Very disappointing, considering the (3) good reviews on Amazon. The author’s basic premise is the old (secular) idea that a theodicy is needed to vindicate God, in light of the fact that He allows human suffering to continue, while He possesses the ability to stop it. The author states that God is guilty of inflicting evil on “innocent” people, and is only vindicated by the fact that he endured the same thing himself at the cross. He sums up this idea by calling it “God’s own theodicy”, and he believes this concept becomes evident when Scripture is viewed through the author’s own “dualist” categories (quoted term is mine).
At the outset, Crum presents a “dualist” framework for interpreting the Bible, which makes a distinction between “faith language” and “fact language”. As you might imagine, difficult texts (those which might support the authors thesis of the need for theodicy) are conveniently pushed into one or the other of the categories, as required to support his theories.
My impression of this (faith vs. fact) method of scriptural interpretation is that it specifically asks the Bible reader to read what is written while consciously ignoring WHY it was written. His exposition reveals skewed perceptions of sin, atonement, and a host of other theological concepts.
My bottom line is, God does not need a theodicy to vindicate Himself. God’s choices are above our scrutiny. Romans 9:19-20:
“But indeed O man, who are you to reply against God. Will the thing formed say to Him who formed it, ‘Why have you created me like this?’ Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?”
No comments:
Post a Comment