Why Wright Does Not Always Understand God

¶ … God I Don't Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith

Preface and Introduction

The Preface explains why Wright chose to write this book. He felt that it could be a more personal and humble approach to God than that achieved in his other books, which were about "knowing God." In this book, Wright wants to address some of the more confusing aspects of God. He justifies this approach by showing how God Himself points out that His ways are not our ways in Scripture. This is a valid point, and what Wright is doing is drawing attention to the fact that we are not God's equals and therefore should not try to humanize Him but rather should try to understand that He knows and sees all and therefore has a good reason for why He commands and does things that might seem disturbing or odd to us.

However, in Wright's Introduction, he explains his struggles with the things God allows to happen, such as why God allows some to suffer more than others. He notes that as he grows older, he seems to understand God less and less, though his love and trust are unwavering. There appears to be some disconnect here and it is this disconnect that the author is attempting to resolve. As Wright notes, the best we can do is at least try to get rid of some of the answers to our questions that are incorrect and which lead us away from the truth or from a better understanding of God -- even if we cannot arrive at a complete comprehension of Him (after all, we do not enjoy the beatific vision, that is, see Him face-to-face here on earth). But Wright follows in the footsteps of Abraham, who is the first Biblical person to question God directly regarding God's fair dealings with man. Starting, therefore, with Abraham, Wright runs down the list of Old Testament characters who speak to God and have an intimate conversation with Him, often questioning Him, that helps us today to put into perspective our own frustrations. From Abraham on down to Hagar, Moses, Naomi, David, Elijah, Job, and so on, right down to Christ Himself on the cross when he cries out, "My God, why have you forsaken me?" -- all of this points to the puzzling question that remains a mystery. Why does God do what He does? Indeed, it is a good question and not one that we should shy away from, because it shows the depth of our concern, grief, feeling, etc. Yet, it should not shake our faith either, if we have learned our lessons from Job, David, and Christ. Faith is our anchor, as Wright concludes in his Introduction.

Chapter 1

While the mystery of iniquity is one that will not go away, there is no question about moral evil, Wright asserts in Chapter 1. It is just something that one must accept. Moral evil is explained very clearly as a result of Satan's fall (due to pride) and Adam's fall (due to temptation) -- this was the foundation of sin in the world and of suffering. This was moral evil and in turn there appeared natural evil. Suffering does not always have to proceed directly from sin, for sometimes it can be an indirect effect. But it does have its root or seed in sin, somewhere down the line -- in the original sin of Adam and Eve. This is the logical answer. Yet there is the other question, the human, emotional question that is not satisfied by logic: the question of how God can allow such evil and suffering to go on.

Wright explores this question by analyzing Job and Psalm 130 as well as other books of the Old Testament to develop a better understanding of evil and why God permits it. This helps the intellect to gain better control of the emotional perplexity that we can feel as a result of frustration. Nonetheless, we are still perplexed at the existence of evil -- that it should exist at all -- when in the light of reason it makes no sense. Wright states that this is actually a good thing to realize. Evil should not make sense to us and we should be perplexed and frightened by it. It is horrific and wrong and unjust and unwanted -- and the more we keep that in mind the less likely we will be to enter into sin or to do something that offends God. The more we grow in His light, the more we turn away from the confusion and darkness and error of evil and sin -- and that is the main point that Wright makes in Chapter 1. We should not be so upset that we are confused by the existence of evil in the world. Evil is meant to be confusing -- that is what Satan wants: confusion. Rather, we should realize that doubt comes from the devil and that God wants us to be firm in faith. As for suffering, we can follow Christ's example and embrace it, uniting our suffering to His, and we can also try to relieve the suffering of others as Christ Himself does -- for instance when He raises Lazarus from the dead to erase the grief of his sisters.

Chapter 2

In Chapter 2, Wright discusses the Offence of Evil. By this he means that evil is to the soul what an infection is to the body. Just as the body fights against an infection, so too does the soul fight against evil through a number of ways: and in this manner, it is okay for us to object or protest against evil because some of the most respected characters in the Bible do the same thing. Wright asserts that it is good for us to fight against evil, to voice our frustrations with it, to lament it, to grieve about it -- and he suggests that the Bible actually shows us how to do this. We can grieve, so long as we aren't griping. We can lament, so long as it is done in a manner that is directed towards God with the expectation and trust that He will hear. Although the why? question is asked all over again, the way to look at it now is approached from a different angle. Wright asserts that it is not likely that every terrible suffering is a judgment for sin or a curse, and so we are not wrong to question or grieve -- but the way to do it is with faith in God.

Thus Wright focuses on and emphasizes how we are made in the likeness of God and therefore we are compelled to feel mercy and charity for those who suffer -- after all, Christ did when He was on the earth and walked among us and shed tears for His people. This is, in fact, exactly what God wants us to do. He wants to see that we care deeply for others and that we will bring our troubles to Him. That is why He allows us to feel so terribly all the griefs that others suffer. He knows that we in our puny ways can do little to actually help or heal -- but He on the other hand can do anything. So in a way, we are being tested like Job to see if we will turn to God for answers, for relief, for consolation, for anything and everything. If we feel sorrow it is a good thing, for we have a place to go and God wants to help us with our sorrows. It is a truly great place to be at -- even when we lament and protest that so many people do not deserve misfortune. We can importune and plead, but in the end we are not God and we are in no position to judge Him or His works. Nonetheless, we can ask about them and the Bible shows us how to do that, in the Psalms especially -- for example, when David cries, "How long, O Lord, how long?" It is a lament, a cry for pity, but in it is also an act of faith -- and that is the most important thing -- that trust that is implicit in the cry.

Chapter 3

In Chapter 3, Wright examines the Defeat of Evil. Here Wright shows how we should not only accept evil and lament it, but how we should also rejoice in its defeat. Christ, after all, came to conquer sin, and with Him we can rejoice in the Redemption and in the victory over death that Christ has given us. Thus there is a pattern to the Bible and to the Christian life: there is the joyful acceptance life, the sorrowful experience of life (and suffering), and the miraculous Redemption and Resurrection that Christ's Passion gives to us. In this manner, Christians can unite themselves still more fully to God through an awareness of evil and the sense that it will be defeated.

The main point is that evil is evil, that good is good, and that there can be no in between. God, after all calls us to be hot or cold and not lukewarm, for the lukewarm are vomited out of the mouth. So on top of the good and evil paradigm there is the sovereignty of God, who reigns over all things. He permits evil because He can use it for a greater good, for a higher and better purpose. Thus even though the devil runs its course and causes hurt and suffering and tries to destroy God's works, the devil is still in spite of himself working to effect God's greater glory -- and this gives the devil no small amount of grief. Therefore, we can rejoice that the devil's plans are all for nothing in the end, because for every soul that the devil tries to catch, God permits it to happen so that there can be greater glory given to God as a result. For example, with Job, he suffers a lot but in the end the victory is God's over Satan and there is much rejoicing for God rewards Job significantly. This is the point of this chapter, and Wright reinforces the notion of this truth in the story of Joseph, who recognizes that good is good, that evil is evil and that God is sovereign. This truth is also realized in the Cross, which acts as the great divider between the good and the bad and acts too as the throne of God.

Chapter 4

Wright admits in chapter 4 that there is no getting around the violence in the Old Testament. It is there and we must deal with it directly, as distasteful as it may seem to modern minds. Wright dispels the myth that the Old Testament God was a fire and brimstone God and that the New Testament God is a God of Love and Mercy. They are the same God, he observes, and there is no change. Moreover, Christ is never embarrassed about the Old Testament and it is worth noting that it says as much about love and mercy as it does about violence. For instance, there is the example of Abraham, Moses and the Psalmist, all of whom intercede on behalf of people for mercy from God. Psalm 103 states clearly that God is compassionate and merciful. This is clear evidence that the Old Testament God is not the one described by Richard Dawkins and other critics like him. Therefore, one should not approach the Old Testament with any misconceptions about what it really says.

At the same time, it is incorrect to suggest that Jesus is only ever talking about Love and Mercy when He actually talks about Hell for the unrepentant more than anyone else and speaks sternly about the Last Judgment. Likewise, the New Testament is never pitted against the Old Testament: that is to say, no one in the New Testament says anything like the Old Testament is from a different day and age and therefore irrelevant today. On the contrary, it is constantly being referenced. Thus, when dealing with the Canaanites and the promise of God to the Jews that the land would be theirs, it is not enough to take these various dead ends, for they do not really get to the heart of what God is about. Nor, can one say that the attack on the Canaanites is simply an allegory for spiritual warfare: this is not the case. The assault happened and while it may have symbolic meanings, the fact remains that the Canaanites were slaughtered and God ordered this to be done. Therefore, when dealing with this violent episode it should be dealt with seriously and on a mature and realistic level for this was a grave and serious action that occurred and not one to be taken lightly. Wright looks into it more closely in the next chapter and offers three separate ways or frameworks for how it might be adequately assessed.

Chapter 5

Wright aims to put the conquest of the Canaanites in context in order to help us to better understand it. He does this is by examining the story in the light of ancient ways of talking about war and of ancient realities regarding warfare and conquest. This allows him to consider the story from a rhetorical angle which is not to say that the story is untrue but that certain liberties may be taken with the wordings because of the way that such stories were told back then. Thus when everything is completely destroyed it may be taken in a literary way as indicating that the area was wiped clean for the Jews. But, of course, this is not really a solution to the problem of the violence in this story, which is off-putting for Wright. Indeed, he admits at the outset that he really has no solution, per se, to the violence described herein. He only has his frameworks through which the violence might be considered in a less repugnant way.

Wright also admits that there are days when he wishes this story were not even in the Bible because he wants God to have found a better way to deal with the situation. This makes the chapter a particularly challenging one for Wright. He states that he really does not understand this portion of the Bible, and that is evident in his approach to it. While he does kind of accept it as it is, his frameworks or ways of looking at it suggest that he is even still not really comfortable looking at it directly and accepting it as it is. While he has no problem accepting evil in the world, as he said should be done in the first chapter, accepting God's wrath towards those who oppose His plans does serve as a stumbling block for him, as though he were scandalized by the ways of God. However, he is not scandalized as such, just perplexed. Even still, his faith and trust in God allows him to work his way through this episode in a manner that helps him to shoulder it, to suffer it, even if he cannot fully understand. He believes that God knows what He is doing and trusts in this.