Layne Wallace is the Senior Pastor of Rosemary Baptist Church in Roanoke Rapids, North Carolina. He earned his M. Div. from Campbell University, his D. Min. from Truett Theological Seminary, and his Ph.D. from B. H. Carroll Theological Institute. He has authored several articles on biblical interpretation and congregational life.

• Preface– Introduction: Theodicy and Its Importance for Today’s Christian– Witness– Why Study Evil– Leibniz and Constructing Theodicies – The Apparent Absence of a Full Theodicy in the Bible – The Possibility of Theodicy – The Necessity of Theodicy – Karl Barth– A Historical Investigation into Theodicies – Organizing the Material and the Augustinian/Irenaean Typology – First Term Theodicies – Second Term Theodicies – Non-Theodicies– Nothingness in Dialogue – Understanding Barth’s View of Evil – Church Dogmatics 3.3 Paragraph 50 Nothingness– Church Dogmatics 3.1 Paragraph 42 Creation and Chaos – Church Dogmatics 4.1 Paragraph 60 Sin – Barth, Augustine, and Calvin – John Hick and Karl Barth – Irenaeus – Hick and the Purpose of Suffering – The Purpose of Suffering in Barth – The Demonic in Hick and Barth – In Summation– Shadowy Vestiges or Absolute Nothingness? – To See Shadows – Barth’s Shadow Side of Creation – Barth’s Use of Job – David Bentley Hart – The Grandeur of God and the Absolute Nothingness of Evil – The Inability to See God’s Purposes – The World as Fallen – The Rejection of the Question – The Only Acceptable Statement of the Problem of Evil: Dostoevsky – The Commonality Between Barth and Hart – Is Theodicy Possible– Why Barth is Insufficient – A Broader Outlook – Barth’s Weaknesses – How to Proceed – Five Thesis – Appendix: Manifesto of the 93 German Intellectuals – Index.

“Theological students with a passing acquaintance with Barth likely know he had little use for the enterprise of apologetics, and to the extent that they associate theodicy with apologetics, they may likewise assume that Barth does not offer a substantial treatment of the problem of evil. Wallace contends that while evil was indeed a significant locus in Barth’s theology, it was inadequately developed. This book gestures toward a more robust theology of evil by bringing Barth’s thought into dialogue with other proposals that lead Wallace to offer pastorally oriented correctives to these shortcomings."—Steven R. Harmon, Professor of Historical Theology, Gardner-Webb University School of Divinity