The Problem with Theodicy

I've talked about theodicy before. We live in a fallen world where bad things happen. Why? Is God not capable? Or does He just not care enough? Theodicy is the effort to defend God against these accusations.

Now, I have no problem engaging the questions. I think there are good and viable answers. There are, however, a some issues to consider.

First, why do we think that God needs defending? Does God think He needs defending? I don't think so. In Psalms, God says, "If I were hungry I would not tell you, for the world is Mine, and all it contains" (Psa 50:12). That is, "I have everything I need; I don't need your help." In fact, it borders on (borders on?) arrogance on our part to think that He needs us to defend Him.

Second, in our efforts to ward off assaults on God's character, we run the risk of misrepresenting Him. You see, if you read the Scriptures, God isn't helping much. We like to say, for instance, that God does good and the bad things that happen just happen or, at best, He "allows." Sure, we would still have a little farther to go in defending that, but, hey, God's not the cause, so it's okay, right? Then God opens His mouth and says things like, "I am the LORD, and there is no other, the One forming light and creating darkness, causing well-being and creating calamity; I am the LORD who does all these" (Isa 45:6-7). If we were God's lawyers, we'd be advising Him to take on the 5th. He's incriminating Himself while we're defending Him. But He seems to have no difficulty saying boldly that He causes calamity. So if our defense of God includes the denial of that fact, we're misrepresenting Him to others. It's an easy and erroneous thing to do.

Third, our purpose is vague. Defending God to unbelievers is pointless. By nature they hate Him (Rom 8:7). It doesn't matter how good and true your argument is; they hate Him. God might use our efforts to regenerate someone, but that's His work, not our fine efforts. And the ultimate answer to the question is not one that most will buy into ... including too many Christians. David used it. "As for God, His way is blameless" (Psa 18:30). That is, "Whatever God does is good and right. Period."

Which points to the final problem. When we try to defend God against these accusations, we hold God up against our standards and try to show that He meets them. Surely you can see immediately that this is a fool's errand. We don't get to try God by our rules. We only get to abide by His standards. Our job, then, is not to defend Him, but to figure out what His standards are and submit to them.

Now, to be fair, it isn't really God who needs defending. He's fine. If we are doing this right, theodicy is not to defend God as much as it is to bolster believers. We need the support, not God. Doing this task to encourage believers who have questions can be helpful. And, to be fair, God might use these kinds of efforts to open someone's heart to Him, so, as long as we realize that it isn't our skillful, coherent arguments or our good heart to defend God that are important here, I have no problem with theodicy. I'm just hoping that people don't get confused about the issues here. God doesn't need defending. We need to agree with what He says about Himself. Our best arguments won't win converts -- only God can do that. And God is not subject to our human standards. If we can keep all this in mind, then perhaps we can be useful to God in the endeavor.