Quote from The Problem of Evil
First, evil is not a thing, an entity, a being. All beings are either the Creator or creatures created by the Creator. But every thing God created is good, according to Genesis. We naturally tend to picture evil as a thing—a black cloud, or a dangerous storm, or a grimacing face, or dirt. But these pictures mislead us. If God is the Creator of all things and evil is a thing, then God is the Creator of evil, and he is to blame for its existence. No, evil is not a thing but a wrong choice, or the damage done by a wrong choice. Evil is no more a positive thing than blindness is. But it is just as real. It is not a thing, but it is not an illusion.
This section simply posits that God must not have created evil because evil is not a thing (or that evil is not a thing because God must not have created it; it's hard to tell which). Not much to say about this part until later.
Quote from The Problem of Evil
Second, the origin of evil is not the Creator but the creature's freely choosing sin and selfishness. Take away all sin and selfishness and you would have heaven on earth. Even the remaining physical evils would no longer rankle and embitter us. Saints endure and even embrace suffering and death as lovers embrace heroic challenges. But they do not embrace sin.
[...]
If the origin of evil is free will, and God is the origin of free will, isn't God then the origin of evil? Only as parents are the origin of the misdeeds their children commit by being the origin of their children. The all-powerful God gave us a share in his power to choose freely. Would we prefer he had not and had made us robots rather than human beings?
The problem with this section is that it assumes that the only two options for an "all-powerful God" would be to give us free will with sin or no free will at all. Again, if God is omnipotent, why isn't free will without sin an option? The first section states that evil is nothing but a bad choice. Free will is the ability to make choices. Because choices can be bad and all things God created are good, did God not create choices, and therefore free will, either? Or are we simply assuming that choices aren't things either, because all
things are
good?
First of all, remember that one attribute of God that's made clear through scripture is that he is a fair God, a God of justice (i can quote the specific verses if you want). Simply put, if you make a good choice, he will reward you. If you make a bad choice he will punish you.
That said, think about what you're saying here. You're saying God should've have made it so that we can only make good choices. Not allowing us to realize or have the capability of making bad choices is not fairness - it's bias.
Quote from The Problem of Evil
A third part of the solution to the problem of evil is the most important part: how to resolve the problem in practice, not just in theory; in life, not just in thought. Although evil is a serious problem for thought (for it seems to disprove the existence of God), it is even more of a problem in life (for it is the real exclusion of God). But even if you think the solution in thought is obscure and uncertain, the solution in practice is as strong and clear as the sun: it is the Son. God's solution to the problem of evil is his Son Jesus Christ. The Father's love sent his Son to die for us to defeat the power of evil in human nature: that's the heart of the Christian story. We do not worship a deistic God, an absentee landlord who ignores his slum; we worship a garbageman God who came right down into our worst garbage to clean it up.
This section once again seems to overlook God's omnipotence. Why send his son to his death when he could just snap his fingers and rearrange the whole universe?
Once again, remember what I said - God is a fair God. We've all sinned, we all deserve to be punished. Punishment has to be handed out because that is justice. One may say "well that's stupid, showing no compassion and having to stick strictly to the rules." No, on the contrary, sending his son Jesus to take our place is an act of compassion. Snapping your fingers and making everything good is a horrible idea. It gives us no sense of right and wrong; only right. It's like your teacher/professor going through your tests and changing all the wrong answers into right ones.
There are far better solutions; why would a benevolent god choose the one with the most torture involved?
The "torture" Jesus faced on Earth is nothing compared to what we all deserve - eternity in Hell. Temporal materialistic suffering to save everyone from eternal damnation is a benevolent act if you ask me.
Quote from The Problem of Evil
Finally, what about the philosophical problem? It is not logically contradictory to say an all-powerful and all-loving God tolerates so much evil when he could eradicate it? Why do bad things happen to good people? The question makes three questionable assumptions.
First, who's to say we are good people? The question should be not "Why do bad things happen to good people?" but "Why do good things happen to bad people?" If the fairy godmother tells Cinderella that she can wear her magic gown until midnight, the question should be not "Why not after midnight?" but "Why did I get to wear it at all?" The question is not why the glass of water is half empty but why it is half full, for all goodness is gift. The best people are the ones who are most reluctant to call themselves good people. Sinners think they are saints, but saints know they are sinners. The best man who ever lived once said, "No one is good but God alone."
If God created man and all things God created are good, then man must be good. This is from the first section of the article. One may claim that Eve sinned in Genesis and therefore man is not good, but Mr. Kreeft has already rebutted this point in section two: He claims that God can't be blamed for evil anymore than a parent can be blamed for the sins of its child; by this logic a child shouldn't be blamed for the sins of its parent either, and therefore mankind should not be blamed for the sins of Eve.
You act as if mankind is sinless and shouldn't be held accountable for Adam and Eve's sin. Honest question: do you know what sin is?
This section also avoids answering why either bad things happen to good people or why good things happen to bad people. This question is the problem of evil.
It avoids it because it was addressed in the other link I posted.
Quote from The Problem of Evil
Second, who's to say suffering is all bad? Life without it would produce spoiled brats and tyrants, not joyful saints. Rabbi Abraham Heschel says simply, "The man who has not suffered, what can he possibly know, anyway?" Suffering can work for the greater good of wisdom. It is not true that all things are good, but it is true that "all things work together for good to those who love God."
This section argues that not all suffering is bad, which is true. However, it does
not argue that
all suffering is good. Why would a benevolent and omnipotent god not prevent useless suffering? This, again, is the problem of evil, and this section still does not offer an answer.
My previous responses have already answered these.
Quote from The Problem of Evil
Third, who's to say we have to know all God's reasons? Who ever promised us all the answers? Animals can't understand much about us; why should we be able to understand everything about God? The obvious point of the Book of Job, the world's greatest exploration of the problem of evil, is that we just don't know what God is up to. What a hard lesson to learn: Lesson One, that we are ignorant, that we are infants! No wonder Socrates was declared by the Delphic Oracle to be the wisest man in the world. He interpreted that declaration to mean that he alone knew that he did not have wisdom, and that was true wisdom for man.
This kind of reasoning is obstructive to the growth of the wisdom that the previous section seemed to give as the only reason for suffering to be good. It's not an argument against the problem of evil, it's an argument against thinking about the problem of evil. If infants simply accepted that they were ignorant and refused to learn, there wouldn't be anyone left to make new infants.
You're missing the point. The point is that honestly we can't possibly know everything - Peter Kreeft made this clear in his writings. Even the Biblical authors acknowledge that we can't hope to know everything. However this does not mean "let's not think about this anymore and carry on with our lives." If you remember the Indiana Jones movie "Raiders of the Lost Ark" when the Nazis tried to obtain the treasures inside God's Ark, they all died. We can relate to this, God's complexity is beyond our comprehension but the key is that he chooses to reveal himself in a way understandable to us - letting us know too much (i.e. touching the possessions inside the Ark) will only blow our minds up. The whole point of religion (at least Christianity) is to continually seek after the Lord, developing a relationship with Jesus Christ. If God/religion is so simple as to be fully grasped within a day, why call it God/religion?
None.