This book fulfills its purpose admirably: it is an introduction to recent discussions in analytical philosophy of religion about the problem(s) evil creates for theism. It begins by surveying the variety of problems evil causes. It distinguishes theodicies (explanations of how evil fits in creation) and defenses (which are not explanations, but demonstrations that cultured despisers' attacks are not necessarily successful). Unfortunately, too many scholars still fail to make this distinction: the shape of the argument and the burden of proof are different for each, and Speak's work clearly evinces that distinction.
The text weaves in ideas from Fyodor Dostoevsky's The Brothers Karamazov. It helpfully distinguishes personal from theological problems. It approaches the logical problem of evil (against which defenses are found effective). It discusses the evidential problem of evil (which results in a real challenge to theistic belief, but not an unbeatable argument against theism). The issue of “divine hiddenness,” that we do not know God's mind, results in an advocacy of humility (with a nod to the current discussions of “skeptical theism,” which is something of an analytic analogue to the apophatic moment in analogical talking of God more common in Catholic theology). Turning away from “defenses,” Speak's examinations of theodicies yield a verdict that there has not (yet) been real success. Tentative conclusions note an analogous problem of evil for atheism and the turn to more particularly Christian doctrines as resources some analytical philosophers have used.
Speak pays little attention to the variety of strong antitheodicy arguments offered by those in dialogue with the analytic tradition: Kenneth Surin, D. Z. Phillips, this reviewer, Nick Trakakis, et alii. He does not take seriously the claims that theodicies are part of the problem, not the solution. Nor does he attend to the works of Thomists (of various stripes) who have disputed with the analytic tradition: Brian Davies, David Burrell, et alii. He does not examine their nuanced understandings of the divine, understandings quite different from those evident in the debates about free will defenses and the purposes of God invoked in the analytic tradition. These omissions are unfortunate, but completely understandable, given the purpose, focus, and length of this text.
All college libraries should acquire this book as a resource for students. It can be used as supplementary reading for advanced undergraduates or graduate students as an orientation to this lively and important set of debates and discussions. Attending to these discussions can help Christian theologians understand how to walk their own paths more fruitfully as they deal with the problem(s) of evil.
