By Shane Lems - Posted at The Heidelblog:
Published August 28, 2025
One of the oldest and most repeated religious questions goes like this: “Why does God allow evil to happen?” Or it may sound like this: “Why is there evil in the world?” These types of questions fall under the subject of theodicy. Theodicy is tackling the question of evil from theological and philosophical perspectives. Theodicists seek to answer the question, “Why is there evil in the world?”It may seem like theodicy is necessarily a good thing. Who does not want to know why God allows evil to happen? Upon close investigation, however, theodicy can often be more harmful than helpful. So argues John Swinton in Raging with Compassion. In this book, Swinton offers a perspective on evil that is much different from modern theodicies. He writes that theodicy should not be understood in an abstract, impersonal manner that focuses on arguments and logic. Instead, the most helpful theodicy is one that is “embodied within the life and practices of the Christian community” (4). This type of theodicy does not try to explain evil or give theoretical answers. Instead, it presents biblical ways for Christians to resist and transform evil so that they might live faithfully until God makes all things new on the last day. We may not have all the answers to the “why” questions, but Scripture does give Christians an answer to “how” we can be faithful followers of Christ in the midst of evil.
In the first two chapters, Swinton investigates the characteristics of modern theodicy. Swinton notes that modern theodicy is fixated on the “why” question: “Why, Lord, did this bad thing happen?” The “why” questions, however, are often answered in esoteric or even deficient ways. Many times, modern theodicy answers the “why” question in a way that does not “bring healing and a deeper love for God” (13). Modern theodicy’s response to evil is often rationalistic, overly analytical, and lacks pastoral sensitivity. Swinton argues that rather than try to solve the problem of evil, we should explore what evil does and how to respond to it in a Christian way. This is what Swinton calls “reframing theodicy.” This is pastoral theodicy. We might not be able to solve the problem of evil, but we can learn how to face it in a biblical manner and through the lens of Christ’s resurrection. Approaching the problem of evil in light of the resurrection and with an aim to trust God through it is substantially more helpful than the abstract methods of modern theodicy.
Chapter three is Swinton’s discussion about the nature of evil and suffering. Swinton notes the difference between moral evil and natural evil. Moral evil is when someone does something terrible to someone else. Natural evil includes diseases, tornadoes, earthquakes, and so forth. Both kinds of evil bring suffering, but it is important to remember that suffering itself is not evil. If we conflate the two terms, Swinton argues, it “blinds us to the crucial pastoral, eschatological, and relational dimension of what we might describe as real evil” (52). This chapter is filled with insights about the biblical descriptions of evil and the types of suffering and tragedies it leaves in its wake. Once again, Swinton brings the discussion to the cross. Through the cross of Christ, we begin to understand how God deals with evil in this world and how Christians should respond to it.