A world where sin never materializes is conceivable, but it may not be the most desirable morally. If evil is not permitted, then it cannot be defeated.
Like automobiles, a tested world is better than an untested one. Or, to put it another way, no boxer can beat an opponent without getting into the ring.
God may have permitted evil in order to defeat it. If evil is not allowed, then the higher virtues cannot be attained. No pain, no gain. Tribulation works patience. There is no way to experience the joy of forgiveness without allowing the fall into sin.
So, a world where evil is not defeated and the higher goods attained would not be the best world achievable. Therefore, while a world where sin does not occur is theoretically conceivable, it would be morally inferior. [2]
A provocative conclusion.
Some people may think they would prefer it if God had never created the world in the first place. Why risk the possibility of evil?
Others may wish that God had not created people with the freedom to sin rather than to love and obey him. Why risk the possibility of rebellion?
Still others may wish that God would simply rid the world of all the evil people so that only the good ones who never go against God’s will are left. Why let bad people live among all the good ones who (uhem) always only do things the way God wants them done?
In any of these idealized cases, such preferences negate the possibility of the “wisher’s” own existence.
I’ll stop here (for now) though there is more to be discussed, but let’s pick it up in the comments below. Jump in!
——-
Notes:
[1] Kaiser, W. C., Jr., Davids, P. H., Bruce, F. F., & Brauch, M. T. (1996). Hard sayings of the Bible (p. 209). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity.
[2] Geisler, N. L. (1999). Article: The Avoidability of Evil In Baker encyclopedia of Christian apologetics. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.
