In the following article, I intend to provide further "grist for the mill" and to propose some tentative answers that have grown out of my explorations of scripture, my observations as a psychologist/therapist, and my own experience as a suffering human being. My previous articles in theodicy (The Strength of Weakness, The Thorn in the Flesh, and Discovering Purpose in Suffering) came from a pastoral perspective and sought to flesh out the existential and spiritual purposes of suffering in the lives of believers and to propose ways to better cope with these circumstances.

This present article focuses more upon the logical-philosophical and theological difficulties - and proposes an Augustine-inspired, teleological, and kenotic resolution. Unlike the previous articles, there are points of potential controversy in this one and I expect disagreement from a number of directions.

The Problem

The rational dilemma in theodicy has been commonly expressed in terms of logical propositions or some form of syllogism. For example:

I. a. If God is perfectly good, then He must want to abolish all evil and suffering.

b. If God is omnipotent, then He must be able to abolish all evil and suffering.

II. Evil and suffering exist in the world in great quantity.

III. Therefore, God cannot be both perfectly good and also omnipotent.

To counter the accusations of unbelieving philosophers and also to provide comfort to believers, the task for the Christian apologist has been to develop a rational and biblical response to this logical difficulty. Due to this common framing of the dilemma, the solution for theologians has been limited to denying the extent of evil or making a choice between God's goodness and His omnipotence. Which one is more important?

Other Christians believe that this problem cannot be limited to mere rational logic, which, being formed by the finite human mind, is necessarily faulty. From God's point of view, the "logical dilemma" and our attempts to answer it may be ridiculous (see Isaiah 55:8-11). Nonetheless, in our testimony to the world and for the sake of evangelism, we need a rational and understandable answer, one that satisfies the human need to make sense of things. What do the scriptures say? Here is a sample (there are many other scriptures that could be included):

God IS good.

Exodus 34:5-7, 2 Chronicles 7:2-3, 30:9, Nehemiah 9:17, Nahum 1:7, Psalms 26:8, 115:1, 116:5. On divine love: John 3:16, 1 John 4:7-19, 1 Corinthians 13.

God IS omnipotent.

God is frequently referred to as the "Almighty." When God speaks, it always becomes so: Genesis 1:3, Isaiah 55:8-9, Job 42:1-21, Psalm 62:11, Romans 1:20, Revelation 19:6. Isaiah 40, Nahum 1, Job 38. Nothing is impossible with God: Genesis 18:14, Jeremiah 32:26, Mark 10:27, 14:6, Matthew 19:26, Luke 1:37, 18:27.

Evil DOES exist.

Genesis 6:5-6, John 8:34-47, Romans 1:20-32, 3:10-23, Ephesians 6:11-13.

Christian faith proclaims that God is the very definition of goodness and love and power. Since this logical "problem" is not one that comes from faith, we can expect some disingenuous illogic to be embedded in how it is framed. It seems obvious to me that there is an unexpressed assumption in these logical propositions that an all-powerful, all-loving God could not possibly have a wonderfully positive purpose for temporarily allowing this degree of evil and suffering. Even 100,000 years is an eye-blink in time compared to eternity. What if short-term innocent suffering (like that of Jesus) wins for humanity huge eternal gains that would be otherwise impossible? What if this eventuality makes the suffering that occurs in this short life well worth it? As Christians, we don't regard these "what ifs" as possibilities, we believe them to be true.

Of course, the "logical problem" is not a problem at all for those people who regard God as neither perfect nor all-powerful, for example pantheists (who regard God as everything-in-nature-combined) or Gnostics such as Christian Scientists (who believe that evil and suffering are only illusions of the mind). The logical problem in theodicy also poses little difficulty for people whose Christian faith relies more on personal religious experiences and feelings rather than on rational belief. Maybe for them, ignorance is indeed bliss. In effect, they say "God knows what He is doing; I do not need to know. Do not confuse me with intellectual questions or human logic. It is not important to think about such things, much less argue about them."

Perhaps these people have a valid point. On the other hand, should we check our God-given brains at the door and simply avoid dealing with the hard questions of life? Sometimes our faith does need testing in the crucible of the mind. God is rational beyond our own capacity for reason and He is not threatened by our honest questioning and searching. God's truth will stand up to our scrutiny. In Proverbs we read: Wisdom is supreme; therefore get wisdom. Though it cost all you have, get understanding (Proverbs 4:7, see also 9:1). And even more importantly, Jesus told us, "Seek and ye shall find. Knock and it shall be opened unto you." So I, for one, will keep seeking the truth in more depth and breadth.

The late Mennonite theologian John Howard Yoder was generally against Christians working in the field of apologetics, especially theodicy, believing it bordered on idolatry to think we needed to defend or justify God. The fact is, we are not qualified to judge God in any way. Although Yoder is right in this sense, our real reasons for doing theodicy are pastoral (encouragement and faith-building in the face of significant suffering and grief) and evangelistic (to show unbelievers the nature of God in dealing with a fallen world).

There are four basic types of theological perspective which attempt to resolve the logical dilemma that have survived into modern times, often in new 'designer clothes.' These various arguments do at least one of the following:

1) They minimize the evilness of evil and the horribleness of suffering (e.g., Irenaeus, Pelagius, John Hick, and in more extreme form, Christian Scientists), or

2) They deny God's perfect goodness (e.g., "protest" theologians such as John K. Roth and a number of post-Holocaust Jewish thinkers such as Elie Wiesel), or

3) They deny God's omnipotence (e.g., "process" theologians such as Alfred North Whitehead, Charles Hartshorne, and Rabbi Harold Kushner, the author of Why Bad Things Happen to Good People), or

4) They emphasize God's purposes in creating free-will creatures (e.g., Augustine of Hippo, Stephen T. Davis, Alvin Plantinga). This is the classic free-will defense (FWD).

Versions of these four types number in the hundreds. This essay is not intended to be an in-depth analysis of these different views. You can begin a study of them with Encountering Evil: Live Options in Theodicy (Editor Stephen T. Davis, John Knox Press, 1981) where each of these options are presented and argued by one of its proponents, with critical responses from the others.

I will briefly describe my own version of the free-will defense (FWD), informed by the process known as kenosis, God's choice of a temporary and partial self-limitation, or one might say, a more-apparent-than-real suspension of omnipotence through the following acts: a) the creation of free-will creatures who could actually rebel against His will, and b) the divine incarnation of Jesus Christ where He submitted to the vulnerability of being human and even submitted to evil as a sacrificial victim.

Brief Resolution

The FWD resolution was first presented in some depth by Augustine. He emphasized that God in his goodness created a world of moral order in which Adam and Eve were free agents. By creating them in his image and likeness, God gave them a unique quality of relationship with each other and with Him. God entrusted them with a certain amount of freedom. In a limited sense, God was sharing His power with them. This freedom included the freedom to turn away from God and disobey, and unfortunately, that is what they did, with the inevitable (and promised) negative consequences. From their sinful rebellion ("original sin"), evil and its consequences in terms of suffering and death came into the world.

Even though God knew beforehand what Adam and Eve would do, He granted them the capacity to do as they chose anyway. God condemns no one unjustly by causing anyone to sin. He is the judge of all the earth and He will do right by everyone, according to His holiness, wisdom, righteous justice, and grace. In general, He does not coerce the human creatures made in his image, yet He knows what they will do and takes their choices fully into consideration when making His own choices - so that nothing can truly thwart His ultimate will. It all resolves, of course, at the cross - and perhaps nowhere else (as stated well by William Dembski's work - see References). In the Eschaton, this divine process will reveal God's incomprehensible wisdom, grace, and glory.

According to Augustine, evil did not have to be, inevitably, or else free-will is eliminated. Thus, theoretically, God's free-will creatures could have refrained from sinning indefinitely. God is not at fault in any way for their sin. To blame God for sin is to say that He should not have created human beings. However, God (being sovereign and omniscient) knew what would eventually happen when He created such beings and He had His plan in place to deal with it - and to redeem His chosen people in the fullness of time.

God does not instantly wipe out all evil (He could) because that would mean instantly wiping out all of us. He has another plan, which allows evil room to operate temporarily, but which also allows humans to be redeemed. We can accept and believe in His Christ (thus receiving forgiveness and transformation) or we can reject Christ and remain separated from God (thus receiving all of the consequences of that separation). Augustine stressed that evil will not be allowed existence forever, and it is only God's patient grace which forestalls the Judgment Day until the full measure of believers are brought into the Kingdom. When the Kingdom is fully ready, then the "goats and sheep" will be divided, and all that is evil (including suffering and death) will be eliminated.

The Paradox of Omnipotence

George Carlin's humorous description of his experiences in Catholic parochial school contains a student's trick question addressed to the nun teacher: "Can God make a rock so big that He Himself cannot lift it?" If God is all-powerful, then He CAN make such a rock. But as soon as He creates the rock, then He is no longer all-powerful, for now He can't lift it.

When we say that God is omnipotent, we mean that any power that there is in heaven and earth is derived by Him and allowed by Him. The only real limits to God's power are His own divine nature and purposes. This means that God cannot act in a way which is inconsistent with His love, righteousness, wisdom, and faithfulness to His Word. Scripture indicates that God does not change (Mal 3:6, Heb 13:8), His Word will stand forever (Ps 33:11, 119:89, Matt 24:35) and that He "cannot deny Himself" (2 Tim 2:13). Evil is the opposite of good; and only God is truly good. Evil thus may be defined as "not in God's will" or even "not of God." It makes no sense to imagine that God would oppose His own revealed will; He cannot perform an evil act. But is this to be regarded as a limitation to His power? Not at all. God does nothing against His own divine nature and this fact does not in any way impugn His sovereignty or power.

But it also is accurate to say that God is sovereign and powerful enough to create a world in which some things cannot happen and yet other things which are generally against His will can happen. Although God does not change His character, the Bible does reveal that He "changes His mind" at times in response to His creatures. Relationships are important to God. God did not want His imago dei creatures to be robots or puppets who were totally under His control or else no real relationship with them would be possible. Without free will, they certainly could not become His children.

Presbyterian pastor and professor James Emerson (Suffering: Its Meaning and Ministry, Abingdon Press, 1986) put it this way: "At the risk of sounding sacrilegious, God also has a 'tragic flaw'. God's strength (and 'weakness') is that God, who created all, has allowed for freedom. Freedom is necessary for both responsibility and individuality. The strength of freedom lies in the capacity to create. The tragic flaw in freedom centers in its capacity to also destroy. Because of the radical nature of the freedom we are given, Old Testament characters periodically suggest that God is responsible for evil (Is 45:7, Ps 22, 76, Job). God did not really create evil as such. Yet, by creating freedom, God created the possibility for evil.

Yet neither the OT nor the New holds God responsible for the evil things God's creation does with freedom; rather, the Bible makes clear that there is such a thing as evil in the world. Take away the 'tragic flaw' in freedom, the possibility for evil, and one takes away the reality of both freedom and responsibility."

And I must add: If you take away this imago dei quality inherent in freedom and responsibility, you also take away the possibility of real relational intimacy between humans and God.

In combining the free-will defense with a small dose of process theology (accepting the reality of divine kenosis as revealed in the scriptures), we can say that God did choose to give up some of His power by sharing it with His free-will creatures - and thereby He placed some limits on His options. Of course, God could destroy us instantly and start over; He came near to this decision in Noah's time. Or, since God is all-powerful, He could remove from humans the capacity to sin. But in so doing, we also would lose our "image of God" nature which allows us to choose to be in God's will (or not). It is a given that due to the Fall and original sin, our free will is damaged to the extent that it is more-or-less enslaved to sin. But without some ability to choose, we would become merely genetically programmed beasts or animated robots. So, in his patience, God temporarily allows people to choose evil and to suffer its consequences. However, as the Book of Revelation reveals, the day is coming when God will say, in essence, "Time's up." and all evil, suffering, and even death will be destroyed. What is amazing is that God's patience with us is so great that He has not done so yet, and He will not do so until all of His plans are accomplished and all of the elect are comfortably at home in the Kingdom of God.

I presently believe that we can best resolve the logical dilemma of so much evil and suffering by emphasizing that because of His amazing grace, love, and wisdom, God temporarily limited His personal power by creating humans with a real capacity to choose. There is nothing that God must do, but He chose to create creatures in His image with the capacity to rebel against Him. God certainly had the power to create us with this ability. And He knew what He would do when we did eventually rebel.

The free-will defense posits an intentional Creation that purposefully allowed elements that were out of God's direct control -that is, creating a relatively free will in the most advanced of God's creatures. This sharing of His power of choice was given only to those He created to be most like Himself: angels (completely spiritual beings) and material creatures made in His image, with a soul capable of interacting with God (human beings).

Eternity and Time

Nothing ends in eternity; everything is forever. But God suspended eternity with the creation of time (where things could begin and end) and He suspended His direct control over everything by the creation of angels and human beings. God had a divine plan to create a family. First, God created spiritual servants to aid the process (angels) and second, He created a way to have a divine bride. We have no idea how complex a problem and solution that this entailed. This "bride" we now know was to be us - that is, believers in Christ, the Church, the Body of Christ. Another way to say it is that from His eternal heavenly place, God first created and then entered into time. As a holy spiritual and heavenly Being, in Jesus Christ, God became a material and mortal earthly being. In choosing to enter our temporal world as a vulnerable, weak human, God chose to express His power in a manner that would lead to an even better result (and more glory) than would be possible by expressing only overwhelming power and control. Through a perfect plan constructed in eternity, God made sure that the outcome would be exactly what He wanted. This is true omnipotence. And this perfect plan included, as its most important element, for Him to fully enter into human weakness. Because this plan would ultimately result in His ideal outcome, we can see that what the Lord told Paul makes complete sense: "My power is made perfect in weakness." This is not just any weakness, it is human weakness - revealed in Jesus Christ, at the Cross, and now, in us.

Kenosis

Jesus Christ is the prime example of God's temporary self-limiting: in His Son, God became human in order to save humans. Jesus Christ, the Son of God and the Son of Man, began His life in this world as a totally dependent human infant and He died a thoroughly human death of torture on a Roman cross. Jesus did not have to do this; it was His choice to obey the Father and therefore to suffer and die as a man. Note the famous kenotic hymn in Philippians 2:5-11: Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant, being made in human likeness. And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled himself and became obedient to death- even death on a cross.

Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

To inform new readers of the truths embedded in Paul's experience of the "thorn in the flesh," see past articles: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=17515#.UZ4Oh7WR-So http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=17549#.UZ4OtLWR-So

Examine again the Lord's amazing statement to Paul: "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." I would think that God's power was already 'perfect' throughout all eternity. But apparently not. The Triune God's power is perfected in creating a vulnerable universe and His entering therein; His power is perfected by creating human beings who could rebel against His will; His power is perfected in His lowering Himself to become human in the Incarnation; His power is perfected in His dying on a cross to redeem these human beings. And His power is perfected in us when, in our weakness, we must fully depend upon Him.

In conclusion, God's power and glory are especially manifested when we are powerless to help ourselves. In the last analysis, we will discover that His grace and power are immensely more than sufficient and that our tribulations are necessary to transform us into the people God intends us to be.

Perhaps also, God delights in keeping His omnipotence and goodness hidden from those who do not want to believe in Him. [See: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=17459#.UbUWKvmR-So]

References

Davis, Stephen T (editor); Cobb, John B. Jr,; Griffin, David R.; Hick, John H.; Roth, John K.; and Sontag, Frederick. Encountering Evil: Live Options in Theodicy. John Knox Press, 1981.

Dembski, William A. The End of Christianity: Finding a Good God in an Evil World. B & H Publishing Group, 2009. [Part One, the first 46 pages, are immensely helpful in putting the proper frame around this issue. I highly recommend it.]

Emerson, James G. Suffering: Its Meaning and Ministry. Abingdon Press, 1986.

Gilson, Étienne. The Christian Philosophy of Saint Augustine. Random House, 1960.

Plantinga, Alvin. God, Freedom, and Evil. Harper & Row, 1974.

Dr. Atkinson is a graduate of Fuller Theological Seminary with a doctorate in clinical psychology and an M.A. in theology. He is a licensed psychologist in clinical practice in Atlanta and also works as a clinical supervisor training Christian counselors for Richmont Graduate University. He is a founding member of Trinity Anglican Church (ACNA) in Douglasville, Georgia.