Comments on: Book Notes: God’s Problem (Ehrman)

By: Threads from Henry’s Web » Explaining Suffering - or Not

Threads from Henry’s Web » Explaining Suffering - or Not — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:56:41 +0000

[...] a follow-up to my notes on God’s Problem, I would like to comment briefly on how a diversity of explanations do coexist, and how they might [...]

By: Henry Neufeld

Henry Neufeld — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:35:15 +0000

Hmmm! I think you’re reading more into the statement than I intended, or perhaps I wrote more than I intended. In either case, my major point here is that God operates by setting parameters, not by directly guiding each point. God’s desire for the hurricane to be a hurricane is expressed in the fact that he created laws that would produce such storms and then does not intervene to change.

I think that is similar to the way in which he works with humans in that he establishes parameters, but doesn’t predestine our every move. It would be unlike the way he works with humans in that God doesn’t (to the best of my knowledge) have communion with hurricanes.

Of course, I could be wrong!

By: Henry Neufeld

Henry Neufeld — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 15:32:46 +0000

I do think you have understood what I was trying to say. My note on freedom and comfort is paraphrased from my book Not Ashamed of the Gospel: Confessions of a Liberal Charismatic, but it is only a passing reference in a discussion of sin, salvation, and an eternal view, rather than directly talking about the problem of suffering. I really ought to collect more of my thoughts on this one. It's just that I don't think I'm anywhere near having that much to say. I'm only beginning to get a grip on some questions.

By: Lifewish

Lifewish — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 21:02:32 +0000

If you want to see God as loving, you also have to see him as willing to allow hurricanes to be hurricanes.

That comment made my head asplode somewhat! I rather like the idea of a God who doesn’t privilege humans over hurricanes – an elegantly egalitarian concept.

It seems like something that would lend itself more to deism (or possibly animism?) than conventional Christian theism though. If God is as supportive of the wind and rocks and trees as He is of us, isn’t it kinda counterintuitive for us to hack trees down and use the resulting paper to make compilations of His words?

By: ‘I must have misunderstood God’ « John Meunier’s Blog

‘I must have misunderstood God’ « John Meunier’s Blog — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 03:29:50 +0000

[...] must have misunderstood God’ Posted on October 6, 2008 by jmeunier In a book review of one of Bart Ehrman’s books, Henry Neufeld has this nice description of his take on God: [...]

By: Larry B

Larry B — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 02:42:08 +0000

Thanks for tackling the book for us mere mortals. I’m grateful for your summaries as it spares me from some “suffering” of my own if I were to read it all myself.

I very much like your position “That�s why I have written that God is more interested in freedom than comfort” and would like links to read more of your views on that.

I too think that freedom underlines that reason that suffering exists and think that without freedom as I understand it (and I think you are referring to) we would cease to be sentient beings altogether and become incapable of relationship with God.

By: Participatory Bible Study Blog » Source and Redaction Criticism: Ehrman on Job

Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:03:18 +0000

[...] book God’s Problem, Ehrman tackles the book of Job.� (My notes on the book as a whole are here.)� He describes the book as coming from two sources, one containing the narrative portions, and [...]