physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia.⁴ If a man is dying and his prognosis hopeless with any further treatment determined as medically futile, in general, he could be allowed to die. However, considering that man’s death is in God’s hands, removal of life support that leads to physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia could be problematic. Not every decision to terminate life need be morally acceptable. For example, removing the ventilator that provides breathing support to a recovering patient would be unethical. Thus, we need to think through physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia, because our moral choices would either abide by or abate the moral values that protect the sanctity and dignity of life - the dying included.

One can posit the validity of euthanasia from the realm of mercy - as a justified end to needless suffering. But medical alternates are: to sedate the patient to sleep (unconscious state) or to relieve pain (which could even hasten the death of a patient, but as an unintended act).

Scott Rae states that euthanasia could be advocated from, among others, the perspectives of ‘utility’ – avoidance of a high cost medical care, and ‘Personal Autonomy’ – one can decide when to die as one can decide when to marry. ‘Utility’ can be questioned from the ill-advised future possibility of coercing a terminally ill patient to consent to euthanasia, and ‘Personal Autonomy’ can be disputed citing the fact that an individual has no absolute right over his life. (This theme has been discussed in my previous blog on abortion).

Scott emphasizes that the opponents of euthanasia conclude that euthanasia and assisted suicide amounts to killing an innocent person. Since elimination of life is God’s prerogative, they reinforce that human beings cannot play God by eliminating human life. But this argument will not be accepted by atheists, who do not believe in God. The opponents of euthanasia also emphasize the redemptive value of suffering (suffering equips a believer to comfort others who suffer). If suffering is good for one’s life, then one can argue against every medical care that eases suffering. But why shouldn’t medicine alleviate unnecessary suffering? A better reasoning against the redemptive value of suffering is the proximity of suffering to death. If suffering leads to death, then the suffering one cannot positively impact the one suffering. So the redemptive value of suffering diminishes.⁵

To conclude, all possible medical treatment should be offered to the dying if the treatment can potentially save him. But, postponing death is not the only solution because every life is valuable irrespective of its quality. The development of medical technology could extend one’s life span, but one should be cautious to not use expensive medical resources on treatment that is futile. Medical treatment should be withdrawn when it is no longer helpful to a dying patient or when the treatment is more burdensome than being helpful to him. “Even though death is rightly to be resisted through reasonable medical means, the Christian’s eternal destiny is beyond death. In that sense, death for a Christian is by definition a “good death” because it ushers him or her into God’s presence in eternal life,” says Scott Rae. 

May the strength and wisdom of God prevail upon those contemplating suicide and those applying medical treatment in seriously ill patients. May HIS pleasing and perfect will be done in each life. Amen.

Notes and References:

¹ Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Human Life as a Journey to God - 29.4, p208.

² Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, Living in the World – Moral Virtue - 64.6, p391.

³ Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics, 3^rd Ed, p218, 2009.

⁴ Euthanasia is often termed, ‘mercy killing.’ It is a direct and intentional effort of a medical professional (e.g. through lethal injection of drugs) to help a dying patient die. (Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics, 3^rd Ed, p214.)

⁵ Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics, 3^rd Ed, p224-234, 2009.

(6) Thoughts pertaining to Physician Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia have been extracted from Scott Rae’s work, ‘Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics,’ barring sporadic interposals of my thoughts.