Alister McGrath and the philosophical problem of evil

Christ Church Cathedral, Dublin, Ireland

I am working on final advisor revisions for my PhD thesis, and I am quite occupied. My C.S. Lewis presentations from my MPhil received good feedback through Blogger and BlogRush, and I therefore present part of my MPhil discussion on Alister McGrath.

Thank you, and I look forward to receiving comments.

Concerning comments, I do not expect long responses, although those are appreciated as well. I generally leave short responses on other blogs, since I have PhD work, two theology blogs to run, and so many blogs to comment on. I realize that one way to build up blog readers, comments and links is to comment on as many blogs as possible, and so I do not necessarily expect to receive long comments, and hope others do not expect this from me. I just have too much work to do.

Long and short comments are appreciated on this blog.

From:
http://thekingpin68.blogspot.com/2006/01/mphil-wales-2003.html

British and Anglican scholar, Alister McGrath, Wycliffe College, Oxford, has written a significant work on suffering which is a result of the problem of evil. It is entitled Suffering (1992), and he condenses his writings in Suffering within Bridge-Building (1992).

The Philosophical Problem of Evil

McGrath pointed out a weakness with the philosophical discussion and stated his desire to concentrate on a theological remedy to the problem of evil within his work.

He writes:

Many of the theological and philosophical texts I have wrestled with seem to be much more concerned with upholding the integrity of a God who seems to allow suffering, than with saying anything helpful to those who are bewildered and confused by that suffering. I can think of few things less helpful to someone going through pain than a sophisticated theological defence of the integrity of God, or even a gentle romp through the subtle logic of necessary evil.

Now that kind discussion needs to take place. But it happens too often without any consideration of the anguish of those who need comforting and reassuring in the face of their sadness. Suffering is a pastoral and spiritual issue, not just a theological problem. In the book, I have not the slightest intention of presenting myself either as a spokesman or as some kind of defence attorney for God. God is perfectly capable of looking after himself. The real issue is not about defending God’s honour or integrity, but about making sense of our experience. McGrath (1992: 8-9).

McGrath is espousing a viewpoint similar to one that I took with my Graduating Essay at Trinity Western University. The philosophical discussion concerning the problem of evil is beneficial but the theological remedy is often overlooked in theological works since the critics of God and Christianity have, in the past, attacked the notion of the infinite, omnipotent, perfectly holy God who has evil existing within his creation.

For people suffering with the problem of evil, and that includes all human beings, the theological remedy to evil and suffering through Christ must be a vital part of theological apologetics. It can complement the philosophical discussion, and the revelation of God should be considered.

Carl Henry wrote: "Not even theistic arguments can fully vindicate God’s graciousness in the face of human evil if they appeal simply to empirical consideration or to philosophical reasoning devoid of revelational illumination." Henry (1983: 282).

Henri Blocher had the same sentiment but in slightly stronger terms. In his text Evil and the Cross:

The failure of the explanations of evil that we have examined as exposed in our preceding chapters, taking them according to their fundamental types, shows them for what they are, when confronted with experience and when the concepts are analysed. But it is Divine Revelation which reveals truly and with complete certainty. Holy Scripture, the Word of God, the ‘normative norm,’ is the only standard which allows us to distinguish between those insights which agree with it, and those all too human false trails in those systems of thought. Blocher (1994: 84).

Both Henry and Blocher share with McGrath the idea that in the philosophical problem of evil discussion it is not as central to Christianity as the theological remedy provided through Christ’s atoning work. However, I think Blocher’s words are slightly too strong by calling the explanations of the problem of evil a failure. Yes, the philosophical discussion is limited but it deals with issues not solved within the theological remedy. He is correct in that the theological remedy alone provides complete certainty of the end of suffering. That certainty, however, does not deal with some philosophical questions raised, although it could be argued that the answers to those philosophical questions will no longer matter once people do not suffer. Critics, however, need to see that Christianity is philosophically feasible in order to accept the possibility that divine revelation leads to the defeat of the problem of evil.

I think, however, the philosophical discussion needs to be complemented by the theological remedy. I can understand McGrath’s perspective on suffering as in many post-Enlightenment works the faith has been under attack because of the problem of evil. The attacks were of a philosophical nature and thus dealt with so, but ultimately the defence of Christianity comes down to divine revelation. McGrath stated in Iustitia Dei:

The central teaching of the Christian faith is that reconciliation has been effected between and God and sinful man through Jesus Christ, and that this new relation between God and man is a present possibility for those outside the church, and a present actuality for those within its bounds. McGrath (1986: 1).

Since to McGrath this is the central teaching, it makes sense in apologetics featuring the problem of evil, that the work of Jesus Christ in atonement which includes restoration and reconciliation, must be central. He thus thinks discussions on the problem of evil that do not deal with this in strong fashion, are lacking. Suffering was written to comfort those struggling with the problem of evil and to inform them that ultimate victory over suffering will be had through Jesus Christ.

BLOCHER, HENRI. (1994) Evil and the Cross, Translated by David G. Preston, Leicester, InterVarsity Press.

HENRY, CARL. (1983) God, Revelation and Authority: Volume 6: God Who Stands and Stays, Waco, Word Books.

MCGRATH, ALISTER. (1986) Iustitia Dei, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

MCGRATH, ALSITER. (1992) Suffering, London, Hodder and Stoughton Limited.

http://satireandtheology.blogspot.com/2008/04/floyd-mayweather-
defeats-big-show-sort.html


No Stanley Cup, once again.

This just in...

Can i trust you?

Dear Friend,

I am an Executive accountant for a bank here in Italy. I
require your assistance and partnership in transferring huge
amount of funds in United states dollars out of my country.
You will be required to:-

(1) Assist in the transfer of the said sum.
(2) Advise on lucrative areas for subsequent investment.
(3) Assist us in purchase of landed & viable properties.

We have all the information and guidance to enable you and
we realize this opportunity. We have evaluated the risk
analysis and we are convinced that the
risk element is ZERO, as long as you maintain 100%
confidentiality. Once secured communication has been
established between you and us, detailed clarifications will
be dealt with, such as what each party stand to benefit and
time scale and procedures. Time is not in our favour; please
establish secured communication with me through my email
address.

Mr. David Maldini
maldinidavidonline@yahoo.it