I, of course, have many disagreements with Bart Ehrman's in chapter one of God's Problem.
Bart brings up many things in chapter one but one thing you get loud an clear is that Bart has a problem with God and it is in part because God will not do as Bart wishes. God simply does not fit into his mold. This attitude, by the way, is all through the book.
Of course, Bart brings up theodicy and if you are unaware of what it is; it is an argument that has been around for a long time about God and suffering.
1. God is all powerful
2. God is loving
3. Suffering exists
The conclusion is that 3 is incompatible with both 1 and 2 so therefore God is either not all powerful or not loving. Therefore the God of the Bible cannot be true. I have found this problematic for years because I think theodicy oversimplifies the issue and does not take into account other aspects of God that reflect on suffering, but more on that later.
Bart's main thrust in the chapter seems to be the fact that while many things regarding freewill can explain suffering, natural disasters seem to defy this -- Bart asks -- how did freewill cause this natural senseless evil? This where Bart makes a critical error because in reality he does not accept the Bible as history -- if he did he might find a connection between natural evil and the Flood.
Bart maintains that the freewill defense has only a minor role in Biblical tradition and that is a major problem for me because if you look at the origins of evil and suffering much of it has much to do with freewill disobedience -- all of the suffering and evil that follows in Genesis 1-11 is predicated by bad decisions BY THE HUMAN RACE.
Bart argues in the Bible God overrides freewill on many occasions to get his wishes why not in all cases to prevent evil. I have two questions:
1. Are we sure that God is overriding freewill in these cases or does it seem that way or is that the way they have been interpreted?
2. What kind of world does Bart want us to live in? -- Apparently a world where god always bails us out of our problems and where we have no responsibilities but to do whatever we please without consequences apparently.
Probably the greatest disagreement I have though is with his statement that the various answers the Bible gives contradict each other -- I don't think so but we will deal with this book we will deal with each answer as it comes and at the end show that the answers are various because each type of answer deals with various types of suffering and evil.
One more thing, Bart seems to have prejudice against traditional views. He dislikes answers to the problem of evil that old or unimaginative. My thoughts are just because something is old or unimaginative does not make it wrong.
Next -- Agreements with Chapter Two
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment