1

Approaches to Suffering & God

One of the ways in which people have tried to make sense

Of the world’s suffering in every generation,

Has been by assuming that we deserve what we get.

That somehow our misfortunes come as punishment for our sins…

- Rabbi Harold Kushner[1]

oth skeptics and believers alike seek to find the answer behind the universal problem of human suffering and evil. Suffering affects some more than others but it still reveals itself to all of us. Once people experience suffering first hand, the reality of the anguish they encounter becomes personal. It is in this personal experience that the individual begins to struggle with the meaning of suffering in the face of a God that is supposedly all-powerful, all-knowing, and all- good.

For many, the existence of human suffering and evil creates a stumbling block. It has the ability to prevent people from believing in God or in a God that is good. This stumbling block can contribute to a distortion of one’s image of God and God’s relationship to the world.

Throughout history, people have asked where God was in the course of human tragedy and, as a result, God has been a scapegoat or controller for thousands of years. In a world that has been turned upside down by natural disasters and catastrophic violence we want to know the meaning behind all of it. What was the purpose of Hurricane Katrina or the Tsunami? Why did all those innocent people in the World Trade Center have to die? How do we accept the hundreds of thousands of innocent lives that have been lost due to a war torn Darfur ? Even more recent is the devastating shooting at Virginia Tech that left 31 people dead. People search for meaning in the suffering they encounter because people yearn for things to make sense. A newborn baby only lives for three hours; a little boy is run over by a car; a mom of five children is diagnosed with terminal cancer; the single dad driving to pick his daughter up from daycare is hit by a semi truck; the little girl who hides her bruises from teachers and friends; or the college student walking across campus who is violently raped. Why?

The existence of suffering and evil inevitably leads to theological questions; they force us to ask more about or of God. If God is good and He loves us it would seem that nothing would stop Him from breaking into the course of human events to prevent unnecessary pain. If God is our “father” then we expect a protector and someone who will do anything to ease our pain. Thus, if God exists, where is He?

In an age of technology in which the media brings human suffering right into our living rooms, it seems that the reality of its existence has lost its shock value. When the newscast reports that twenty three more soldiers have been killed in Iraq , we often barely blink and eye because it has become just a number. But it is when one of those soldiers is our best friend, brother, sister, father or mother that the suffering is made real. The death of thousands saddens us but the death of one we love appears more senseless than anything else.

Everyone expects an ideal world in light of a God that we have been taught is perfect. Obviously, the world is far from perfect and sometimes believing in God seems to be more of a chore than anything else. If God created the universe why fashion it in such a way that suffering and evil exist? Free will is a gift given by God, but if God is all-knowing then wasn’t He fully aware of what we would do with such a gift?

I am not the first to ask these questions nor will I ever be the last. The problem of suffering and evil is a universal question that will continue to invite people to question God and his interaction with the world. Rabbi Harold Kushner wrote the New York Times best-seller, When Bad Things Happen to Good People, in 1981. His book has sold over four million copies and has been translated into fourteen different languages which shows the universal interest in this problem. Kushner approached the question of suffering in a very simple manner which allows readers to be captured by his message.

In his first chapter Kushner identifies the most popular responses that people commonly give to explain suffering; for example, suffering leads to a better place, God determines our faithfulness through suffering or that God never sends more than we can bear. However, these commonly held explanations do not always adequately satisfy the reason for suffering. Kushner takes a critical look at many of these responses and explores how problematic they can be.

In order to see if some of the commonly held explanations that Kushner outlines are accurate I began my research with a survey.[2] I was most interested in the theological trends and bents that influence people’s outlook on suffering in relationship to God. The purpose of my survey and research was to help me gain a deeper understanding of suffering along with the approaches to it that are beneficial and those that are not. I surveyed fifty students from Daniel J. Gross Catholic High School ranging from grades 9 through 12 and fifty-five traditional and non-traditional students from the College of Saint Mary . The survey consisted of twenty-six questions that pertained to God and suffering as punishment, as a lesson, and as part of a master plan. I wanted to know if people really believed these explanations that attempt to answer the mystery of human suffering. A sample of these is as follows:

·        God tests us through suffering

·        God has to punish us to teach us a lesson

·        God has a pattern into which all our lives fit that’s a master plan

·        God never sends us more than we can bear

·        Suffering serves a higher purpose nad has a deeper meaning

Results of the survey revealed a shared theodicy among all three groups.[3] Each group adamantly opposed the notion that God causes suffering (2.1).[4] Perhaps this fixed response is due to the type of religious education that shaped the early foundation of the individuals surveyed. Our understanding of God can be shaped not only by religious instruction but also by family, friends, the media, and our own personal experiences. God takes on different characteristics in various families, religions, and cultures. Thus, our image of God is often a product of our environment.

In the book, Good Goats: Healing our Image of God, the author Dennis Linn, illustrates how one’s social location impacts our image of God. Linn grew up in a German family along with a very German God. Linn’s God was judgmental, self-righteous, and constantly held the reality of hell over the sinner’s head. The German construction of God that Linn experienced growing up influenced his own personality. He concludes that he became like the “God he adored”[5] and he took on some of the familiar self-righteous characteristics that his God possessed. He believed that he too could judge others and decide what treatment his enemies should endure. Therefore, God is often a reflection of ourselves. Linn believes that in order to improve this “the key to personal and social healing is healing our own image of God.”[6] Who God is in our life has the ability to shape who we are, how we relate to others, and how we perceive the events in the world around us.

In 2005, the Gallup organization conducted a survey[7] in conjunction with sociologists from Baylor University that looked at America ’s different views of God.[8] The survey was sent out randomly and 1,721 people completed it. From the results emerged four distinct views of God and his relationship with the world: “These Four Gods — dubbed by researchers as Authoritarian, Benevolent, Critical or Distant, tell more about people's social, moral and political views and personal piety.”[9] The results indicated that the highest percentage of Americans believe in an Authoritarian God. Thus, 31.4 percent of Americans polled believe that God is involved in worldly affairs and assists people in their decisions. They believe that this God interacts with the world through global events. The Authoritarian God is angry and judgmental. He is a God that punishes those who sin or are unfaithful to Him. More specifically, the Authoritarian God is portrayed as a God who throws down thunderbolts at sinners from heaven, much like Linn’s God. While the majority of people surveyed believe in a judgmental wrathful God, 25% believe in a Benevolent God. This population includes mainly Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. Characteristics of this God are forgiveness, mercy, love, and goodness. The Benevolent God is not angry or wrathful and impacts the world in a positive manner. People believe that this God is involved in human affairs but is less likely to punish them for their sins.

The results revealed that in the Midwest 32.5% of people believe in an Authoritarian God, while 28.8% believe in a Benevolent God. Astonishingly, the highest percentage of American people who believe in a Benevolent God are from the Midwest . I took these two distinct views of God into consideration when I interpreted the data from my survey. I believe that perhaps the results establish the theological background and mindset of the small population I surveyed. In addition, it uncovered the God that is prevalent throughout the Midwestern culture of the United States .

The results of my own survey found belief in a mixture of the two images of God both as benevolent and authoritarian. However, students were less inclined to believe in a judgmental or Authoritarian God, the image which the Gallup survey concluded is very prevalent in the Midwest . Overall, the students disagreed with the image of God as a judge that punishes people who deserve it (2.4). However, high school students were more prone to the belief that God punishes us to teach us a lesson, while college students disagreed with the statement. This difference is perhaps due to high school students being at a stage of development where discipline or punishment in more prevalent or necessary in their daily life. In the high school population there is more emphasis on outside authority. Thus, they are more prone to think that God is also another disciplinarian in their lives.

In relation to human suffering the survey results point out that God is initially seen distant from its existence. However, despite overall agreement that God does not cause suffering inconsistencies began to emerge. The results correspond with the popular responses that Kushner critiques and outlines in his book. From these responses emerge agreement with many of the common expressions or platitudes that are used to justify suffering, explain its existence, or God’s involvement with it. Often they are logical responses to a familiar phenomenon, but they can often be problematic. They have the potential to create a hindrance in one’s relationship to God, others, and the way in which one interprets the chaos prevalent in the world.

Perhaps the population surveyed grew up on an image of God as love. This God is one of compassion, mercy, and forgiveness. Consequently, it is difficult for people to believe in a God that directly causes suffering because it doesn’t fit their foundational notion of who God is. Thus, when specifically asked if God causes suffering they are adamant in their response because they simply can’t imagine a God like this. For these students, having faith in a God who causes pain seems illogical because it goes against everything that they have learned about God, but this is what precisely can cause a crisis of faith.

The image of God that emerged from the surveys is not just one of love and compassion, but one of great power. The students maintain the belief that God is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good. They also agree that this power enables God to end suffering and the existence of evil in the world (3.7). However, they remained neutral in that God has the power to stop the bad things that happen to us. Thus, free will may prevent God from intervening but still, because God is all-powerful, He has the capacity to break into the course of human events.

How does one begin to make sense of a benevolent omnipotent God in relation to the world in which we live? Religious education teaches some of the commonly held answers but often they seem to be empty responses to this great mystery. If God is all-good and all-powerful then wouldn’t He prevail over suffering, evil, and the chaos that transpires? God’s omnipotence becomes problematic when suffering or chaos is encountered in life or in the world in which we live. The deeper questions begin to emerge and often many people begin to question where God is in relationship to His creation. But then who are we to question God? I asked this question in my survey and students were very neutral in their response. I imagined that as Americans who are often seen as having a strong spirit of independence, that people would be more inclined to strongly agree that it is okay to question God. However, the students polled were very hesitant in response to this question. It isn’t plausible to have all the answers, but if we are afraid to question God then it becomes even more of a challenge to make sense of human suffering.

The results concluded that God is not a judge, but rather benevolent and powerful. This God has the power to put us to the test. Perhaps, a God that “tests” people through suffering becomes a much more plausible prospect because this belief may have the ability to make people feel more comfortable rather than admitting in a God that causes suffering. Thus, all three groups either agreed or strongly agreed that God tests us through suffering (3.9). However, this approach directly conflicts with the student’s original position of a God that does not cause suffering.

The students also had a tendency to defend God by disagreeing with the ultimate question regarding his impact on suffering.  Nevertheless, it appears when there was an opportunity to indirectly implicate God in suffering the majority of people leaned toward this position. Once again, the majority of the students surveyed believe that God tests us through suffering. But if God doesn’t cause suffering, how could He test us through suffering? This blatant contradiction revealed that in actuality the students do believe that suffering comes from God on some level. However, the belief is held in suffering through the “tests” He sends in our direction. This approach allowed students to comfortably acknowledge their belief that God has a role in suffering.

It is easier to imagine a God that tests us because in that belief we can come to God’s defense—he tests us for our own good, in his deep love for us. Often these “tests” are considered being for our own benefit because in some cases they lead us to further growth and a greater understanding of ourselves. The survey results found that the students share this belief and they too agree that suffering can serve a beneficial purpose (4.3). Perhaps the notion of tests sent from God is a way that people make sense of the suffering. It offers meaning and provides a greater purpose behind the suffering. The students agreed with this approach to suffering. However, this approach establishes an image of a God who permits suffering in order to make us stronger. Possibly this belief emerges from the common idea that God tests us to determine our faithfulness to him and others. Still, if the students believe that God doesn’t cause suffering why did they agree that He tests us through suffering? Even if the tests are meant for our own benefit, how do we justify this image of God?

Sometimes painful things can be beneficial and in some cases we find our best selves in the midst of the suffering. For many people, everything happens for a reason, and as a result everything must be rooted in a deeper meaning because it must somehow be part of God’s plan. Thus, the suffering serves a higher purpose. The students strongly agreed that suffering serves a higher purpose (3.9), thus its very existence is for a greater good despite the pain that may emerge.      

Nevertheless, why are people so apt to link God with painful experiences? It seems that a God of love, compassion, and forgiveness would be less inclined to directly send us pain. Thus, if God doesn’t cause suffering then God cannot send us “tests” through various forms of suffering or tragedy. These images of God simply do not correspond with each other. But who undergoes these tests?

The majority of the high school students agreed that bad things shouldn’t happen to good people (4.0)[10]. Traditional College students disagreed (2.7) while the non-traditional students remained neutral (3.2). However, high school students didn’t believe that suffering or tragedy should only happen to people who deserve it. Once again, the non-traditional students remained neutral but the traditional students changed their position on who should suffer, agreeing that suffering should only happen to those who deserve it. Thus, when bad things happen to good people it is often difficult for people to make sense of, why the just suffer.

For many, occurrences of suffering or tragedy are seen as a result of a wrongdoing. People are more apt to believe that bad things should happen to bad people or because of bad actions. Another alarming factor is that both high school and non-traditional college students leaned in agreement that if good things happen, then God is happy with them. Thus, when good prevails in their lives in is attributed to God’s contentment with their actions. The results of who the sufferer should be were shocking because it doesn’t seem logical that people in the 21^st Century could have this image. The truth is that good people suffer and bad people prosper and vice versa.

While the survey found that the students were less likely to believe in God as judge it also revealed the belief in “retributive justice,” which is the idea that people get what they deserve.[11] At some point in our life we have found ourselves bargaining with God… “God if you do this…then I will do this.” For example, about two years ago I had surgery on my leg. A few weeks later I became very ill while I was at school and had to be taken to the hospital. Eventually, the nurse came in and told me that, as a result of the surgery, they believed a blood clot was possibly traveling to my heart. I was stricken with fear and all I could imagine was the worse. I was sure that I was going to die, this was the end of the line for me! I remember laying there shaking and immediately I began bargaining with God… “Please God, don’t let me die, stop this. Why me, I am a good person and if you love me you will help me.” As they were running more tests I became more desperate and I made one final plea… “Dear God, if you make this all go away I promise that I will give myself entirely to you…I swear I’ll become a nun, a Sister of Mercy, if you just heal me!” The irony is that they found no blood clot and even more amusing is that I really did enter the Sisters of Mercy. However, not for that reason!

We all bargain with God because we expect that, as Richard Rohr put it, “we do this or that then we expect this much back; we do this much bad and expect this much punishment…because we keep score, we assume God is the scorekeeper.” [12] In bargaining, the assumption is that God has control over the events that take place in our life and that He has the power to stop or fix what happens to us. Bargaining with God implies that He has a role in why we suffer. Thus, bargaining can become problematic when the end result is not what we requested.

Our “unanswered prayers” which are often an attempt to negotiate with the almighty, can be harmful. Time and again the just encounter suffering and the wicked seem to prevail. In many cases, people struggle and seem to get nothing in return when those that seem undeserving are given every opportunity. In the Old Testament, the Book of Job addresses the universal problem of human suffering and the unfairness that emerges in the suffering. This reiterates that this problem has been a constant question throughout human history. In the story, Job too longed to know why bad things happen to good people and why the unjust seem to prosper, he asked

Why do the wicked live on, reach old age, and grow mighty in power?....Their houses are safe from fear, and no rod of God is upon them….They spend their days in prosperity….What is the almighty that we should serve him? And what profit do we get if we pray to him?[13]

Bad things that happen are not always a reflection of the seeds we sow. It is true that sometimes bad actions result in consequences and punishment. However, who the sufferers are does not always correspond with their actions. For instance, each year over one million people die of Malaria, the majority of these victims are young children in Africa .[14] Children are generally thought of as inherently good and innocent. For many, it is even more of a challenge to understand why such innocent beings suffer. Obviously, these children do not deserve their pain. They are in no way responsible for their suffering nor does this kind of suffering occur because of God’s happiness or unhappiness with humankind. In my survey, the students also leaned in agreement that in a tragic event God chooses who will live and who will die (3.7). So, in this case, God hand picks which children will be stricken down with the disease and which children won’t.

From this belief emerges the common expressions, “it was his time….God never sends us more than we can bear…God needed her.” Those answers are only sufficient for the person saying them. However, for the person who is experiencing the loss and who possibly witnessed the suffering of someone they loved; in many cases those explanations become meaningless answers to a deep hurt.

If God is all of these things I was taught, then why? Why was it my sister, my son, or my best friend? In regards to a tragic event, the students agreed that God decides who will live and who will die (3.7). This belief implicates God in any suffering that was encountered through the death. This can create a dilemma because belief in this idea sets the stage for a God that single handedly picks out when and how people die particularly in tragic events. This becomes a problem in situations where one person is killed and another is spared; for example, a tornado that skips over Mr. and Mrs. Jones’ house but destroys and kills the family of five next door. Belief that this human tragedy was impelled by nature but that an all-knowing God determined who would suffer and when it would occur, isn’t a sensible response for why the family of five was killed. Suddenly, it doesn’t become a case of sheer randomness but rather the story is immersed in being a part of God’s plan, thus it had to happen for a reason. Author Bill Thomason puts his belief simply, “We just suffer, that’s all. We must bear it the best we can. Suffering is pointless, purposeless, without any redeeming meaning.”[15] He concludes that rather it is how we confront the suffering and learn to bear with it.

Another discrepancy that emerged in the survey was that students agreed with the statement: suffering is a part of God’s plan for us (3.7). This concept stands in stark contrast with the original stance students had on the lack of God’s involvement in suffering. In fact, it directly implicates God with the existence of suffering. This portrays a God who fashioned the universe with suffering and simultaneously creates an image of a God that wills suffering for creation. If the original responses were accurate and those responding do not believe that God causes suffering, how could it be that God simultaneously includes suffering in His plan for us?

The students strongly agreed that life isn’t fair and that ultimately everything happens for a reason (4.2). It’s true, “life is not fair, the wrong people get sick and the wrong people get robbed and the wrong people get killed in wars and in accidents.”[16] Aside from this reality should people believe that tragedy, suffering, and evil exist for a specific purpose? It became evident that the students connected the existence of suffering as being a part of God’s master plan. Consequently, incorporated in this plan are God’s reasons which are beyond our comprehension, thus who are we to question those reasons? The student’s hesitancy surrounding whether or not it is right to question God reveals itself once again in their agreement that God’s reasons are beyond our comprehension (4.3).

Initially the students came to God’s aid in defense of his goodness through their strong agreement that God does not cause suffering. However, the results of the survey conclude that people have a difficult time explaining its very existence in conjunction with a God that is all-powerful, all-good, and all-knowing. Consequently, the suffering is linked to God in the belief that he “puts us to the test.” The image of God that emerged from the survey is a God that incorporates suffering into creation to test us, but this is still not an adequate answer to why suffering exists.

The presence of suffering cannot be attributed to a God that solely wants to test us because if God is all-knowing why would he need to test us? God created us; he knows both our weaknesses and strengths. Psalm 139 reflects this, “O Lord, you have searched me and you know me…For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb.”[17] Thus, if God created us then He is aware of the choices or decisions we will make.

To say that God “tests” actually denies God’s omniscience not to mention that it contradicts His benevolence. Therefore, it is illogical to believe that God would have to create suffering or evil in order to determine who will pass or fail His test. Thus, “if God is testing us, He must know by now that many of us fail the test.”[18] Belief in a God that tests people through trials of suffering or evil creates a problematic image of God. If people accept that God sends us these tests and that He will never send us more than we can handle, what happens to the sufferer’s faith when there is too much deal with?

Students at the college level were in agreement that God will never send us more than we can handle while high school student disagreed.[19] Primarily, this reinforces the belief that God “sends” us tests. Many people have been in situation where there was a great loss, where they felt broken and in despair. There are times when people feel they are barely staying afloat. Often in these times people hear this familiar statement, “you will get through this because God never send us more than we can handle.” As a result we find ourselves repeating this expression to ourselves in the midst of the pain. The benefit of this statement or belief is that some may find comfort or hope that God measures what people can endure. Damaging can be the denial of the amount of a burden that is placed on a person.

In the book, The Bereaved Parent, the author tells a story about a mother who loses her young son. The woman’s son died during a heart operation and she remembers the words of comfort she heard from her clergyman,

“I know that this is a painful time for you. But I know that you will get through it all right, because God never send us more of a burden than we can bear. God only let this happen to you because He knows that you are strong enough to handle it.”[20]

However, the reality is that sometimes things do happen in life that are more than we can handle and in many cases, people do emerge broken from the suffering or even faithless. For many, they might not stop believing in God, but their image of God may be transformed in either a negative or positive dimension. Kushner also affirms this from his own experience counseling different people in these types of situations,

I have seen people crack under the strain of unbearable tragedy….I have seen some people made noble and sensitive through their suffering, but I have seen many more people grow cynical and bitter….I have seen cancers and automobile accidents take the life of one member of a family, and functionally end the lives of five others, who could never again be the normal, cheerful people they were before the disaster struck….if He (God) is only giving us burdens we can bear, I have seen Him miscalculate far too often.[21]

The woman in the story later shares her reaction to those words: “If only I was a weaker person, Robbie would still be alive.”[22] What does that belief do to a person’s relationship with God? When people believe that they have failed or that God sent the pain in their direction, how do they make sense of something that seems impossible to handle? Especially when the person has the belief that God measures what pain He sends our way. Thus, how should people of faith respond to suffering, whether it is a result of violence or nature? Undoubtedly, chaos is real within our world. Despite that reality, people still expect order and a level of reasonability within the world. But even more imperative is how people respond to God in the midst of the suffering.

            There are many different types of suffering. Often much of our pain is trivial even though it doesn’t seem minor at the time, for instance a toothache, a sprained ankle, or a pain in the back.[23] “Very seldom does this ordinary, everyday suffering raise questions about the goodness or power of God. We suffer it, take care of it, and forget it.”[24] However, there are times when the pain is far from trivial and it becomes more difficult to reject the amount of suffering. In these times, we ask God why? This is a very normal and human response to the pain, especially when we are personally touched by suffering or witness its presence in those around us. For example,  

“…a beautiful child who dies of Leukemia after a long and painful struggle. Her parents look on helplessly while doctors try everything they can but to know avail. Why did God not do something to save this child, so beautiful and full of promise? ...We cannot help but ask why a God of goodness and love allows such things to happen.[25]

In situations like this people often wonder why pray? If God doesn’t cause the suffering what role does he play in the midst of the pain? Even more imperative is why pray if God can’t stop it? In other words, what can God do for me?

             Kathleen Chesto, a lecturer who gives retreats throughout the United States , has a video, Where is God When Life Hurts, in which she deals with the problem of human suffering. She asks the same question, “Why pray? She concludes that people should pray “not to change God—not even to change what is. We pray so that God’s strength might come and transform our weakness.”[26] If God suffers with us, maybe He can offer more to us in times of crisis than we generally think.[27] However, when people pray do they really know the most beneficial way to go about this conversation with God?

             The high school and non-traditional college students remained extremely neutral when asked: God chooses to respond to the prayers of some people and not others; while the traditional students disagreed with the statement. According to Kushner, people generally have a skewed view of what it means to pray. In addition, “if prayer worked the way many people think it does, no one would ever die, because no prayer is ever offered more sincerely than the prayer for life, for health, recovery from illness.”[28] Thus, when are prayers seem to go unanswered or the answer is no, how do we avoid the belief that God has forgotten us? How do we fill our hearts with emotions other than bitterness and anger?[29]

             First, we cannot ask God for a “redo” and we cannot plead with him to go back and change the past. Second, we cannot pray to God to change the laws of nature in order to alter the conditions that seem to cause more bad than good. Third, we cannot go to God and ask him to do something or give us something which is often within our own power to do.[30] As author Jack Riemer puts it,

             We cannot pray to you, O God, to end war; For we know that You have made the world in a way that man must find his own path to peace…We cannot merely pray to you, O God, to end starvation; For you have already given us the resources with which to feed the entire world…We cannot merely pray to you, Oh God, to root out prejudice, for you have already given us eyes with which to see the good in all men…We pray to you instead, O God, for strength, determination, and willpower. To do instead of just to pray, to become instead of merely to wish.[31]

Therefore, in prayer we should ask God to “suffer with us” because it is in his presence that we find the strength and determination to persevere. The purpose of prayer is to put us in touch with God, not just as a means to request what we need, but to ask God to be with us, to be by our side.[32] If God is with us, suffering alongside, then we may be able to better cope with the pain because we are not in it alone. There is a unique power in companionship that is evident in everyday life. For many, emotional or physical pain is easier to endure when there is someone else to walk alongside. In that, we find a support system of love and hope. Kushner believes that the kind of prayer God answers is, “people who pray for courage, for strength to bear the unbearable, for the grace to remember what they have left inside of what they have lost, very often find their prayers answered.”[33] It is God who gives us the strength to cope with suffering. People must acknowledge that they need God and that they can’t face their problems without Him. If someone opens their heart to God and the power of prayer perhaps one can find the answer to their prayer. As Kushner says to a young widow,

Somehow you found the strength not to let yourself be broken. You found the resiliency to go on living and caring about things…you faced a scary situation, prayed for help, and found out that you were a lot stronger, and a lot better able to handle it…You didn’t get a miracle to avert a tragedy but you discovered people around you, and God beside you, and strength within you to help you survive the tragedy.[34]

            Concluding this section of my paper I would like to pose a few thoughts. First and foremost God isn’t the cause of our suffering. Sometimes things are not part of God’s plan and hence they are not willed by God. Also, suffering does not come from God in different shapes or forms. Pain and tragedy do not come from God but rather the help to face them is what truly comes from Him.[35]

God doesn’t test us to determine our faithfulness, to punish us or just because He believes that we are strong enough to handle it. Therefore, maybe the explanations we use to address the problem of suffering are simply theories that attempt and often fail to justify this great mystery. These theories

Just protect ourselves from other people’s suffering. We build bridges across another’s pain and that way we can walk across without ever getting touched…We try to make them different (those who suffer), when we say those things, that way it can’t happen to us.[36]

In actuality the explanations for suffering implicate God in the suffering and that God causes it in some fashion. Despite our attempt to defend God or to blame the suffering on different people or structures, in the back of our minds and somewhere deep in our hearts we wonder, “why, God?”     We can offer these learned expressions but that doesn’t take away from the pain or confusion.[37] So, if God is love and at times life proves unloving then why do we love God?[38]

We love Him because He is God, because He is the author of all the beauty and order around us, the source or our strength and hope and courage with which we are helped in our time of need. We love Him because He is the best part of ourselves and of our world…Loving and accepting him makes us better and stronger.[39]

That is what it means to love God, but it is okay to struggle in our relationship with God. It is okay to ask the difficult questions, to wonder why we suffer, or why others are struck down by tragedy. People must seek out God during such times, but the danger lies in becoming disconnected from Him and others due to the loss or emptiness. There is no explanation that will make sense of such chaos nor is there an answer that will satisfy the human heart. It is the end result of the suffering, not the cause, that one finds meaning in the experience.[40] 

2

The Book of Job

My own utterance I will not restrain;

I will speak in the anguish of my spirit;

I will complain in the bitterness of my soul.[41]

-Job

uman suffering has been present throughout the course of history, thus, the biblical world also had the same problem with explaining its existence. For the second part of my paper I will look at the biblical tradition of human suffering in the Old Testament, specifically in the Book of Job. It’s a story that raises many of the familiar questions about suffering that we still have today, specifically, why do good people suffer?

The origins of the Book of Job are still being debated. Authorship is associated with an Israelite who wanted to pose Job’s questions against the theory of retribution to humanity. Scholars speculate that it was written between the seventh and second centuries BCE.[42] Furthermore, it is also possible that the author “intended it to be symbolic of the suffering of the Jews in the time of the exile.”[43] Therefore, it is an exilic text, meaning that it was written when the Jewish people were in exile in Babylon after their city and temple in Jerusalem had been destroyed. Undeserved suffering then, became an imminent question for Israel due to the exilic experience.[44] Their tradition concluded that God became inactive in their lives and curses emerged because of their sins. The exilic period would have been a time of great crisis, primarily a crisis of faith.

Job is a part of Wisdom Literature which addresses human situations and experiences. Wisdom Literature focuses on human behavior, human accomplishment, and human misfortune.[45] These texts are not God centered, rather they look at the deeper meaning of human experiences.

A careful study of the texts that have come to be known as the wisdom literature shows how difficult defining this diversified and elusive concept is. Wisdom has been variously referred to as: the meaning in life, the meaning of life, ancient humanism, a way of coping, the way to success, the discovery of the orders of creation and conformity to them…[46]

Wisdom Literature didn’t attempt to solve the mysteries of the universe, rather it concluded that wisdom is found in the understanding that an explanation is beyond human reach.[47]

In the biblical world, human suffering was attributed to the theory of retribution. This theory is that there are consequences for our actions. Which is true; bad actions generally result in some type of penalty. The problem with this theory began when people in the biblical world started to only look at the consequences and assumed that because of the person’s misfortune, they must have sinned. Thus, its misuse became problematic, and as a result Job addresses the misinterpretation of this theory.

The Book of Job was written to address the misunderstanding of this theory in light of the main character’s experience with suffering. Job struggles with the meaning of his suffering due to the fact that he is a just man.[48] Thus, if he is an upright man, why is he suffering? Job’s reality caused a problem for the belief that good actions only resulted in blessings and sin only resulted in punishment. Job speaks out against this tradition because he was a good man and still bad things were happening to him. Therefore, the misuse of the theory of retribution no longer proved true in Job’s case.

Job was blessed with many animals, servants, children, and a wife. Above all he was a righteous man, fearing God and avoiding evil at all costs. At the beginning of the story, the sons of God[49] presented themselves before the Lord. One of the adversaries was the Satan[50] who had been roaming the earth testing people. Due to his travels the Lord asks Satan what he thought of his servant Job. God then begins to brag about Job’s righteousness and loyalty, but Satan challenges Job’s dedication to God. Satan believes that because Job has lived a life rich with blessings he remains loyal to God, but he speculates that the moment evil touches Job that he will turn against God. God agrees to let Satan test Job and over the course of these tests he loses his animals, servants, children, and is afflicted with boils.   

The Book of Job attributes human suffering to the Satan because God allows Satan to test Job. This image of God can be problematic for readers because God does not appear all-good in this light; especially because it appears that God and the Satan have some kind of relationship with each other. Kushner wrote

What kind of God would that story have us believe in, who would kill innocent children and visit unbearable anguish on His most devoted follower in order to prove a point, in order, we almost feel, to win a bet with Satan?[51]

Although the story implies this belief, it is not the intended message in the bargaining that takes place between God and Satan. Rather it introduces one of the most important questions in the Bible: Do humans serve God for themselves or for their own profit?[52] Thus, is Job faithful to God because he has nothing to want for or does he serve God because of his love for God? Again, this portrayal of God tends to make readers uncomfortable, but in reality it shows that God trusts those who serve him.[53] In addition, if God hadn’t agreed to let Satan test Job, God’s refusal would have been a product of fear in that the Satan’s theory was correct.

Initially, Job accepts his suffering and refuses to blame God for his loses. “Instead, he patiently resigns himself to his fate with the consolation that God gives or takes away as God pleases.”[54] Even his wife questions his acceptance of his suffering and tells him that he should curse God and die.[55] Job lashes out at her, “We accept good things from God; and should we not accept evil?”[56] Job maintains his belief in God and doesn’t turn away from God.

Eventually Job’s acceptance turns into bitterness and anger. Job begins to curse the day he was even born and demands an explanation for his undeserved suffering. Author Bill Thomason puts it, “Job believes he has a right to an explanation because it is his life that has been ruined.”[57] Therefore, Job believes that he can challenge God and question his undeserved suffering. Job calls on God for a response, “I will say to God: Do not put me in the wrong! Let me know why you oppose me. Is it pleasure for you to oppress…”[58]

Job originally focuses on his own grief and says, “Why did I not die at birth, come forth from the womb and expire?”[59] Towards the end of his speech his focus begins to shift. Now, Job not only wants to know why he is suffering, but he broadens his questioning to the larger community. Thomason says that, “he (Job) is beginning to recognize his kinship with the many people who suffer as he does, but are unable to articulate their feelings.”[60]

Job's 3 friends come to comfort Job. In the beginning the friends, Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, are models of compassion. “They sat down upon the ground with him seven days and seven nights, but none of them spoke a word to him; for they saw how great was his suffering.”[61] More importantly, his friends come to help Job figure out how he had sinned, in order to fix his current state. They insist that Job is suffering punishment for a sin that he must have committed.

Job’s friends believed that if a person suffered it was because they sinned against God. Therefore, his misfortunes were a punishment from God. Thus, the friends adhere to the misuse of the Theory of Retribution. Throughout the story Job and his friends are in constant dialogue about the origin of his suffering. His friends saw how great his suffering was and wanted to console him. However, they begin to “plead God’s case” and begin to defend, what they believe, is God’s position.[62]

The book is divided into speeches between Job and his friends, followed by Job’s final plea for his case, the speeches of Elihu,[63] and then God. The book contains three cycles of speeches; Eliphaz and Bildad each have three speeches and Zophar only two.[64] Elihu’s speech is the “longest continuous statement”[65] made by any of the characters. Also, Job does not respond to Elihu’s speech.[66]After Elihu’s speech, God has two different speeches. The first addresses God’s sovereignty over the physical world, and then God addresses Job, followed by Job’s response.[67] God’s second speech focuses on His justice in human affairs.[68] Again he addresses Job and Job repents.

In the text, Job challenges God, but simultaneously is aware that he is incapable of competing with God. However, that does not stop Job from contending with God. Job accuses God of not listening to him and not responding to his accusations because God is too busy “raining blows on him.”[69] Since Job believes that God is refusing to answer him, he begins to consider that God is unjust. However, Job quickly disregards this image of God because

His (Job) better religious instincts lead him away from that possibility. It would be monstrous to worship an omnipotent being whose goodness could not be counted on in every circumstance. It would be better to deny the existence of God altogether than to assert the existence of an all-powerful but morally imperfect God. Religious practice and devotion demand, with even greater insistence than the case of God’s Power, a God who is all-good.[70]

Through the cycle of speeches; Job becomes more desperate to know the reasons for why God has turned on him.[71] He questions whether or not it is a test sent from God or if God is attacking him to gain something.[72] Job wants God to provide him with evidence and concrete reasons for his suffering or to admit that Job has been right all along.[73] After Job makes his final plea, “let the almighty answer me!”[74] God addresses Job out of the whirlwind and a series of rhetorical questions begin,

Gird up your loins now, like a man; I will question you, and you tell me the answers! Where were you when I founded the earth? Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its size; do you know? Who stretched out the measuring line for it? Into what were its pedestals sunk, and who laid the cornerstone[75]

According to Kushner, God appears because Job’s case is so compelling.

…his (Job) challenge is so forceful, that God Himself comes down to earth to answer him. But God’s answer is hard to understand. He doesn’t talk about Job’s case at all, neither to detail Job’s sin nor to explain his suffering…He says to Job, in effect, What do you know about how to run a world? [76]

God puts Job in his place. In addition, parts of God’s response are humorous at times because of His sarcasm, “Will we have arguing with the Almighty by the critic? Let him who would correct God give answer!”[77] Ultimately, concluding that perhaps Job doesn’t understand the mysteries of the universe, therefore he cannot comprehend the wonders of creation. As Dianne Bergant puts it, “Job was led by the magnitude of creation to see that he could not fathom the laws by which God governs.”[78] Finally at the end of the text, Job repents, and says

I know that you can do all things…I have dealt with great things that I do not understand; things too wonderful for me, which I cannot know. I had heard of you by word of mouth but now my eye has seen you…[79]

Kushner believes that Job repents and comes to understand that his suffering is a result of “…an unjust world, from which we cannot expect fairness. There is a God, but He is free of the limitations of justice and righteousness.”[80] The story ends with his health and prosperity restored and “then Job died, old and full of years.”[81]

Job was searching for something deeper than his friends, an intimacy with God because of the isolation he felt. He is described as groping for a “communion of love.”[82] Thus, Job became angry and bitter with God mainly because he felt isolated from God; the God that he believed he had served faithfully. Due to his loyalty, Job could not grasp why God was “destroying all the fruit of that devotion.”[83] Thomason describes Job’s struggle in the midst of his isolation:

…Doesn’t God see into the human heart and know people as they really are? Surely, God knows that Job is innocent…Job is utterly alone. The incomprehensibility of his suffering isolates him from and sets him at odds with God. [84]

The isolation makes him assume that God is persecuting him. Yet, he turns his anger to the place it should be directed, towards God. Job says, “I cry to you and you do not answer me, I stand, and you merely look at me.”[85] Job doesn’t suppress his anger or disrespectfully voice his cries at God and later God praises Job for the way in which he spoke.

A common misconception is that Job is patient. Often he is referred to as a “patient man” or the phrase “the patience of Job” is sometimes used to describe his character. Yet, Job is also described as being a rebellious believer. However, he does not disrespect God in his behavior. Bergant says that “Job’s rebellion is not considered a revolt against God. It is the cry of one whose life has been shattered and who is overwhelmed with confusion.”[86]

Job is not a patient man; instead he is described as steadfast in his perseverance. The road he traveled was a very human one filled with unexplainable disease and death. In the end, Job has a new understanding of his suffering in light of his experience with God, which leads to his conversion. Ironically, this new understanding is unknown to the reader. The Book of Job is timeless because it has the ability to speak to every generation, but the text does not reveal the answer to why we suffer. The framework of the book allows the reader to interpret the text in light of their own experiences. The reader then must achieve understanding of its message on his or her own.[87]

Job teaches people how to respond to suffering. Job is a role model for those who suffer because he shows us how to speak to God in the midst of the pain. So, where is God in all of this mess? Clearly, the answer is inaccessible to human understanding. What people do have control over is how they respond to the suffering and how they respond to God. People have the choice and ability to move towards God in the face of suffering and tragedy or to turn away from God.

The text teaches that God does not abandon, but rather he makes himself present in the midst of the suffering. The story portrays a universal problem that is at the heart of every believer: the difficulty of understanding God’s love in the midst of suffering.[88] The Book of Job reinforces that questioning God is a normal part of human existence and that it is rooted in the exilic experience of the Israelites. Ultimately, the Book of Job “looks for the correct way of talking about God within the most strained and knotty of all human situations.”[89] Job teaches us that it is okay to be angry with God and that it is acceptable to question Him, but one must be in conversation with God in order to move past the anguish or disillusionment.

Only God has the wisdom to understand the universe. The author must have been aware of the complexity of human suffering and that is why he didn’t attempt to answer it. No one can adequately understand the purpose of suffering because it is beyond human understanding, “the best they can do is fear the Lord.”[90] The wisdom of God is not accessible to human thought, “wisdom belongs to God alone, wisdom is said to be hidden from the eyes of humans and beasts.”[91] But Job’s conversion teaches us that the beginning of wisdom is through “fear of the Lord.” This doesn’t mean to be afraid of God, but rather having the ability to recognize our limits; that we aren’t nature, that we aren’t God. Furthermore, it’s the understanding that “all creatures have limits, and this is one of man’s which he must acknowledge.”[92] Thus, fearing the Lord is having deep respect for God.

The Book of Job reinforces that bad things do happen to good people, but God doesn’t will such suffering or tragedy. God doesn’t decide who will be born handicapped or who will develop a terminal illness. God doesn’t decide whose life is destroyed by a hurricane or which children are born into starvation and poverty. In addition,

We don’t know why some people spontaneously recover from illnesses which kill or cripple others. We don’t know why some people die in car crashes or plane crashes, while other people, sitting right next to them walk away with a few cuts and bruises and a bad scare.[93]

“God would like people to get what they deserve in life, but he cannot always arrange it.”[94] Sometimes things just happen and there is sheer randomness in the world; coupled with choices that result in evil or harmful consequences. Often people try so hard to make connections and find meaning in the suffering, but maybe sometimes things happen for no reason.  Despite the constant striving to make connections, the ways of creation are truly inaccessible to human thought and understanding.

Kushner believes that the most important part of the Book of Job is chapter 40: 9-14,

Have you an arm like God? Can you thunder with a voice like His? You tread down the wicked where they stand, bury them in the dust together… Then will I acknowledge that your own right hand can give you victory.[95]

Meaning perhaps, “if you think that it is so easy to keep the world straight and true, to keep things from happening to people, you try it.”[96] Thus, where would we be without God and could we run the world or even our own lives any better?

Job’s relationship with God illustrates an intrinsic human need: God’s presence in our lives. Job teaches us not to turn away from God because of our misfortunes but rather to cling to God, to keep our faith in Him, and to serve God[97] because “He is the best part of ourselves and our world.”[98] We will never understand or control why we suffer or why the world suffers. What we are able to control is our response, what the suffering does to us and what kind of people we become due to the suffering.[99]

Bibliography

Achtemeier, Paul J. Harper’s Bible Dictionary. San Francisco , California : Harper & Row

Publishers, 1985.

Bergant, Dianne. Israel ’s Wisdom Literature: A liberation-Critical Reading . Minneapolis :

Fortress Press, 1997.

Brown, Raymond E., Joseph Fitzmyer. S.J., and Roland Murphy. The New Jerome Biblical

Commentary. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.: Prentice Hall, 1990.

Carson D.A, France R.T., Motyer J.A, and Wenham G.J. New Bible Commentary. Downers

Grove, Illinois : Inter-Varsity Press, 1994.

Catholic Study Bible (CSB). The Book of Job. New York : Oxford University Press, 2006.

Chesto, Kathleen. Where is God When Life Hurts. Connecticut : Twenty-Third Publications,

1996.

Grossman, Kathy Lynn. “View of God Can Predict Values, Politics.” USA Today, 2006.

Gutierrez, Gustavo. On Job. Maryknoll , New York : Orbis Books, 1985.

Kushner, Harold. When Bad Things Happen to Good People. New York : Random House, Inc.,

1981.

Linn, Dennis. Good Goats: Healing Our Image of God. New York : Paulist Press, 1994

National Center for Infectious Diseases, Division of Parasitic Diseases. “Malaria.” April 11

2007. http://www.cdc.gov/malaria/facts.htm.

Rohr, Richard. Job & the Mystery of Suffering: Spiritual Reflections. New York : The Crossroads

Publishing Co. , 1996.

Sanders, Paul S. Twentieth Century Interpretations of the Book of Job. Englewood Cliffs, New

Jersey : Prentice Hall, 1968.

Tambasco, Anthony J. The Bible on Suffering: Social & Political Implications. New York :

Paulist Press, 2001.

Thomason, Bill. God on Trial: The Book of Job & Human Suffering. Collegeville , Minnesota :

Liturgical Press, 1997.

Vawter, Bruce C.M. Job & Jonah: Questioning the Hidden God. Ramsey , New Jersey : Paulist

Press, 1983.

Wharton, James A. Job. Louisville , Kentucky : Westminster John Knox Press, 1999.