Final answer:
Greg Ganssle suggests that a reason God may allow evil is because it is a consequence of human free will, implying that intervention would compromise our freedom. This concept aligns with the greater good philosophy, where some evil is permitted for an eventual greater good, contributing to 'soul-making'.
Step-by-step explanation:
According to Greg Ganssle, a reason God may have had for allowing evil into the world would be the exercise of free will by humans. The argument suggests that God prefers a world of free agents rather than one of automatons, meaning that the existence of evil is an unfortunate but not unavoidable outcome of free will. This perspective argues that for God to intervene in human affairs would be to take away our freedom to make choices, even if those choices result in evil actions. Consequently, from this standpoint, God is neither responsible for evil nor guilty of neglect for not intervening. Furthermore, evil may sometimes lead to greater goods, as posited by philosophies that support the notion that some degree of imperfection may be necessary for the overall perfection of the world. St. Augustine and Thomas Aquinas contribute to this line of thinking by suggesting that the allowance of evil leads to the greater good of the universe, and in some cases, can result in opportunities for moral and spiritual development, a process often referred to as "soul-making."