Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Evangelical
“Why? On Suffering, Guilt and God” Part 1

“Why? On Suffering, Guilt and God” Part 1

Last updated on: May 4, 2023 at 8:00 am by Roger E. Olson

0 Comments

“Why? On Suffering, Guilt and God” Part 1 2023-05-04T08:00:53-05:00 Roger E. Olson

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Today I begin my commentary and critique of A van de Beek’s book “Why?” Some of you are reading it along with me. Others can listen in and ask questions, but please do not make any judgments about the book or what others who are reading it say about it if you are not reading it with us. I will continue to announce here when we who are reading it are to move forward. I will space out these occasional commentaries and critiques. Please don’t comment about a portion until after we have read it.

I am going to refer to the author as “Beek” even though I know A. van de Beek is his whole name (with the “A” standing for Abram and he goes by “Bram” to his friends). Beek begins by apologizing for another book about God and the problem of evil and says “Now the church has always seen suffering in relation to God. The question is what role does God play in the experiences of suffering?” He then goes on in 1. Apology to explain his theological method: “We are bound by the sources of the Christian tradition, of which Jesus Christ is the center.” However, he acknowledges that there is no escaping tradition and experience in our thinking about God and suffering. He also affirms the use of reason as “consistency” in theological thinking. This sounds something like the so-called “Wesleyan Quadrilateral.”

However, and this is a big “however,” on page 5 Beek admits that “we have no alternative but to acknowledge…that…discontinuities in our thinking will remain.” That is the essence of his “apology”—that he does not expect to solve the problem of evil within a Christian theistic worldview with any finality. He concludes this chapter: “In short, this book intends to make a contribution in the common struggle to fathom our human situation with God; in other words, a contribution in the common struggle to know God as the God of this world—our world.” (5)

Beek then moves on to THE problem in chapters 2 and 3. “Both divine omnipotence and divine goodness are fundamental to Christian theology.” (5) But how to reconcile them in light of our human experience of evil and innocent suffering? In these chapters it becomes clear that Beek will not turn to process theology or Hegelian thought or any non-traditional view of God that he considers a denial of God’s omnipotence. He will hold firmly to God’s omnipotence as he believes it is crucial to the biblical witness and to our Christian knowledge and experience of God. So the question is: “Why did not God do things differently? Why is there so much suffering and injustice, if God could have acted differently?” (13)

In chapter 3 Beek turns to the other side of the enigma: God’s goodness. As with God’s omnipotence he has no intention of qualifying God’s goodness. Beek rejects an Augustinian view that all things are good because God is their source, the creator of all that is. He rejects that view because “Not everything in the Bible is called ‘good.’ People turn out not to be what God has intended.” (17) THAT is where I stopped and caught my breath. THAT is what I have always believed. But so many theologians are not willing to say it that boldly and blatantly. So where is Beek going if not into some limitation of God’s omnipotence or God’s goodness? He insists (in this chapter) that “good” cannot just mean “whatever God decides and does.” “The goodness of God is no empty concept.” (17) Beek closes the chapter with a BIG clue to a central theme of the book: “Ever since Jesus Christ has come into the world, the goodness of God can never again be viewed apart from him…. In Christ, God in goodness and with his entire being has turned to the cries and tears of the wretched.” (18)

There it is—the central thesis of “Why?” But it will need to be fleshed out. What does he mean that God “has turned?”

In chapter 4 Beek talks a bout “suffering and sin” Here the author simply elaborates the problem: “Why did God permit—or perhaps even will—that human beings should be sinful? How could he create beings who were able to commit the horrors humans have perpetrated?” (20) This is a question Christian theologians have wrestled with much, very much, for two thousand years. Does Beek have a better answer than most?

In chapter 5 Beek finally tells us what he going to DO in this book—in contrast to other books about the problem of evil. He is going to talk about omnipotence and THEN about goodness. He says we cannot choose between them, but neither can we talk about them at the same time. He announces that he is going to start with omnipotence and then turn to goodness. “One has to start with one of the two approaches. If I choose to begin with omnipotence, it is because this access road is usually taken in the history of dogma.” (22) He is going to talk about traditional and existing “models” of omnipotence and then of goodness. In the very last paragraph (p. 23) Beek tells us something very important, almost giving away what is going to be different about this treatment of the problem of evil. He will talk about God’s “history” with us. Here is the thesis of the book: “Only within that history do alternate models gain their meaning and place, and one will not exclude another.” (23)

By the end of this part, page 23, Beek had my attention and interest. At least from the years of my seminary studies I have always been obsessed with the problem of reconciling God’s omnipotence with God’s goodness and I refused to go down the voluntarist rabbit hole of saying that whatever God does is good just because God does it. But I also refused to sacrifice any of God’s omnipotence. So, by page 23 Beek had me hooked. I agree with his theological method and share his concern for consistency in thought and his desire to reconcile God’s omnipotence and goodness in light of the problems of evil and innocent suffering. I investigated process theology, Hegelian thought, existentialist theology (paradox), and even some theologians who dared to question God’s goodness. I found all of those to be dead ends—at least for me.

Might Beek have a better answer? We’ll see…stay tuned!

*If you decide to comment on this post, please make sure you have read the material discussed (viz., “Why? Part 1). If you have not read the material, you may ask a question but don’t expect an answer; you may or may not receive one. In every case, keep your comment relatively brief, on topic, addressed to me, civil and respectful (not hostile or argumentative) and devoid of pictures or links.*

Uncategorized

Previous Post

May 1, 2023

Comments and Cautions Regarding “Why?”

Next Post

May 6, 2023 About Reading More of “Why?” Setting a Date

Recent Comments

0 | Leave a Comment

"“Secular” means non-religious. No religion is embraced by American society anymore. Christianity remains the leading ..."

Roger Olson

Billy Graham’s Successor?

"I will look him up. Never heard of him."

Roger Olson

Billy Graham’s Successor?

"Where and when and how did I “support” a leader or church…? I said I ..."

Roger Olson

I’m Proud of Adam Hamilton (and ..."

"4-5% of the population is atheist or literally 'secular' not the entire country.Thats a really ..."

davidt

Billy Graham’s Successor?

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Against Liberal Theology Uncategorized

Select a Month November 2026 October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

What does Paul tell Titus that the grace of God teaches us to do?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Say no to ungodliness and live self-controlled, upright and godly lives Spread the gospel Love one another Obey the authorities