Keller and the question of suffering

Tim Keller's book called The Reason for God has several chapters which address frequent doubts that skeptics, and even those who believe, have about religion. I covered the first objection (there can't be just be one true religion) in a previous blog. I wanted to cover his second chapter here -- how could a good God allow suffering? This is a common complaint among skeptics, but Keller has good points to challenge it.

First, he says the question seems to suggest an enormous faith in the skeptic's own cognitive faculties. Just because we can't see or imagine a good reason why God might allow something to happen doesn't mean there can't be one. The skeptic doesn't have a good answer, and, therefore, he thinks there can't be any. Keller calls this "blind faith of a high order."

The author believes that with time and perspective most of us can see good reasons at least for some of the suffering in this world. Many admit that success in life came only after difficult and painful experiences. So, since we know some tragedy and pain is useful, why couldn't it be possible than that God sees good reasons for all of them?

Keller says that evil and suffering actually may be evidence for God, not against his existence. How is that possible? We say people should not suffer in the world; on what basis does the atheist judge this world to be wrong and unfair and unjust? A nonbeliever in God doesn't have a good basis for being outraged at injustice. If you say this is an unjust world, you are assuming the reality of some standard by which to make your judgment. Notice the atheist does not say that he doesn't like injustice; he says it is wrong. So his standard is beyond his own feelings -- he believes there really is some larger standard for his judgment. Where does this standard come from except from a supernatural agent?

Keller then argues that even though Christianity does not provide a reason for every experience of pain and suffering, it provides deep resources for facing it with courage. For one thing, it is only Christianity that says God came to earth to deliberately put himself on the hook of human suffering. Jesus died a terrible death, separated from God and jeered by the onlookers. He had not only physical pain but also cosmic abandonment. It is Christianity alone among world religions that says God became human and, therefore, knows all the suffering of the human race.

It is Christianity that also provides a great hope. Our suffering is not in vain because of the resurrection of Jesus. The secular view sees no future after death. Eastern religions say we lose our individuality after this life. The biblical view of things, however, is resurrection, a restoration of the life we always wanted.

Many authors over the centuries have struggled with this issue of suffering and the goodness of God. Keller's response is a good one -- he says our view is too limited view to be able to say there is no reason for our suffering, by complaining of injustice we are actually saying there is a standard beyond us, Christianity offers consolation and hope. I'll take a look at some of his other chapters in future blogs.