> It follows, then, that it would be unfair for god to punish those who commit evil -- as they're an important part of god's plan. Furthermore, we still haven't explained free will, so I'm operating under the assumption that they had no choice in the matter.
>
> Is it right to punish people who do evil if their evil was really serving a greater good?

I don't think this is possible. I would call evil a divergence from God's commands to us. (I'd like to say a divergence from God's *will*, but we diverge from a part of God's will that is not known to us, I don't call that evil.) An evil that serves a greater good (good = God's will for us) then that "evil" was never really evil at all. Practically speaking, lying is evil and punishable as a sin, yet, as an example, the woman Rahab, from the Old Testament, was considered righteous and rewarded for hiding innocent refugees in her home and lying to the authorities when they came by to ask if she had seen them. That "evil" that served the "greater good" was not actually evil at all, nor was it punished.

Backing up a bit, I'll echo the thought about joy and evil by rephrasing it a bit. There can be happiness without hardship, but *appreciation* of happiness, joy, peace, whatever, comes to a free will agent amidst the presence of hardship.

But I do think that joy can exist without evil, as that's exactly what the promise of heaven is. Evil/hardship in this world might be one thing that is used as a means for us to appreciate that time.