The Problem of Pain

Rating:
Summary: Thought-provoking, although not wholly satisfying
Review: "The Problem of Pain," by C.S. Lewis, is a non-fiction work that looks at the title phenomenon in a Christian theological context. The chapters in the book look at human pain, animal pain, divine omnipotence, human wickedness, and other theological/philosophical concepts.

I found "Problem" to be a curious book. Some parts are well-written and thought-provoking, some parts are dull. Some parts just seem self-indulgent and even silly; at its worst the book reads like an eggheaded parody of theology. The chapter on hell is particularly unsatisfying; I found it to sound patronizing and frustratingly vague at times. But the book as a whole is thankfully enlivened by delightful flashes of wit.

Theologically, Lewis seems to be at odds with strict biblical literalism; in chapter 5 he appears to endorse the idea of biological evolution, for example. Despite my reservations, I feel that this is a worthwhile book for both Christians and those of other belief traditions.

Rating:
Summary: Great spiritual food
Review: "The Problem of Pain" contains such extraordinary spiritual nourishment. Through the process of wrestling with the role of pain, Lewis gives a truly inspirational explanation of the interaction between God and humans (while also giving wonderfully realistic descriptions of most Christians' struggles!) That said, I would agree with reviewers who said that this book in *not* particularly comforting for those suffering from great grief (Lewis himself said much the same, late in his life.)

This book has given me so much encouragement and, at the same time, challenged me greatly. I am a better Christian for having read it. My copy is underlined, often quoted, and much loved.

Rating:
Summary: If you like C.S. Lewis . . .
Review: . . . like I do, I strongly suggest We All Fall Down, by Brian Caldwell. Like Lewis, Caldwell takes an intellectual aproach to the concept of Christianity. His novel is very much in the vein of The Screwtape Letters and The Great divorce. I highly recomend it for discriminating Christian readers.

Rating:
Summary: My favorite Lewis book of all time
Review: A question which so often plagues us is what Lewis attempts to answer. His examples, as good as they have been in the past, have never been better, cornering us at every position, until we can't help but admit that he was right, even if we don't want to. And, when you read this book, as in so many others of his, you are surprised by the internal joy you feel which makes you never want to lose the memory of even the moment you are in.

If you have the patience to re-read every page a few times, then get started as soon as possible; if not, then read Mere Christianity first to get an understanding of why people love this author so much, and then you'll know why it's worth going over each page several times.

Rating:
Summary: Brilliant Christian Exposition - Proceed with Caution
Review: A quick warning to those who have been pointed to this book but are not Christian: you are not the audience Lewis is speaking to. This book cannot be fully grasped in its original context without some degree of belief or acceptance of Christian doctrine. It is apologetics at its best, but cannot be considered in the "self-help" category like many contemporary titles are.

That said, this must be the finest treatise on the apparent contradiction between the existence of pain and the existence of a supposedly loving God that has been written.

Succint, well-organized, thorough, yet "The Problem of Pain" still reads like it was written by a human being rather than a scholar. Some chapters bring conviction. The chapter on Hell brings fear and dread, and respect for Him who can "destroy both body and soul in Hell". The chapter on Heaven, which Lewis admits is his own philosophical foray, no one else's -- brings hope and reassurance that Heaven is your true calling, your one True Home.

This is not light reading, at least not at first. This may not be a book to recommend to someone at the height of a crisis; Lewis taxes your attention and does not take any short cuts. A "Cliff Notes" version of this book would miss the point. Pain is one of the toughest theological problems a Christian can face, either in their lives or the life of another person they know -- and Lewis does not want you going in armed with half an argument or some "Precious Moments" sentiment.

From a non-Christian POV, I would be surprised if this book made much sense -- so many of the pillars are set on Christian theology, philosophy, and tradition. If you cannot (or will not) accept the possibility of the existence of Heaven, Hell, or God, this book will be just so much incomprehensible babble.

But, as I said, it is not written for that segment of the market. This book is best read by the thinking Christian who has reservations about aspects of Christianity that seem to gloss over, avoid, or ignore the issue of human suffering.

Rating:
Summary: Christian Theology's Insoluble Problem
Review: C. S. Lewis, the late professor of Medieval and Renaissance literature at Cambridge University, was one of the most popular, thought-provoking Christian apologists of the Twentieth Century. In his book on the problem of pain, he acknowledges in his Introduction that Christianity actually "creates, rather than solves, the problem of pain, for pain would be no problem unless...we had received what we think a good assurance that ultimate reality is righteous and loving." On the other hand, as he also points out, merely discarding Christianity creates the problem of explaining why, if "the universe is so bad...humans ever came to attribute it to the activity of a wise and good Creator?" He then follows this statement with a mini case for Christianity, discussing four religious elements.

The first three elements are: (1) experience of numinous awe, (2) consciousness of a moral law which we both approve and yet disobey, and (3) identification of the "Numinous Power of which we feel awe" as also being "the guardian of the morality to which [we] feel ablation." Lewis perhaps rightly contends that these experieces are neither "the result of an inference from the visible universe" nor a logical deduction "from the environment and [our] physical experiences." He then contends that our religious experience must be either "a mere twist in the human mind, corresponding to nothing objective and serving no bioligical function...or else it is a direct experience of the really supernatural." Religious experience and thought may indeed be a "twist in the human mind" that nevertheless has a useful function without necessarily being an actual experience of the supernatural. Anyone interested in finding out more about how religious thought may have developed without invoking the supernatural may consult Pascal Boyer's excellent book, Religion Explained: The Evolutionary Origins of Religious Thought (New York: Basic Books, 2001).

The fourth religious element Lewis discusses is the Incarnation as follows:

"Either he [Jesus Christ] was a raving lunatic of an unusually abominable type, or else he was, and is, precisely what He said. There is no middle way. If the records make the first hypothesis unacceptable, you must submit to the second."

Far from being cogent, this argument would make an excellent example of an either/or fallacy for textbooks on logic. It is also called the fallacy of "incomplete enumeration." Christ could have been mistaken about himself without necessarily having to be designated an "abominable lunatic," and he could be misrepresented in the Gospels. These rational alternatives show that the dilemma presented by Lewis for the unbeliever is false. Having introduced how Christianity causes the problem of pain, Lewis then proceeds to deal with it via the free-will defense.

In his chapter on "Divine Omnipotence," Lewis states the following:

"We can...conceive of a world in which God corrected the results of this abuse of free will...at every moment...But such a world would be one in which wrong actions were impossible, and in which, therefore, freedom of the will would be void."

However, the contention that free will necessarily includes the option to commit wrong actions is erroneous. Am I less morally free if I am only able to care lovingly for my little dog and incapable of choosing to abuse him? Is my moral freedom diminished in the least by my incapacity to terrorize mentally and abuse physically the woman I love? Are persons capable of choosing to do evil as morally free as those capable of only choosing good? Free will is always limited by the capacities and opportunities of any moral agent. Hence, there is no logical contradiction in conceiving of a limited moral freedom to choose only from among various good actions.

Furthermore, free will limited to choosing only good options need not diminish the total amount of free will. God creating greater capacities and opportunities for choosing good could replace the loss of the capacity to do evil. Consequently, since even Christian apologists acknowledge that free will is never absolutely free and since the option to do evil is unnecessary to possess limited free will, the free-will apologetic attempting to rationally explain evil in a world created by an omnipotent, loving God is fallacious. Another of the problems for Christian theology concerns a doctrine Lewis discusses in his chapter, "The Fall of Man."

Lewis says that, in the developed doctrine of the Fall, "Man, as God made him, was completely good and completely happy, but...he disobeyed God and became what we now see." This doctrine creates another problem, which Lewis states as follows:

"For the difficulty about the first sin is that it must be very heinous, or its consequences would not be so terrible, and yet it must be something which a being free from the temptations of fallen man could conceivably have committed."

The sin that Lewis suggests as being possible to someone completely good is "turning from God to self" or "self-idolatry." However, the notion that enyone completely good would commit "self-idolatry" or any other sin is self-contradictory. If turning to God and not to self is essential to being good, then a morally perfect agent ipso facto could never turn from God.

Near the close of his chapter, "The Fall of Man," Lewis suggests that "it would be futile to attempt to solve the problem of pain by producing another problem." However, this is just what Christian apologetics does with the problem of pain and evil. It introduces "solutions" that both fail as solutions and actually produce more problems--even when authored by C. S. Lewis.

Rating:
Summary: A great read, but a bit heavy
Review: C.S. Lewis does an awesome job in this book of explaining the problem of pain, which many cite as a reason for denying the existince of God. In this book Lewis takes small things that don't seem to mean much, but then he builds this small concepts up into something much larger, and he creates strong powerful arguments like this, and many of them are things that I wouldn't ever think of.
All in all this book can be farily heavy reading, so read it slowly, even though it is pretty small, and keep in mind there are going to be many times where you will have to read parts of this book multiple times, until you have a firm grasp on the concept that Lewis is laying out.

Rating:
Summary: A stand out on a difficult subject
Review: C.S. Lewis's "The Problem of Pain" is one of the best books I've found to address the considerable question of how a good God could allow bad things to happen. I found it to be as challenging and interesting as Harold Kushner's "When Bad Things Happen to Good People" although the two theologians come to different conclusions about what the reason for pain is.

Part of what makes Lewis amazing is the crystal clear language and metaphor he uses for examing faith. In "Pain" he talks about humanity as being an opportunity to "reverse the fall of Adam" by coming to Christ. Here, in one sentence, he has truncated the scope of the Bible down to one goal -- start with the Fall, end with the Resurrection. A perfect, crystalline comment -- one of many in this book. Then Lewis is on to the consirable task of explaining why God would require pain (in fact, death) for his creations.

Lewis -- in another excellent metaphor-- likens God to a sculptor and man to his clay. God is an artist, and won't stop until his creation is perfect. The pain we feel in life are God's attempt to make us his perfect creation, to complete the goal he has for our lives. In another collection, Lewis likens God to a heart surgeon. Knowing the full process required, the surgeon can't stop the process when the patient cries out in pain, because if he did the required outcome would never result.

Lewis likens Christians to a child drawing a circle -- they are attempting to draw something but it is rudimentary and sketchy, while the perfect circle God wants for people's lives is outside the reach without pain.

Fine, you might say, but what about needless suffering? Not the pain of death but the pain of life -- suffering children, poverty, abuse. Lewis is a little less convincing on this topic, relying on the age old excuse of blaming free will and man's sinful nature for the unneccessary pain in the world. Here I like Harold Kushner's metaphor (co-opted from another source) that human beings are "God's language". When you ask "where is God?" the answer is that God is in the spirit of inspiration of people who help out in times of crisis. God can't intervene, Kushner says, so he inspires people to do his work for him.

All in all, "The Problem of Pain" is an excellent book, well worth the read.

Rating:
Summary: C. S. Lewis calls himself a "layman" -- Its a lie!
Review: C.S. Lewis, once again, proves himself the master apologist. This book gives many thought-provoking answers to the Question "Why, if 'God is Love', is there pain and suffering in the world we inhabit?" He goes on to explain the difference between Godly and human love. He has chapters explaining the subjects of Heaven, Hell, and Animal pain and all his arguements are very well presented. I would be a good idea to read this book with a dictionary (I had to!), because he writes on a really high level

Rating:
Summary: A simple, satisfying solution to a complex problem
Review: CS Lewis was a master at making complicated theological questions make sense. In this short work, he tackles what is perhaps one of his most difficult subjects yet. Why does pain exist? If there is a God, and he is benevolent, why does he allow his creatures to feel both physical and mental anguish? The answer, as Lewis sees it, is simple, though the explanation for it may not be. Because he loves us.

In this book, Lewis shows how God molds us through our afflictions, and how he actually works toward our greater good by allowing us to experience pain and misfortune, that we may be more willing to give of our own free will back to him. It is through pain, says Lewis, that God can guide us back to Heaven.

Lewis continues the argument made in many others of his books: that no one goes to Heaven or Hell without choosing to. God guides us by allowing us to experience pain, but it is our choice whether we choose to submit to His will or not. And no one will go to Hell without having first refused the helping hand. As Lewis says, the gates of Hell will be locked from the inside.

This is some of the simplest, yet most beautiful theology around, expounded by a man who's humility made him always refer to himself as a 'layman.' If you're a fan of other Lewis works, pick this one up--you won't be disappointed. And if you're just looking for some good Christian reading material, with great insight, then you won't want to miss CS Lewis's the Problem of Pain.