Recent events in the news have finally forced me to blog again about the problem of evil. In addition to the dementia and influence of Pat Robertson, there was a tragic earthquake in Haiti. While in either situation we ask, “how could God let this happen?” I prefer to focus on Haiti.
Yes, I am opening this blog a little tongue and cheek, but in all seriousness I do want to talk about the problem of evil once again. Specifically, I want to talk about theodicies. A “theodicy” is an attempt by Christians to explain why God allows evil. Theodicies come in many shapes and sizes, and are vigorously argued. When it comes to Haiti, I will present two common theodicies, which will in turn open up for a bigger problem of theodicy in general.*
One type of theodicy might be called the “sovereignty theodicy.” In the sovereignty theodicy, nothing happens without at least God’s consent. God is never surprised by any event. God, who sees the entire picture, works everything out for his own good justice in the end. Evil is part of this process. This will even extends to humans, as our suffering (and reaction to other people’s suffering) will make us more holy or Christ-like. This theodicy might be summed up as saying, “God works out everything for his own good, and our good in the end.” The bitter medicine of evil and suffering will not compare to glories that await us and the world to come.
Of all theodicies, I like an idea of theodicy in which evil is part of a cycle of growth for Christians and for a future glorious new creation. Nonetheless, I think this theodicy faces a big problem. It makes God a utilitarian: a certain amount of evil, for a greater amount of good. Why would God need to do this? I recognize that utilitarian is something that human beings need to do. Jack Bauer must occasionally (frequently) torture someone in order to save many lives. Though he (hopefully) knows what he is doing is wrong, he understands that there will be a great good that will come of it. Jack Bauer does this trade-off because his power is limited. If he could save lives without having to torture someone he would, but as it is plastic bags and bamboo shoots are the only. God’s power is not limited. So why is evil necessary?
There is another problem with this kind of theodicy: God must make some people victims in order to make other people better. Consider the following, there is a great amount of “good” that has come out of the horrendous tragedy of the Haiti earthquake. Among other things, Christians are getting together to express Christian love in a very tangible way. Undoubtably, many will come back with a fresh perspective on poverty, suffering, and Christian service. Of course, for this kind of Christian growth to happen, many people had to die or at least endure terrible suffering. Why must some people die in order to deepen the spiritual lives of the living? It seems like the Haitians are getting the short end of stick. Again, this is a kind of utilitarian trade-off that doesn’t make sense to if God is omnipotent.
There is another theodicy that can be called the free-will theodicy. This is one of the most common ones heard in everyday evangelicalism. All evil comes from sin, and sin comes from our free choices. God could override our free-will, but wants Christian to love him willingly and “not be robots.” There is something so supremely good about free will, that it justifies the side effect of evil.
Those who know me well know that free will is a pretty big deal for me, but I still don’t think this justifies evil and suffering, especially in relation to Haiti. First, the tragedy of Haiti is not totally the result of human sin. We may have misused our free-will to create the economic and social conditions of Haiti, but human sin did not bring the earthquake. Furthermore, this still faces the same problem as the sovereignty theodicy: a utilitarian tradeoff. Why would an omnipotent God need to have some people suffer in order that others might exercise their free will? Couldn’t an omnipotent God have set up a universe in which free-will of one person did not involve causing others to suffer?
Any Answer at all?
Now I get to the big problem. There is a possibility that I think all Christian need to face: that we might not have access to a theodicy at all. Why would God allow the earthquake in Haiti? We simply do not know. For some, I think that this may threaten the Christian faith. I do not think so, because although we cannot know the answer it does not mean that the answer is not there. God’s reasons may simply be hidden from us. God may simply be silent on this matter.
But is strange for God to be silent on this matter. For Christians, God has obviously spoken on a great many things. So presumably, God could simply tell us why evil exists in the world. Yet we do not quite something so clear and unambigious, and are left to coming up with theodicies on our own. The best answer we ever get from God is same answer that we see at the end of the Book of Job, “who are you to ask these kinds of questions?”
Honestly, that seems to be the world that we live in, but what does that mean for Haiti?
=======================================
*I credit Nicholas Wolterstorff for pretty much everything that I am saying in this blog. See his article, “Silence of the God who Speaks” for a more detailed discussion of what I am condensing here.
