The Bible is not an answer machine to all your questions (despite what billboards on US I-40 tell me); many of our modern questions are not addressed in the Bible (most of them, in fact: think of the issues people are each others’ throats about half the time in our country); the Bible often gives a range of answers to various issues; sometimes these contradict one another; and sometimes they simply don’t make any sense in our modern context (if you think they do, then look through your closet to see if you have any clothing made out of more then one fabric).

These are some of the issues I address toward the tail end of my Introduction in my book God’s Problem (HarperOne, 2008), excerpted here.

******************************

It is important, I think, to realize that the Bible has a wide range of answers to the problem of suffering because this realization reveals the problem of thinking that the Bible has one simple answer to every issue.

Many people in our world take a smorgasbord approach to the Bible, picking and choosing what suits them and their views without acknowledging that the Bible is an extremely complex and intricate concatenation of views, perspectives, and ideas.

There are millions of people in our world, for example, who suffer social estrangement because of their sexual orientation. Some of this social alienation originates among simple- minded Bible believers who insist that gay relationships are condemned in Scripture. As it turns out, that is a debated issue, one on which serious scholars disagree.

But apart from that, this condemnation of gay relations “because the Bible condemns it” is a case of people choosing to accept the parts of the Bible they want to accept and ignoring everything else. The same books that condemn same-sex relations, for example, also require people to stone their children to death if they are disobedient, to execute anyone who does any work on Saturday or who eats pork chops, and to condemn anyone who wears a shirt made of two kinds of fabric. No special emphasis is placed on one of these laws over the others—they are all part of the biblical law. Yet, in parts of society, gay relations are condemned, while eating a ham sandwich during a lunch break on a Saturday workday is perfectly acceptable.

It is important, then, to see what the Bible actually says, and not to pretend it doesn’t say something that happens to contradict one’s own particular point of view. But whatever the Bible says needs to be evaluated. This is not a matter of setting oneself up as God, dictating what is and is not divine truth. It is a matter of using our intelligence to assess the merit of what the biblical authors say–whether this involves questions of suffering, sexual preferences, working on weekends, or culinary and sartorial choices.

Having said this, I should stress that it is not the goal of this book to convince you, my reader, to share my point of view about suffering, God, or religion. I am not interested in destroying anyone’s faith or deconverting people from their religion. I am not about to urge anyone to become an agnostic. Unlike other recent agnostic or atheist authors, I do not think that every reasonable and reasonably intelligent person will in the end come to see things my way when it comes to the important issues of life. But I do know that many thinking people think about suffering.It is important, then, to see what the Bible actually says, and not to pretend it doesn't say something that happens to contradict one's own particular point of view.

This is in no small measure because all of us suffer, and many of us suffer a lot. Even those of us who are well off, who are well educated, who are well cared for-even we can experience professional disappointment, unexpected unemployment and loss of in- come, the death of a child, failed health; we can get cancer, or heart disease, or AIDS; all of us will eventually suffer and die. It is worth thinking about these things, and in doing so it is worth seeing how others have thought about them before us -in this case, those others who produced the books that be- came the Bible, the best-selling book of all time and the book that lies at the core of our civilization and culture.

And so my goal is to help people think about suffering. There are, of course, numerous books about suffering al- ready. In my opinion, though, many of these books are either intellectually unsatisfying, morally bankrupt, or practically useless. Some of them attempt to give an easy or easy-to-digest answer to the question of why people suffer. For people who prefer easy answers, those can be useful books.

But for people who struggle deeply with life’s questions and do not find easy answers at all satisfying, such books merely irritate the mind and grate on the nerves-they are not helpful. Still, there is a good deal of simplistic schlock written about suffering. Pious-sounding or pat (and very old, unimaginative) answers sell well, after all these years.

Other books are morally dubious, in my opinion-especially those written by intellectual theologians or philosophers who wrestle with the question of evil in the abstract, trying to provide an intellectually satisfying answer to the question of theodicy. What I find morally repugnant about many such books is that they are so far removed from the actual pain and suffering that takes place in our world, dealing with evil as an “idea” rather than as an experienced reality that rips apart people’s lives.

This book will neither provide an easy solution nor attack the question philosophically by applying difficult intellectual concepts and making hard-to-understand claims with sophisticated and esoteric vocabulary. My interest for this book is instead with some of the age-old and traditional reflections on evil found in the foundational documents of the Judeo-Christian tradition.

The questions I will be asking are these:

  • What do the biblical authors say about suffering?
  • Do they give one answer or many answers?
  • Which of their answers contradict one another, and why does it matter?

How can we as twenty-first-century thinkers evaluate these answers, which were written in different con- texts so many centuries ago?

My hope is that, by looking at these ancient writings that eventually came to form the Bible, we will be em- powered to wrestle more responsibly and thoughtfully with the issues they raise, as we ponder one of the most pressing and wrenching questions of our human existence: why we suffer.

Over $2 Million Donated to Charity!

We have two goals at Ehrman Blog. One is to increase your knowledge of the New Testament and early Christianity. The other is to raise money for charity! In fact, in 2022, we raised over $360,000 for the charities below.

Become a Member Today!

2024-10-15T16:43:56-04:00October 22nd, 2024|Reflections and Ruminations|

Share Bart’s Post on These Platforms

21 Comments

  1. fishician October 22, 2024 at 10:39 am

    Suffering is only an intellectual problem for the theologically-minded. In the natural world suffering is, well, natural. The imperfections of our genetic system lead to cancer. The structure of the earth’s crust leads to earthquakes and tsunamis. Microorganisms see us as prey and so disease happens. And our short-sighted self-interest in our stll-evolving mammalian brains leads to crime, war, poverty and other human-caused problems. There is no need to apply some cosmic meaning to it; we just have to learn to deal with it.

  2. johan plas October 22, 2024 at 11:08 am

    “But whatever the Bible says needs to be evaluated. This is not a matter of setting oneself up as God, dictating what is and is not divine truth.”

    Evaluating the Bible must also include evaluating the image(s ) of God as described in the Bible. That is not a matter of dictating but of morally an intellectually evaluating what can be Divine Truth and certainly by eliminating all that is certainly not as for instance the prologue and the epilogue of the Book of Job.

    • BDEhrman October 26, 2024 at 3:05 pm

      Evaluating what a book says about God is not the same as evaluating God (you can evaluate a biography of Obama without passing judgment on Obama)

  3. jhague October 22, 2024 at 3:19 pm

    “ The same books that condemn same-sex relations, for example, also require people to stone their children to death if they are disobedient, to execute anyone who does any work on Saturday or who eats pork chops, and to condemn anyone who wears a shirt made of two kinds of fabric. ”

    Is there any indication that these death penalty sentences were ever followed through on? It seems if nothing else, all the children would have had to be executed due to disobedience!

  4. geofff October 22, 2024 at 9:45 pm

    Such a well worded question, which says much : “Why CAN’T the hard problems have simple answers?”. Sounds more like the plaintive appeal of a child (or a childish adult?) rather than asserting an answer by tweaking the wording to : Why the hard problems CAN’T have simple answers! It reminds me of a book title years ago (I never read the book – the title itself gave me plenty to think about!) : “But Lord, I was happy shallow!”. And I read this to mean “happy being shallow” or “happy living shallow”. I’ve got to admit, much of the manoeuvrings I see from evangelical apologists seems to revolve around the need to maintain the simple happiness of blocking out inconvenient reality so that the neat fantasy can keep working.
    “If only we didn’t live in life, as well as dreams”, to quote Blood Brothers.

    • BDEhrman October 26, 2024 at 3:12 pm

      I’m sorry you think my question shallow!

      • geofff October 27, 2024 at 1:33 pm

        Certainly NOT! Your question cleverly plays on the distinction that can’t be conveyed by simple text between making a statement rhetorically (as you’ve done) versus asking a straight question (based on wishful thinking, as others often do)!
        This also reminds me of the mix-up often seen when people mis-title Robert Frost’s “The Road Not Taken” with their preferred “The Road Less Travelled”! I so love that poem!

        • BDEhrman October 28, 2024 at 7:37 pm

          It’s weird that there are so many interpretatoins of it. I never suspected that for years, since I simply assumed the understanding I had (that he was later pleased he had made the right choice…) was simply what it obviously meant. Whoops.

          • geofff October 28, 2024 at 9:48 pm

            Yes, it certainly IS weird there are so many interpretations out there given there are really so few if the actual words of Frost are read! Which is very similar to the point you make in this post about the Bible! This is all deliciously clever.
            Frost himself is reputed to have said this poem was very tricky – such is the power of imagination, regret, and pining for what might have been instead of getting on with what IS!!

  5. srawson October 23, 2024 at 9:35 am

    (Part 1 – Continued on next comment.)
    Here is my solution to the problem. I have yet to see this one, so maybe worth discussing.

    To begin, I must say that my life has never included any significant suffering, certainly not of the scale many humans experience, so the below may seem hopelessly naive.

    Imagine what you would consider a “non-suffering” life. Just how great would it be? What I expect is that even in the world you imagine now as “non-suffering” you would find something to complain about and that it would seem like a huge problem and make you doubt that God exists.

    We also know that for many people whom we see as experiencing terrible suffering (quadriplegics, those in extreme poverty, people in the past with no modern conveniences (you couldn’t pay me enough to live back then), many of these manage to feel OK or even happy. (Search for “hedonic treadmill.”)

    Read on for more…

  6. srawson October 23, 2024 at 9:37 am

    (Part 2)
    Now imagine our world with its terrible suffering. Could it be worse? It sure could. The worst torture imaginable would be infinitely worse if there were no death and therefore no escape, or if we lived for a thousand years instead of maximum of hundred or so. Literally Hell.

    So my solution to the problem is twofold:

    1) Complete lack of suffering is probably impossible. The scale of suffering we see is one of the possibilities, but it could be better or worse. However better it was we’d still find something wrong with it.

    2) If perfect joy were even possible, we would probably find it boring. Don’t we want a good story? Without a good story would it even be fun enough to qualify as perfect joy?

    In any case I’m still an atheist, just not because of suffering in the world. And I still care about the wretched of the earth. I wish everyone on earth was at about the same level of suffering and hope we get there someday.

    I hope this doesn’t fall into the category of “it’s not really suffering.” I don’t believe it does.

    How’s that?

    • BDEhrman October 26, 2024 at 3:23 pm

      Yes, people have made that and simiar arguments. For my part, I’d be willing to accept a more boring story in exchange for putting an end to 25,000 people dying of starvation every day (and that’s in the MODERN world wehre there is a much lower % of people starving to death than any time since homo sapiens appeared some 300,000 years ago.) It’s hard to see the children need to come into the world with birth defects, or that 30,000 people have to die in volcanic mudslides, or 300,000 in a tsunami, or 11 million in a holocause so I won’t be quite so bored, if you see what a mean… disabledupes{d39fa18384e5a1bc936d8812c5cd1713}disabledupes

      • srawson October 27, 2024 at 6:54 pm

        Yep, I’d opt for a more boring life in exchange for eliminating all those things. And if God is God, I’d expect Him to have the power to give us both at once: perfect joy and endlessly fascinating ideas, including things like the problem of suffering, to consider at the same time. And art and play and other kinds of fun.

        What I find more theologically troubling is that people can beseech God to make them good and charitable only to continue being selfish, human, and even evil. Where is the grace we keep hearing about?

        But I’m an atheist simply because there’s no evidence that any gods exist. Just because so many people believe in one god or another is not enough proof for me.

    • BDEhrman October 26, 2024 at 3:23 pm

      Yes, people have made that and simiar arguments. For my part, I’d be willing to accept a more boring story in exchange for putting an end to 25,000 people dying of starvation every day (and that’s in the MODERN world wehre there is a much lower % of people starving to death than any time since homo sapiens appeared some 300,000 years ago.) It’s hard to see the children need to come into the world with birth defects, or that 30,000 people have to die in volcanic mudslides, or 300,000 in a tsunami, or 11 million in a holocause so I won’t be

    • BDEhrman October 26, 2024 at 3:23 pm

      Yes, people have made that and simiar arguments. For my part, I’d be willing to accept a more boring story in exchange for putting an end to 25,000 people dying of starvation every day (and that’s in the MODERN world wehre there is a much lower % of people starving to death than any time since homo sapiens appeared some 300,000 years ago.) It’s hard to see the children need to come into the world with birth defects, or that 30,000 people have to die in volcanic mudslides, or 300,000 in a tsunami, or 11 million in a holocause so I won’t be

  7. Tom48 October 23, 2024 at 10:36 am

    This topic makes me wonder about something: The basic problem is that, if god is all powerful, all knowing, and all compassionate, why is there suffering? One answer is that it is due to free will among humans, but the counter to that argument is that souls in heaven still have free will, but there is no suffering there. At least, according to some traditions. So here is my question: souls in heaven are not all powerful, they are all compassionate, but are they all knowing? At least according to various denominations and sects? If they are all knowing while humans are not, that would seem to strengthen the free will argument.

    • Tomaha November 1, 2024 at 8:23 pm

      First, one has to accept as “truth”, as “given”, that certain concepts from the Bible actually exists. Like an all powerful God, a loving God, free will, heaven, etc. Otherwise, it’s just an intellectual exercise without meaning. But, whatever keeps you out of the bar, I guess.

  8. BruddaB October 27, 2024 at 7:21 pm

    Professor:

    I am a Jew. A non-observant Jew. What baffles me is that Christianity rejects biblical proscriptions on personal behavior, e.g. dietary laws of Leviticus, but accept the biblical restrictions on the behavior of others, e.g. homosexuality. I have read several of your books, but still wonder what caused this distinction to emerge. Thanks for your work and any comment you may offer.

    • BDEhrman October 28, 2024 at 7:39 pm

      What causes it is the desire to weaponize the Bible for one’s own purposes! (But for those who are being more sophisticated about it, the difference is that it is widely thought that are some laws of Scripture that are intended to enforce and re-enforce Jewish identity, and other laws that are applicable to all people — kinda like the Noachide laws. And circumcision/kashrut/sabbath etc. are the former and ethical laws the latter. I do think that view was around among Xns already in NT times)

      • Tomaha November 1, 2024 at 8:35 pm

        Christians only quote the Old Testament when it can score a rhetorical point, but conveniently forget the sayings of Jesus saying he was the “New Testament”, the condensing of all the OT laws and stories into HIS story. A much simpler and edifying story to remember until you get to part about Eternal Suffering, and the ‘many are called but few are chosen’ aspects. The exclusivity of the “Elect”.

Leave A Comment