Thomas Kits van Heyningen

Problem of God Professor Morici

December 18, 2014
Topic 2: Judaism (Wiesel & Rubenstein on Job) & Islam (Malcolm X): How do these
readings function as religious or theological expressions of and responses to modern
concerns? According to these examples, what is the place of religion in the modern
world?
In their respective writings, Rubenstein, Wiesel, and Malcolm X critique the role
of religious cultures in todays world, arguing that change is necessary to meet modern
day requirements. While all three works have very different ideas on this matter, they all
share the same idea that current religious structures need reform. Malcolm X advocates
for the abandonment of Christianity and for the conversion of African-Americans to the
religion of Islam, as it provides a fresh start for black culture, cutting ties with the whitemans exploitative God. To varying degrees Rubenstein and Wiesel argue that theodicy
and the view of an entirely just God is outdated and must be rethought for the viability of
the modern mans view of God.
In The Autobiography of Malcolm X, Malcolm believes that the institution of
religion has a significant role in the societal reforms he hopes to catalyze in America. The
majority religion in America and for African-Americans is, of course, Christianity, and
Malcolm advocates for this to change. As part of the Civil Rights movement, many
African Americans are looking to renounce the aspects of their culture that contributed to
their subjugated heritage, and Christianity is an obvious place to start. On a fundamental
level, Malcolms biggest problem with Christianity is not its teachings or tenets, but its
historical association and origin within the black community. Malcolm views Christianity
as a foreign religion that was forced upon African-Americans in times of slavery. For
centuries, African-Americans have been taught to worship the white God that their

former masters believed in, being taught values that promote the mitigation of
revolutionary tendencies that would be needed to promote real societal change. In the
early part of his life, Malcolm was fervently anti-religious. For all the above reasons, he
hated the prevalence of Christianity in black culture, and thought it was a sickening
callback and vestige of the white exploitation of blacks during slavery. In his own words,
Malcolm considered his hatred for religion to be too great for the term atheist, claiming
that his anti-Christian sentiments went as far as to self-identity himself as Satan (X,
101). During his stint in prison, he begins to reassess his hatred of religion after he is
introduced to the Nation of Islam. The Nation of Islam is a modern religious movement,
focusing primarily on African-Americans as a religious reform movement in opposition
to white Christianity. They have a wide variety of radical views, including the belief that
white people are literal devils who systematically marginalized the genetic trait of black
skin through murderous birth control methods. Malcolm was initially introduced to the
Nation by his brothers through letter correspondence, and while they didnt personally
believe in every tenet of the Nations teaching, they told him of their belief that this
movement was an exceptional opportunity for black empowerment and unification.
Malcolm was receptive to the religion, and saw its potential to take the place of the hated
Christianity in the culture of blacks. Islam was a compelling choice of religion for
African-American for an abundance of reasons, most of which are symbolically and
historically related to the opposition of white Christianity. Islam and Christianity have a
complex history of rivalry, opposition and even war, and the two beliefs are
fundamentally incompatible with each other from a theological perspective. During its
founding, Islam was constructed as anti-Christian, and while on a macro-level there are

many similarities between the beliefs (both Abrahamic religions), these similarities only
help contribute to the tension and threat that Christians perceive the Muslim faith to be.
For all these reasons, anti-integration black power groups view Islam as the perfect
religion to act as the vehicle for their movement. In many ways, Malcolm X viewed the
Nation of Islam and the role of religion as a whole as a necessary facet for the larger
movement he was trying to catalyze. When discussing the rise of the Nation of Islam in
conjecture with his social movement, he claimed, This gives us a religious base, and the
spiritual force necessary to rid our people of the vices that destroy the moral fiber of our
community (X, 199). Malcolm attributes many of these vices in the African American
community to Christianity, and views its eradication from the ideology as the most
effective way of starting over without the remnants of exploitation intertwined in their
culture. Starting over from a theological perspective, especially with the religion of Islam
and its anti-Christian history, held as much symbolic meaning as it did functional. Not
only did the movement hope to use religion as a way to unite the African community as
one, but it did so by advocating for the conversion to a religion with a history of cultural
significance.
Both Malcolm and the Nation believed in the importance of religion as a cultural
indicator of ethnicity, culture, and tradition. With Christianity, Malcolm argues that
African Americans have no such foundation, and this lack of a strong base leaves them
vulnerable to the exploitation of their community. Malcolm points to the example of the
Jews in Nazi Germany as a cautionary tale of what can happen to a people without strong
ethnic and cultural roots. By accepting nationalism, viewing themselves more as
Germans than Jewish, they were left weakened and vulnerable for attack. These self-

weakened, self-deluded Jews were gradually pushed and pushed until they found
themselves in the gas chamber, still gasping, It cant be true! (X, 175). In the eyes of
Malcolm X, having a religious backbone is a proven way to gain cultural fortitude and
unity, safeguarding a culture from exploitation.
The Nation of Islam saw the Muslim religion as a return to the natural world,
before the crimes of the white man. They believed that Islam was the religion of the first
men in Africa and that it was the natural religion of the black race. Christianitys
prevalence in black culture was a constant reminder of slavery and exploitation, and a
return back to the original religion symbolically represented a rebirth of heritage rid of
white influence. While the history and origin of Christianity is the primary reason for
Malcolms hatred for the institution, there are also some contentions that he holds with
the message that the white man uses Christianity to purvey. My brothers and sisters, our
white slavemaster's Christian religion has taught us black people here in the wilderness of
North America that we will sprout wings when we die and fly up into the sky where God
will have for us a special place called heaven. This is white man's Christian religion used
to brainwash us black people! We have accepted it! We have embraced it! We have
practiced it! And while we are doing all of that for himself, this blue-eyed devil has
twisted his Christianity, to keep his foot on our backs to keep our eyes fixed on the pie
in the sky and heaven in the hereafter while he enjoys his heaven right here, on earth,
in this life (X, 130). In this quote, Malcolm is explaining how white Christian
interpretation advocates for complacency with the quality of life on earth, and being
resigned to the hope for salvation after death. These aspirations for social change, which
are necessary for a successful Civil Rights campaign, are pacified by the false hopes

Christianity provides. The Christian religion is incompatible with the Negro's aspirations
for dignity and equality in America," the student had written [to Malcolm X]. "It has
hindered where it might have helped; it has been evasive when it was morally bound to
be forthright; it has separated believers on the basis of color, although it has declared its
mission to be a universal brotherhood under Jesus Christ. Christian love is the white
man's love for himself and for his race. For the man who is not white, Islam is the hope
for justice and equality in the world we must build tomorrow" (X, 150-151). Through the
willingness to cast aside past religious traditions for the sake of progress, the Islamic faith
provides a fresh start in which the African American community can begin to rebuild its
heritage.
UsingtheBookofJobasajumpingoffpointforalargerdiscussion,bothArthur
RubensteinandElieWieseldiscusstheneedforusingrealitytobegintoreassessthe
traditionalistviewsoftheroleofGodinourlives.Rubensteinsargumenthingesonthis
question:giveneverythingweveexperiencedintheworldwiththesufferingofthe
innocent,canwestillhonestlyholdontothetraditionalistsbeliefinanallpowerful,
completelyjustGod?Sincethebeginningofcivilization,thepredicamentoftheinnocent
suffererhasbeenadifficultissuetograpplewith.OneofthefirstlessonsthattheOld
Testamentteachesisthatmenaretoblamefortheirsuffering,andthatAdamsoriginal
sinintheGardenofEdenstillaccompaniesallofhumanityintheirquestforreverence
inthelightofGod.ThestoryofJobisoneofthemostsignificantlessonsinalloftheOld
Testament,andcontainscommentaryonthedilemmaoftheinnocentsufferer.Jobisan
allaroundvirtuous,charitableandwealthyman,andGodusesJobtoshowthedevilan
exampleofatrulygoodsubject.ThedevilretortsthatitseasyforJobtobevirtuousand

faithfulbecauseofhiscircumstances,andthatheisonlygoodtoGodbecauseGodis
goodtohim.IfmisfortunestartedmakingitswayintoJobslife,thedevilarguesthathis
foundationoffaithcouldeasilybeshaken.ThestorypaintsGodinaveryunappealing
light,asheobligestotakepartinthiscontestandremoveshisprotectionoverJob,
allowingSatantotorturehimtotrytowinthebet.Jobenduresunfathomablehardship,
losinghishealth,hisfamily,hisbelongings,andhislifestyle.Havinghadeverythingand
losteverything,Jobturnstotheonlypersonleft:God.HecourageouslystandsuptoGod,
demandinganexplanationforhistorture.Thoughaccused,condemned,andrepudiated,
hedefiedthesystemthatkepthimimprisoned.HelaunchedaninquiryandsuddenlyGod
wasthedefendant.Jobspokehisoutrage,hisgrief;hetoldGodwhatHeshouldhave
knownforalongtime,perhapssincealways,thatsomethingwasamissinHisuniverse
(Wiesel,229).GodanswersJobwithaseriesofvaguerhetoric,providingneitheratrue
answertoJobsprotestoranadmissionoferror,refusingtorespondtoJobsquestions.
Insteadofcontinuingtoarguehispoint,however,Jobimmediatelygivesinandaccepts
Godsunfulfillingreply.
WieselbelievesthatJobwastooquicktoreconcilewithGod,accepthispast
punishment,andsurrenderhisprotestsabouttheunwarrantedwayinwhichhewas
treatedasaninnocentsufferer.Iwasoffendedbyhissurrenderinthetext.Jobs
resignationasmanwasaninsulttoman.Heshouldnothavegiveninsoeasily.He
shouldhavesaidtoGod:Verywell,Iforgiveyou.Iforgiveyoutotheextentofmy
sorrow,myanguish.Butwhataboutmydeadchildren,dotheyforgiveYou?Whatright
haveItospeakontheirbehalf?(Wiesel,234).ByacceptingtheinequitiesthatGodhas

putforthonhislife,Wieselbelievesthatheisbecominganaccomplicetothedeathsof
hischildrenthatwerepartofhisownpersonaltrial.Wieselisstandingupforthesufferer,
anddeclaringthatitisnotoutoflinefortheinnocentsufferertolookintothefaceof
Godwithoutresignation,refusingtoconfessthesinstheydidnotcommitorwelcomethe
punishmenttheydidnotdeserve.Inotherwords,continuingtoaskthequestionsofGod
thatthestoryofJobbringsupisnotalapseoffaith,butanecessarydevelopmentinthe
journeyforreligiousunderstanding.ByadvocatingforJobtohavecontinuedtoseekout
theanswerstoquestionsthatarefundamentaltothedilemmaoftheinnocentsufferer,
Wieselismakingalargercommentaryabouttherolewehavetodayincontinuingtopush
theconversationsurroundingtheodicyanditsinadequacyintodaysclimate.The
sufferingweundeniablyobserveintheworldforceshumanitytomakeachoiceeither
alienatetheindividualsuffererandattributeblametothem,orrefutethetraditionalist
viewoftheodicyandthejust,allpowerfulGod.
Rubensteinengagesthisissuefromalessreligiouslyattachedperspective,andas
aresultcomestoamoredefinitiveconclusionabouttheneedforideologicalrethinking
ofreligiousnorms.Rubensteinadvancesthelogicalargumentconsistingofthethree
possibilitiesthataccompanythisdiscussion:theinnocentareguiltyandsuffer
accordingly,Godisunjustorevil,orthatthereisnoGod.Intheeyesofman,thelatter
mightbethemostterrifyingpropositionimaginable,evenmoresothananevilGod.
Thereisanevenmoreterrifyingpossibility:ifyouareinnocent,theremaybeno
Creator.EvenademonGodoffersmenthehopethattheyarenotnakedlyaloneinthe
cosmos,thattheymayfindatleastsometwistedhopeinservingtheSatanicCreator.If

thereisnoGod,weareofnogreatersignificancethananyinsect,and,likethemost
repugnantorganism,wehavenothingtohopeforbuteverlastingoblivion(Rubenstein,
240).RubensteinisverywillingtoacceptanalternatedefinitionorrolefortheGodin
oursocietyTherealquestioniswhetheranyinheritedimageofaprovidentialGod
continuestomakesenseintheworldofcomputers,theInternet,mediamanipulation,
rationalizedbureaucracy,organtransplants,interplanetaryexplorationandenvironmental
spoliation.Theartofthelatetwentiethcenturyislargelytheartofthetechnological
world.Onehasonlytocompareitsrepresentativecreatorswiththoseofearliercenturies
tobecomeawareoftheextraordinarytransformationinculturalandreligioussensibility
thathastakenplace.Godisabsentfromcontemporaryart;notsurprisingly,sotooisman.
Idonotsaythistofaulttheartist,thepoetandtheartistcannothelpthemselves.They
mustspeakthetruthastheyfindit.TheworldtheydescribeisaworldwithoutGod
(Rubenstein,249).Inthecontextoftodaysworld,Rubensteinonceagainassertsthe
inadequaciesofthetraditionalGodinhelpinghumanitynavigatetherelevantissuesthat
ahumanconstructedGodmustprovideguidancefor.
WhenRubensteinassertsthatthetraditionalistGodisdead,hemeansthatthe
humanconstructedvaluesthatweapplytoourviewofGodournolongerfeasiblefor
todaysclimate.Idonotbelievetheworldwilllongremaingodless,hegoesontosay,
Godsdie;othergodsarisetotaketheirplace(Rubenstein,250).Rubensteinseesthis
nextGodasamirrorforthemodernhumanpsyche,describingarealisticviewofthe
certitudeofmortalityandthejoysandpainofthehumanexperience,withoutthe
illusorypromiseofsalvation.RubensteinviewsGodinanuntraditionalmannernota

maninwhiterobescontrollingourcollectivedestiny,butahumanconstructthat
reinforcesandemphasizesourchangingsetofvaluesbasedonourneedsatthetime.
Usingtheirexperiencesandobservations,bothRubensteinandWieselargueforreligious
reform,andfortheconversationsurroundingGodandtheodicytocontinuetoprogressto
addressourmodernobservations.
Whilethesethreesourcesdiscussverydifferentapplicationsofreligious
concerns,theyareunifiedbythecommonbeliefinthenecessityforreligiouscultureto
bereworked.Eachsourceiscriticalofthereligiousinstitutiontheyface,andprovidesa
clearagendatoremedythesesituation.Allthreeseethenecessityinchangingreligionto
answertomodernsuffering,andtakeanunapologeticlookattherealityoftheinstitution
andthewaysinwhichitmustchange.ForMalcolmX,onereligionmustbeswappedfor
anothertoatonefortheproblematicoriginsofChristianityinAfricanAmericanculture.
WieselandRubensteinsuggestthatweshouldnolongerbeblindedbytheodicyinto
ignoringreality,andthattheimageofGodmustbereassessedinresponsetomodern
observations.Thecommonthreadbetweenthethreeisarefutationoftraditionalistviews:
assertingthattheusuallystagnantinstitutionofreligionisnotofflimitstoadaptationand
change.