The God Exception – Excursus on Theodicy
Theodicy is a relatively interesting thing, and I’m really going to discuss a popular aberration, so those of you who have real backgrounds in theology can tune out, or critique me for oversimplifications.
One basic way of stating the entry point for Christian theodicy is that there are three key things we believe about God and the world: 1) He is good, 2) He is all-powerful, and 3) Evil exists. These three cannot be reconciled as normally defined, and thus much ink is spilled in trying to work with them. No, that’s not the whole of theodicy, nor does it always have to be stated that way, or derived from this irreconcilable (or more commonly inconsistent) triad.
In popular discussions the details are often bypassed, and we get a simple argument against the existence of God because there is evil. “I don’t believe in God because so many people suffer,” someone announces. Believers often fail to look behind the statement in response.
The argument from suffering really doesn’t go to the existence of God as such, but rather to the nature of God. I recall having this discussion in a philosophy of religion class in which I said simply, “What if God is evil?” I think now I would use “indifferent” as an example, but I used evil. “That would be too horrible to contemplate,” said one of my fellow students. But the fact is that “too horrible to contemplate” does nothing to establish that something isn’t true.
This particular form of theodicy has to occur within a framework of religious views. The triad is only inconsistent because Christians believe that God is both good and omniscient. One possible way to reconcile these is by simply saying that God isn’t one thing or the other. For example, a dualist has no difficulty reconciling these points. God is good, but he isn’t all-powerful. He’s in conflict with an evil power.
I encountered this the other day in discussing the book of Joshua. How can I question the command to kill all the Canaanites if it is a command given by God? It’s a good question. Is there some standard of good that is above God, and if so who made it? If God is the creator of everything, doesn’t he get to say what’s good? There’s a whole new can of worms! But the more direct question here is how do you reconcile God’s action here as recorded in scripture with God’s actions or statements elsewhere in scripture?
That’s why it’s so important not to interpret scripture based on any narrow selection of passages. For example, what do I learn about God by reading Ezekiel 18:32 (for I have no pleasure in the death of anyone) and then comparing it to God’s action in the flood when God is sorry he made humanity and decided to wipe them all out except for eight people and start over. You may say that they were all wicked and deserved to die, which is indeed what the story says, but the action still seems extreme.
If we turn then to Job, whose children are killed along with many of his servants, because God allows the adversary (the satan, but don’t read a Christian concept of “Devil” here) suggests that Job can’t take it. They may not be 100% innocent, yet the only reason given in the story for them to die is to help God prove a point.
I’m not going to dig into these stories much right now, but this leads me to a point I feel I can discuss with more confidence than a philosophical question. How does one reconcile Biblical statements, stories, and their implications in such a way as to present God as just and good? Can this be done? When I’ve looked at a few incidents, I’m going to return to the question of whether evolution actually presents a more serious issue for theodicy than do many standard Biblical stories.
In conclusion let me give one warning. As Christians we need to beware of answering one objection to God’s justice by making God look bad in another way. For example, if one suggests that God was simply carrying out justice in the flood because everyone other than Noah and his family was irredeemably evil, we should also ask why God didn’t intervene in a more successful way earlier. When dealing with a classroom, for example, I found that when one intervenes early, one will have greater success, whereas if one ignores a problem long enough, one loses control of the classroom. Is it not possible here to answer God’s justice problem by portraying God as inept?
More wisdom. Thanks.
I’ve been reading some of your work and at first I was very quick to dismiss your point of view, but as I mused, the Spirit of God began to speak to me – something I feel…rather know that you are not familiar with. You are full of knowledge, I’ll give you that – but it does not mean that you are wise. The reason I do not dismiss what you have said in this article is because you voice the thoughts and questions of so many who struggle to understand God.
The thing is…in reading your work one thing contiually jumps out at me – you feel that you must justify God – but this is not our work – God’s acts do not need to be justified by man because He is God and this is basically what God Himself said to Job in Job 38.
You are a brilliant man, but your brilliance stands between you and God and thus, your brilliance becomes foolishness. The Word in totality cannot be understood or defined or even taught as though it were a text book – in other words – from the perspective of only fact. The Word has to be taught from the perspective of revelation also. Fact and revelation must marry, in order that truth may arise. Some how I know you’ll say that I’ve opened a can of worms because “what is fact”. With so many different views – how can we know what is fact?
We can, bcause see, the Word of God was never meant to be preserved only in writings, but rather through the sons of God who would choose to walk as their Saviour Jesus Christ walked – in righteousness, goodness and truth – bearing within their vessels the presence of the Holy Spirit (who is the Spirit of Truth). This is how the written word is confirmed and revealed.
In Isaiah 11, we read about the Word made flesh – Jesus Christ and many of the attributes He would possess. One that jumps out at me is that He would have the spirit of wisdom and understanding (verse 2). This is tremendously important, because the carnal mind is not only enemity with God, but it is unable to understand spiritual things.
The reason that you have problems accepting the ‘literal’ writings of Genesis, is because thats precisely what you are doing – studying the bible literally and so when things do not line up or make sense, we (man) begin in our wisdom to find answers.
Brother, you need an experience with God’s Holy Spirit who not only conforms us to the image of Christ, but leads us into all truth. If it is truth you seek, which I honetly believe it is what you desire more than anything, then you need the rhema of God’s word – not scientific mumbo jumbo.
It is impossible to take the findings of a carnally-minded man and line them up to the revelatory teachings of the word of God. For every question that you have stated there is an answer – the problem is that we have many issues with equating a good God with Him also being a God of Judgement – some how in the mind of the human being who views God as simply merciful and loving – judgement seems erroneous.
That’s an amazing number of words to say that I haven’t had the experience of hearing God speak, to imply that my answers are wrong, but that you have the answers, presumably because you are listening to the Spirit of God. I don’t really recall having gotten to the answers yet–I’m still discussing the questions–but we’ll leave that aside at the moment.
I believe one can hear God speak, but I am unimpressed by the claim itself. My suggestion would be to provide some of the wisdom you claim to have by that means. As I say in my book on the topic (When People Speak for God), the final person who has to hear from God is you–and in this case, me.