This study rereads Qoheleth and the Babylonian Theodicy through a trauma lens as opposed to the generic lens of speculative wisdom encompassing retributive justice, retribution theology, and the deed-consequence nexus and their consequent view of the gods’/God’s justice. According to retribution theology, actions correlate appropriately to consequences; however, in light of their suffering and resilience, both authors are disillusioned, struggling to make sense of life’s predicaments despite their religiosity and placating of the deity, as they also resist retribution theology. Rereading Qoheleth and the Babylonian Theodicy through a trauma lens shows that both sufferers seek answers and cope with suffering similarly to modern readers

If God is truly good, then why did my grandmother die of cancer? Why did I have to bury my child? Why does the darkness overcome so many? These questions typify discussion of theodicy. What we want to know is, “Why do bad things happen to good people?” The book of Jonah, however, presents us with the other side of the problem when he cries out at God because God has caused some good thing to hap-pen to bad people in the world. Indeed, what are we to do when God forgives the evildoer? And this was Jonah’s fear from the very beginning.

Of course there are drawbacks to the adjunct life, and of course the ideal for pursuing scholarship is
a research professorate. But that’s not where God has me—or you, if you’re an adjunct. Rather than
ruminate about the downsides of adjuncting, I’ve found that appreciating and taking advantage of
time and energy freed up by not being a full-time faculty member more than makes up for the model’s detriments.