What do you think?
Rate this book
Evil and the Cross
While it is evil that tortures human bodies, it is the problem of evil that torments the human mind. . . . It resists our unremitting efforts to understand it. So begins Henri Blocher's investigation of the question that has troubled people for centuries. Christian philosophers and theologians have proposed numerous solutions to the problem of evil. Blocher classifies the principal approaches and solutions that have been hammered out, and he sympathetically explains the proposals and most of their typical representatives. But when he holds them up to the light of facts, reason and Scripture, Blocher finds none of these solutions adequate.Evil-that horrific, unjustifiable reality, is at bottom a dark and inscrutable enigma, a parasite of truth. Blocher finds the only satisfying response in the cross of Jesus Christ. There the offense of evil is in no way diminished by plausible argument. It is conquered in a moving and breathtaking play of divine wisdom. Originally published in French, Evil and the Cross is a profound grappling with a basic human question.Henri Blocher is professor of systematic theology at the Faculte Libre de Theologie Evangelique in Vaux-sur-Seine, France.
Paperback
First published January 1, 1994
2 people are currently reading
132 people want to read
About the author
Henri Blocher
26 books12 followersHenri A. G. Blocher is a French Baptist evangelical theologian.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
October 6, 2021
Words fail. So I’ll keep it brief.
This is simply magisterial. Without question the best treatment of “the problem of evil” I’ve encountered. With no risk of overstatement I can confidently say that chapter 4 is one of the greatest pieces of theological writing (pound for pound) I’ve ever read.
Staggering in its insight. Utterly stunning in its beauty. Here is balm for the evil-wearied soul.
This is simply magisterial. Without question the best treatment of “the problem of evil” I’ve encountered. With no risk of overstatement I can confidently say that chapter 4 is one of the greatest pieces of theological writing (pound for pound) I’ve ever read.
Staggering in its insight. Utterly stunning in its beauty. Here is balm for the evil-wearied soul.
July 29, 2025
Evil and the Cross by Henri Blocher
Dr. Blocher’s work has great value for the reformed and evangelical pastor. Where he is most valuable is in the first three chapters where he briefly gives an overview of the various answers to the “problem of evil” that have been propounded from the early church to modern times. These are brief, but thorough, incisive, and his takedowns of pseudo-theologians is priceless, while being fair and understanding. As a reference book, this is quite an excellent overview and worth the price of the book.
His own analysis and answer to the problem is not incorrect. Where he is a strong is giving precedence to the biblical understanding of evil. For example, he points out how we often find the words that are associated with sins in the New Testament are predicated with the negative prefix “a” such as unrighteousness as adikia, which gives credence to the idea that evil is a non-entity and parasite of the good.
Further, his analysis of the various biblical passages on evil are well collected and interpreted. He does what is necessary by maintaining the truths together that 1) evil is really evil, 2) God is totally good and no accomplice of evil, and 3) evil is under the plan of the sovereign God and is transformed against its evil nature for His ultimately good purposes. Any account of evil, must maintain these three inviolable principles, which are clearly taught in Scripture and truly express the reality of the case – even when it appears to us that this does not logically cohere.
The philosophical question of the “problem of evil” is helpfully placed into the specific and philosophical form that it should be, which is: where does evil come from? In other words, the so-called “problem of evil” is really a question about the origin of sin. Also, more broadly, the question is often put in terms of a rational disputation, and Blocher is clear that evil is fundamentally irrational and therefore, it does not have a rational basis. It is, and remains, out of line.
But where does evil come from?
On the more basic question, I think that Blocher is not as biblical as he could be, because the Bible gives us a clear answer.
Thankfully, he dismisses all those crude and pseudo theologies that try to originate evil among the angels (which has no basis in Genesis) or in the fact of creation (which again is rejected in the good creation of Genesis) or, even, in the Trinitarian nature of God (totally irrelevant). With this good start, it seems that such conclusions would draw the most natural and basic conclusion that the Bible gives us from the start. And yet somehow Blocher misses this. I suppose this is because he is still dwelling upon this whole problem as if it were a “philosophical question” and even though his transition to Scripture for answers is the right move, he is not ready to shed entirely the philosopher’s vain reasonings.
A philosophical account of evil will fail just as much as a philosophical account of man that fails to reckon with the visceral facts of history (i.e., in the case of man, dust). In other words, Scripture does tell us about the origin of evil from the very start of the story – we are not left to wonder about it. (This is precisely what the first chapters of the Bible are answering!) The Bible answers the question that every child (at least, my children when they reached the age of 7 knew to ask) asks: “So if God is good, why is there evil in the world?”
This is not asked, to be clear, as a philosophical question, even though it is often coached in these terms even by a seven year old. But that is precisely the problem. I suppose that in the realm of philosophy the answer that evil is “irrational” satisfies that inquiry as such, but I still think that answer misses the whole point. Even there, it still treats “the problem of evil” as if it is a problem for us to make sense of it. It almost makes “the problem of evil” a philosophical problem – as if the real problem is that we don’t understand.
But, if that is actually “the problem of evil” it is hardly unique to evil. We cannot make sense of very many things. For example, how our brain works, or how the sun rises, or how the wind blows or where the soul comes from. Now, you will object that we apply the scientific method to these phenomena and we can give a rational explanation of them. But only so far. And so it is with evil. To say it is “irrational” only satisfies so far. But that is just fine. We do not have to give an account and understanding of everything -nor can we. An account that goes so far, is just fine – we are after all limited beings. This, again, is hardly a problem – its really just “the question about evil.” But, again, we don’t get an answer to every question we ask. “Why is the sky blue?”
So the problem of evil is not a philosophical “problem” at all (its a problem only insofar as trying to understand anything is a problem). The problem of evil is found precisely in the fact that we do know its origin – and that is in the heart of man. This is not a philosophical answer, but it is the real answer of the world, and the one that Scripture relays. Adam who was created good by God sinned against God. The problem of evil is that we are evil and evil has come from us.
This makes the whole philosophical conversation turn on quite a different axis. It even makes those philosophical inquiries that try to find an explanation of evil insidious – because we end up finding that really evil has come from God, or really evil has come from his creation, or really evil has come from good. Even the idea that evil is nonbeing (which is quite helpful) can be used to excuse us so that, in reality, evil is not a big deal (Blocher points this out).
But the story of mankind and the testimony of Scripture stand as the constant rebuke to all our philosophical speculations and explanations and instead declare what is always manifest (even though the wise cannot find it out): Oh Sinnerman, where you gonna run to?
At the same time, the story of Genesis 3 also reminds us of man’s constant preoccupation with finding a necessary excuse for his sin, whether that is hiding it, blaming his neighbor, or even daring to blame God. From the start, man has sought an answer to “the problem of evil” and has always found refuge by coming to a conclusion that somehow does not include “me.” (And, this should remind us, that before Adam sinned, there was no problem of evil).
Of course, Genesis 3 is not only the answer to the origin of evil and the despair of our own sinfulness, but it is also the blessed promise of divine hope that thrills the soul, that is the story of this world, that is the solution to the problem of evil. The seed of the woman will crush the head of the serpent. Here Blocher is by far the most accurate – because the problem of evil must always lead us to the foot of the cross. This is because when we are confronted with the evil of our guilt and sin, our lies and our hate, our lust and our fear, we do not need a new systematic philosophy for our psychosis, we do not need theological jargoneesse to find cognitive rest, or even a clearly rational explanation…
… what we need is to behold the Lord who is Good, whose mercy endures forever. In the cross, the love of the Father who made his creation is demonstrated in the blood of his dearly beloved Son which has paid for sin and has been poured out over his people to give them the life of the Spirit of God.
The cross answers the problem of evil not because we need some explanation of its origin and purpose, but because we need someone – some person – to wash away the black stain of our sin.
Dr. Blocher’s work has great value for the reformed and evangelical pastor. Where he is most valuable is in the first three chapters where he briefly gives an overview of the various answers to the “problem of evil” that have been propounded from the early church to modern times. These are brief, but thorough, incisive, and his takedowns of pseudo-theologians is priceless, while being fair and understanding. As a reference book, this is quite an excellent overview and worth the price of the book.
His own analysis and answer to the problem is not incorrect. Where he is a strong is giving precedence to the biblical understanding of evil. For example, he points out how we often find the words that are associated with sins in the New Testament are predicated with the negative prefix “a” such as unrighteousness as adikia, which gives credence to the idea that evil is a non-entity and parasite of the good.
Further, his analysis of the various biblical passages on evil are well collected and interpreted. He does what is necessary by maintaining the truths together that 1) evil is really evil, 2) God is totally good and no accomplice of evil, and 3) evil is under the plan of the sovereign God and is transformed against its evil nature for His ultimately good purposes. Any account of evil, must maintain these three inviolable principles, which are clearly taught in Scripture and truly express the reality of the case – even when it appears to us that this does not logically cohere.
The philosophical question of the “problem of evil” is helpfully placed into the specific and philosophical form that it should be, which is: where does evil come from? In other words, the so-called “problem of evil” is really a question about the origin of sin. Also, more broadly, the question is often put in terms of a rational disputation, and Blocher is clear that evil is fundamentally irrational and therefore, it does not have a rational basis. It is, and remains, out of line.
But where does evil come from?
On the more basic question, I think that Blocher is not as biblical as he could be, because the Bible gives us a clear answer.
Thankfully, he dismisses all those crude and pseudo theologies that try to originate evil among the angels (which has no basis in Genesis) or in the fact of creation (which again is rejected in the good creation of Genesis) or, even, in the Trinitarian nature of God (totally irrelevant). With this good start, it seems that such conclusions would draw the most natural and basic conclusion that the Bible gives us from the start. And yet somehow Blocher misses this. I suppose this is because he is still dwelling upon this whole problem as if it were a “philosophical question” and even though his transition to Scripture for answers is the right move, he is not ready to shed entirely the philosopher’s vain reasonings.
A philosophical account of evil will fail just as much as a philosophical account of man that fails to reckon with the visceral facts of history (i.e., in the case of man, dust). In other words, Scripture does tell us about the origin of evil from the very start of the story – we are not left to wonder about it. (This is precisely what the first chapters of the Bible are answering!) The Bible answers the question that every child (at least, my children when they reached the age of 7 knew to ask) asks: “So if God is good, why is there evil in the world?”
This is not asked, to be clear, as a philosophical question, even though it is often coached in these terms even by a seven year old. But that is precisely the problem. I suppose that in the realm of philosophy the answer that evil is “irrational” satisfies that inquiry as such, but I still think that answer misses the whole point. Even there, it still treats “the problem of evil” as if it is a problem for us to make sense of it. It almost makes “the problem of evil” a philosophical problem – as if the real problem is that we don’t understand.
But, if that is actually “the problem of evil” it is hardly unique to evil. We cannot make sense of very many things. For example, how our brain works, or how the sun rises, or how the wind blows or where the soul comes from. Now, you will object that we apply the scientific method to these phenomena and we can give a rational explanation of them. But only so far. And so it is with evil. To say it is “irrational” only satisfies so far. But that is just fine. We do not have to give an account and understanding of everything -nor can we. An account that goes so far, is just fine – we are after all limited beings. This, again, is hardly a problem – its really just “the question about evil.” But, again, we don’t get an answer to every question we ask. “Why is the sky blue?”
So the problem of evil is not a philosophical “problem” at all (its a problem only insofar as trying to understand anything is a problem). The problem of evil is found precisely in the fact that we do know its origin – and that is in the heart of man. This is not a philosophical answer, but it is the real answer of the world, and the one that Scripture relays. Adam who was created good by God sinned against God. The problem of evil is that we are evil and evil has come from us.
This makes the whole philosophical conversation turn on quite a different axis. It even makes those philosophical inquiries that try to find an explanation of evil insidious – because we end up finding that really evil has come from God, or really evil has come from his creation, or really evil has come from good. Even the idea that evil is nonbeing (which is quite helpful) can be used to excuse us so that, in reality, evil is not a big deal (Blocher points this out).
But the story of mankind and the testimony of Scripture stand as the constant rebuke to all our philosophical speculations and explanations and instead declare what is always manifest (even though the wise cannot find it out): Oh Sinnerman, where you gonna run to?
At the same time, the story of Genesis 3 also reminds us of man’s constant preoccupation with finding a necessary excuse for his sin, whether that is hiding it, blaming his neighbor, or even daring to blame God. From the start, man has sought an answer to “the problem of evil” and has always found refuge by coming to a conclusion that somehow does not include “me.” (And, this should remind us, that before Adam sinned, there was no problem of evil).
Of course, Genesis 3 is not only the answer to the origin of evil and the despair of our own sinfulness, but it is also the blessed promise of divine hope that thrills the soul, that is the story of this world, that is the solution to the problem of evil. The seed of the woman will crush the head of the serpent. Here Blocher is by far the most accurate – because the problem of evil must always lead us to the foot of the cross. This is because when we are confronted with the evil of our guilt and sin, our lies and our hate, our lust and our fear, we do not need a new systematic philosophy for our psychosis, we do not need theological jargoneesse to find cognitive rest, or even a clearly rational explanation…
… what we need is to behold the Lord who is Good, whose mercy endures forever. In the cross, the love of the Father who made his creation is demonstrated in the blood of his dearly beloved Son which has paid for sin and has been poured out over his people to give them the life of the Spirit of God.
The cross answers the problem of evil not because we need some explanation of its origin and purpose, but because we need someone – some person – to wash away the black stain of our sin.
November 25, 2012
Evil and the Cross, is a book that attempts to look at the problem of evil from an analytical point of view. The book is written by Henri Blocher, a very famous French theologian.
In this book, Blocher summarized the 3 schools of theodicy. Namely: 1) Evil is the absence of good, has affinity with non-being, therefore tend towards destruction. 2) THe solution of the problem of evil by free will, and 3) Solution of evil by dialectical reasoning (evil as a way for reconciliation to bring good).
Blocher rightly pointed out that strength and the weaknesses of these 3 theodicy. And at the end, he pointed to the cross of Jesus as God's solution to the problem of evil.
However, I cannot feel that this is a book where Blocher heavily criticized the 3 schools of theodicy, yet Blocher himself tells the reader nothing, not even a hypothetical speculation of the origin, and the reason for evil's existence.
In other words, I think this is a book where the author says he is going to look at the problem of evil "analytically", but at the end tell you nothing.
Another problem of the book is, the use of language, and the writing is very dense. A friend of mine who was a theological college student told me they usually call Henri Blocher "Henri Blockhead".
While I agree with Blocher that there are weaknesses in the 3 schools of theodicy, but I disagree with him when he branded the 3 schools of theodicy as "false teaching". The truth is, the Bible does not really say where evil comes from, or why evil exists. i.e. The origin and the problem of evil remains, largely a mystery.
We only have pieces of information from the Bible to aid us to try to comprehend the existence of evil and suffering. Personally, I don't see any problems with a hypothetical speculation on the origin of evil, and I definitely won't go as far as branding these speculations as "false teaching".
The only thing I agree with Blocher in this book, are 3 things: A) The Bible does not say where evil comes from, or why evil exists. B) God defeated evil through Jesus. and C.) The 3 schools of theodicy has some grains of truth, and parts of their ideas can be used to explain the problem of evil and suffering.
My conclusion is, while this is a good book that gives an overview of different theodicy, but Blocher himself actually told me nothing about the existence of evil. More than 50% of the book consists of Blocher trying to explain why other people's theodicy are not Christian, but he has no proper solution to offer on the topic.
In this book, Blocher summarized the 3 schools of theodicy. Namely: 1) Evil is the absence of good, has affinity with non-being, therefore tend towards destruction. 2) THe solution of the problem of evil by free will, and 3) Solution of evil by dialectical reasoning (evil as a way for reconciliation to bring good).
Blocher rightly pointed out that strength and the weaknesses of these 3 theodicy. And at the end, he pointed to the cross of Jesus as God's solution to the problem of evil.
However, I cannot feel that this is a book where Blocher heavily criticized the 3 schools of theodicy, yet Blocher himself tells the reader nothing, not even a hypothetical speculation of the origin, and the reason for evil's existence.
In other words, I think this is a book where the author says he is going to look at the problem of evil "analytically", but at the end tell you nothing.
Another problem of the book is, the use of language, and the writing is very dense. A friend of mine who was a theological college student told me they usually call Henri Blocher "Henri Blockhead".
While I agree with Blocher that there are weaknesses in the 3 schools of theodicy, but I disagree with him when he branded the 3 schools of theodicy as "false teaching". The truth is, the Bible does not really say where evil comes from, or why evil exists. i.e. The origin and the problem of evil remains, largely a mystery.
We only have pieces of information from the Bible to aid us to try to comprehend the existence of evil and suffering. Personally, I don't see any problems with a hypothetical speculation on the origin of evil, and I definitely won't go as far as branding these speculations as "false teaching".
The only thing I agree with Blocher in this book, are 3 things: A) The Bible does not say where evil comes from, or why evil exists. B) God defeated evil through Jesus. and C.) The 3 schools of theodicy has some grains of truth, and parts of their ideas can be used to explain the problem of evil and suffering.
My conclusion is, while this is a good book that gives an overview of different theodicy, but Blocher himself actually told me nothing about the existence of evil. More than 50% of the book consists of Blocher trying to explain why other people's theodicy are not Christian, but he has no proper solution to offer on the topic.
July 20, 2008
A fascinating look at the Bible's answer to the question, "Why does evil exist?" Blocher seems to be in agreement with N.T. Wright (in his book Evil and the Justice of God) that the Bible never tries to explain where evil comes from but is interested instead with God's response to it: limiting its effects and eventually conquering it. But Blocher's book spends a little less time examining the Biblical texts and instead enters into discussion with the various historical Christian explanations of evil. In doing so he demonstrates that most attempts to explain evil really end up justifying its existence, diminishing its evil-ness, or voiding the sovereignty of God. He insists that a real understanding of evil must see it the way God sees it, as completely abhorrent and something being defeated by him in his sovereign power. This book left me thinking a lot, and I feel I will have a whole new answer when someone tells me they cannot believe in a God who allows evil. Previously I might have fallen into the trap of justifying evil by explaining its "greater purpose." Now I think I will be inclined to agree with that person--to say, "You're absolutely right about evil. It's inexcusable, and God rejects it like you do. But the good news is that he has conquered it and it will be destroyed!"
This book is a bit heady and theologically complex, but not so much as to be inaccessible. I recommend it.
This book is a bit heady and theologically complex, but not so much as to be inaccessible. I recommend it.
November 3, 2020
Even better the second time. This remains *the* statement on the problem of evil for me.
August 20, 2021
This very short book by (renowned - I think?) French Systemic Theologian Henri Blocher (I don't read enough to know, and I certainly know very little about analytical philosophy) aims to look at evil, pain, and suffering in the Christian tradition, and the various ways it has been understood (theodicy). It then tells you why all of these are wrong/misguided, before offering an alternative approach at the problem wholesale unlike the others. And I guess it does do that, however...
The book is kind of bizzare, it's the first book in a long time that's made me question so much, and not necessarily in a good or constructive way. However, that's not why it only gets 3 stars, infact there probability one of the reasons it got as high - always good to be challenged! TL;DR, came looking for a short, understandable, scriptural response to evil. Got the last part and some existential crisis' instead.
+ First a huge positive - the summaries of the core beliefs and the theodicies of the (15!!) different "Theologians" are super clear well done, probably the most concise I've seen.
+ Similarly, the three groups they are in: evil as non-being (and trending away from God, Goodness itself, and therefore to evil); evil explained via free will; evil by dialectical thinking are handy
+ The "point" of the book, and final chapter, is super important, evil as an unjustifiable reality - and even when Scripture doesn't precisely answer the questions we ask about it - it speaks of God universally holding evil AS evil, that which is never justified, and which the whole of Scripture proclaims it will be justly removed.
However the first issue is the... pacing? Flow? I'm not sure if it's because of the English translation, but it's seems quite abrupt at both large and small scales - it feels like 4.5 different essays put together, that wouldn't really lose anything slapped being separate. The final chapter would be a great standalone article, and I feel like it actually loses a little because..
- The book overall for the subject matter is, I think, far too short.
- The first 3 chapters are extremely dense, which is fair, maybe it's a technical book, and isn't an issue, but infact I think it would benefit from being far longer since, in my view:
- Its systematically strong, but biblical-theologically weak. I think because if how short it is, many of the arguments against the theodicies arent fleshed out really in terms of method, exegetical moves or context.
For example, p80, on evaluating why Karl Barth's view is wrong "The idea of a real non-being or nothingness, which is taken to be something other than the corruption or perversion of the acts of a creature, finds no support in Scripture.", But that's it. It may very well be true - but where is the discussion of, for instance, the "deep waters" of Gen 1 being an ANE concept of "nothing" and then water imagery symbolising chaos all throughout scripture? Wheres the discussion of personified Sin in Gen. 4:3? (cf. Romans 7, perhaps even Paul's theology of the powers), where's Leviathan/Chaos dragon motifs? Why doesn't this book tell me how to make the perfect scrambled egg (basically, I understand you can't say everything all the time).
This is, for me, the biggest weak point. I just wasn't super convinced, or atleast not convinced enough to as strongly denounce the other views as Blocher may have.
I don't know, maybe I'm just too soft, but it really really feels like an unnecessarily large attack on the other theodicies, and then a pretty brief "solution" that I think doesn't REALLY help the destabilised reader in the end. The key point in HUGE though and really important to grasp in any case, and does in some way do away with theodicies as ~"to fully explain evil is to justify it" or something. So I'm not sure if quite meets its aim, hence the 2.5-3 stars.
Also if it wasn't already clear, probably some existential crisis warnings for the lay Christian! But that doesn't mean that Blocher clearly isn't working in a very sensitive, honest and caring manner.
The book is kind of bizzare, it's the first book in a long time that's made me question so much, and not necessarily in a good or constructive way. However, that's not why it only gets 3 stars, infact there probability one of the reasons it got as high - always good to be challenged! TL;DR, came looking for a short, understandable, scriptural response to evil. Got the last part and some existential crisis' instead.
+ First a huge positive - the summaries of the core beliefs and the theodicies of the (15!!) different "Theologians" are super clear well done, probably the most concise I've seen.
+ Similarly, the three groups they are in: evil as non-being (and trending away from God, Goodness itself, and therefore to evil); evil explained via free will; evil by dialectical thinking are handy
+ The "point" of the book, and final chapter, is super important, evil as an unjustifiable reality - and even when Scripture doesn't precisely answer the questions we ask about it - it speaks of God universally holding evil AS evil, that which is never justified, and which the whole of Scripture proclaims it will be justly removed.
However the first issue is the... pacing? Flow? I'm not sure if it's because of the English translation, but it's seems quite abrupt at both large and small scales - it feels like 4.5 different essays put together, that wouldn't really lose anything slapped being separate. The final chapter would be a great standalone article, and I feel like it actually loses a little because..
- The book overall for the subject matter is, I think, far too short.
- The first 3 chapters are extremely dense, which is fair, maybe it's a technical book, and isn't an issue, but infact I think it would benefit from being far longer since, in my view:
- Its systematically strong, but biblical-theologically weak. I think because if how short it is, many of the arguments against the theodicies arent fleshed out really in terms of method, exegetical moves or context.
For example, p80, on evaluating why Karl Barth's view is wrong "The idea of a real non-being or nothingness, which is taken to be something other than the corruption or perversion of the acts of a creature, finds no support in Scripture.", But that's it. It may very well be true - but where is the discussion of, for instance, the "deep waters" of Gen 1 being an ANE concept of "nothing" and then water imagery symbolising chaos all throughout scripture? Wheres the discussion of personified Sin in Gen. 4:3? (cf. Romans 7, perhaps even Paul's theology of the powers), where's Leviathan/Chaos dragon motifs? Why doesn't this book tell me how to make the perfect scrambled egg (basically, I understand you can't say everything all the time).
This is, for me, the biggest weak point. I just wasn't super convinced, or atleast not convinced enough to as strongly denounce the other views as Blocher may have.
I don't know, maybe I'm just too soft, but it really really feels like an unnecessarily large attack on the other theodicies, and then a pretty brief "solution" that I think doesn't REALLY help the destabilised reader in the end. The key point in HUGE though and really important to grasp in any case, and does in some way do away with theodicies as ~"to fully explain evil is to justify it" or something. So I'm not sure if quite meets its aim, hence the 2.5-3 stars.
Also if it wasn't already clear, probably some existential crisis warnings for the lay Christian! But that doesn't mean that Blocher clearly isn't working in a very sensitive, honest and caring manner.
April 14, 2020
In this magnificent book, Henri Blocher discusses the origin and meaning of pain. He explores and evaluates Christian explanations of the this problem under three heads: The solution by universal order - the idea that somehow evil is explained by the fact that it serves the good that God uses it to serve; the solution by autonomous freedom - the idea that God had to create free creatures and that explains sin; the solution by dialectical reasoning - the idea that the conflict that evil implies plays a positive role in the world. He finds each of these three ideas wanting.
His solution is summed up like this: "The evil of evil, the lordship of the Lord, the goodness of God: these three immovable propositions stand together as the basis of biblical doctrine ... But the great difficulty lies in holding all three together." He calls this "the thorn in reason's flesh."
The last chapter (which was surprising since I had not thought of it) asks how three propositions affirmed by scriptures - evil is abolished in the kingdom of God, the kingdom of God has come and evil persists in the kingdom - can be reconciled.
If the problem of evil troubles you I highly recommend this book. It presents a very wide variety of solutions that have been offered by Christians of various stripes. It is a difficult read but is worth the effort.
His solution is summed up like this: "The evil of evil, the lordship of the Lord, the goodness of God: these three immovable propositions stand together as the basis of biblical doctrine ... But the great difficulty lies in holding all three together." He calls this "the thorn in reason's flesh."
The last chapter (which was surprising since I had not thought of it) asks how three propositions affirmed by scriptures - evil is abolished in the kingdom of God, the kingdom of God has come and evil persists in the kingdom - can be reconciled.
If the problem of evil troubles you I highly recommend this book. It presents a very wide variety of solutions that have been offered by Christians of various stripes. It is a difficult read but is worth the effort.
May 16, 2017
Very good Critics and destroys all the "theodicy" going from libertarianism ("free-will" theodicy) to Leibniz "meilleur des mondes". It would be good if it interacted with "calvinist" and non-free-will protestant theodicies. Without falling in mysticism, justifies strongly the mystery of the "problem of evil". How can we explain ultimately the goal of evil and how can God ordain whereas he hates it ? Evil, by definition is allien to the world's harmony. By explaining evill we give it a place in the world's harmony while it doesn't have one. Each theodicy that achieves exhaustively explaining evil ends in excusing evil and strip off its evilness.
February 20, 2018
Henri Blocher's book is a must read for anyone studying Christian responses to evil and suffering. He begins by giving insightful analysis of traditional theological and philosophical attempts to understand the problem of evil. His criticisms of these positions lead to the conclusion that they are ultimately lacking. Instead, Blocher puts forward a 'biblical' position, that does not so much answer the question of why there is evil in the world, but focuses on the nature of God and the promise to bring an end to suffering.
October 18, 2018
It is rare to find a book that almost instantly makes it on my must read and reread list. (especially when the sub-title contains the word “analytical”). This book, however, is such a book. Even in translation, the writing is brilliant. Blocher combines penetrating analysis of every major kind of response to the problem of evil (pagan and Christian) with consistent biblical faithfulness. And all while remaining tethered to the centrality of the gospel. I have never read a better book on the problem of evil. Highly recommended!
September 12, 2018
Fantastic. So helpful and biblical.
January 28, 2015
Blocher offers an excellent critique of common answers or theodicies for the Problem of Evil. He analyzes 3 commonly used Christian positions (free-will defense, evil as part of the plan, and German dialectic schemes) and finds them all wanting and insufficient to the testimony of the Scriptures. Blocher really does a phenomenal job engaging with pre-Enlightenment philosophers all the way to (at the time brand-new) post-modern philosophers and surveys Christians who claim a part of these traditions. He makes sure to hear his interlocutor on their own terms without unfairly presenting them.
His main solution is that the Bible doesn't offer an answer to the origin of evil, but rather, consistently portrays at unjustifiable reality that will be dealt with by God in Christ at the cross in the kingdom of God. Evil doesn't fit into the other schemes/theodicies because if it did, it would be rational and therefore no longer unjustifiable reality.
Excellent book. I would recommend the last 3 chapters to most people as they are the most accessible. Though the book is short (only ~130 pages of text) it is dense and takes a while to read. Still, a very helpful book on the problem of evil.
His main solution is that the Bible doesn't offer an answer to the origin of evil, but rather, consistently portrays at unjustifiable reality that will be dealt with by God in Christ at the cross in the kingdom of God. Evil doesn't fit into the other schemes/theodicies because if it did, it would be rational and therefore no longer unjustifiable reality.
Excellent book. I would recommend the last 3 chapters to most people as they are the most accessible. Though the book is short (only ~130 pages of text) it is dense and takes a while to read. Still, a very helpful book on the problem of evil.
October 22, 2012
I'm not sure this is a three-star book. It's not long, but it's not easy to read, perhaps because it's a translation from the original French, but more likely because he discusses various theories on the origins of evil from authors I'm not personally familiar with. Blocher rejects the idea that evil is nothing, a sort of hole that needs to be filled with goodness. He rejects the free will defense of evil (evil exists because we have free will, and God needed to create a world in which people had free will). And he rejects the dialectical approach of Hegel and others. You have to wade through the first three chapters to get to some good stuff.
March 4, 2015
This book attempted to answer some really good questions. However, there was much to be desired. I wish that certain parts of the book would have gone into more depth while others would have been shorter.
July 7, 2013
Excellent analysis of evil from the three strongest Christian perspectives. It would be interesting to understand how evil is understood in other cultures and religions.
March 7, 2016
Evil is unnatural and unjustifiable. Only by maintaining this truth can we hope for its eradication. A deeply thought-provoking book which criticizes the major attempts to solve the problem of evil.
September 26, 2017
Henri Blocher was professor of Systematic Theology at Faculte Libre de Theologie Evangelique, Vaux-sur-Seine, France. In his book he tackles the theological question of evil in the world, using philosophy and logic. He takes on such philosophers and theologians as Hegel, Paul Tillich, Jurgen Moltmann and Karl Barth. He also analyzes G.E. Ladd's Kingdom of God theology and Dispensationalism - and finds them all wanting. Blocher defines evil as "'something' that occurs in experience but ought not to," in fact, as something outside the recognizable cosmos. This is where it must be overcome, he claims, which is just what Christ's work on the cross accomplishes.
His argument seems to me too contrived, and so does not rise above other answers to this ages-old question of evil.
His argument seems to me too contrived, and so does not rise above other answers to this ages-old question of evil.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews