The problem of evil, empirical theology, and science

Train ride, Whistler, BC (photo from trekearth.com)

Hans-Gunter Heimbrock provides the opinion that since religion and faith is experimental within empirical theology (which uses questionnaires and statistics), the social sciences have been used to examine social dynamics, conditions and contexts of religious life. He reasons that pastoral work has also been assisted in this process. Heimbrock (2005: 273-299). Philosophically and theologically from my Reformed perspective, I do not view Christian faith and philosophy as primarily experimental, although I can grant Heimbrock’s point that the social sciences can deal with the existing experimental aspects of religion and assist in understanding. Heimbrock (2005: 273-299). Christian doctrines can be examined through the use of questionnaires. The experimental nature of empirical theology can not only lead to a better understanding of practical theology within the Christian Church, but when applied to the problem of evil related questions in my PhD project, can help to explain how the theoretical theories of theologians and philosophers are being understood and accepted by persons that attend church.

If there are misunderstandings and disagreements between professionals and amateurs in regard to the problem of evil, for example, the empirical aspect within my PhD thesis allows for both pastoral work, and theoretical theology to be assisted by feedback from church attendees of various denominations and groups. It should be explained that in my view, and contrary to some within empirical theology, empirical findings do not establish new Christian doctrines, or potentially overturn orthodox Biblical views. Christian doctrine is determined through the use and interpretation of Scripture and should also take precedence over whether or not Biblical doctrines are accepted by persons within questionnaire results.

Professor of philosophy and religion, Karl E. Peters comments in his abstract that empirical theology is in contrast to science in that it seeks to understand the nature and source of human fulfilment, and science seeks to understand the world regardless of the implications of human welfare. Peters (1992: 297-325). Empirical theology is like science in that it affirms naturalism, accepts limitations on human knowledge, and therefore makes all religious knowledge tentative. Peters (1992: 297-325). Both scientific and religious explanations are sought for meaning in life, and a key criterion for justifying ideas is to explain experience and to focus on new research. Peters (1992: 297-325). Within my Reformed perspective there is an acknowledgement that science is dependent on the use of naturalism. Y. Krikorian explains naturalism is part of nature, contains nothing supernatural, and that the scientific method should be used to explain all aspects of reality, including those assumed to be ‘spiritual’. Krikorian (1944)(2007: 1).

C.A. Dubray writes that naturalism is not primarily a special system as much as a view held by many within philosophy and religion. It is not so much a set of positive or negative doctrines, but a general attitude, which influences many ideas. Dubray (1911)(2007: 1). Nature is viewed as the fundamental and original source for all that exists, and therefore all reality needs to be explained in terms of nature. All events find an adequate explanation within nature itself. Dubray (1911)(2007: 1).

I can accept that science must use natural and not supernatural means and is clearly often a discipline with different methods than theology or philosophy. One should not expect scientific method to be religious in nature. I disagree with Krikorian that science, which tests material matter, can or should be the method by which immaterial spiritual issues are explained. God is spirit in John 4:24, and Biblically would have existed prior to the beginning and creation of matter in Genesis 1. Many Christians of moderate positions and various traditions would disagree with the concept that nature is the fundamental and original source for all that exists, and I disagree with this position as well. James W. Sire notes that there have been theistic critics that have found fault with naturalism. Sire (1977: 74). This was based on the conviction that a personal God was behind the universe and that naturalism in itself did not provide an adequate reason why human beings were valuable. Sire (1977: 74). Human beings are unique, but so were gorillas, and there remained the problem of establishing the value of human beings within naturalism. Sire (1977: 74).

Thiessen explains that since naturalism holds that nature is the whole of reality, everything that occurs is due to the laws of nature. He comments that Scripture recognizes that existence of the laws of nature, but it is reasoned they do not operate independently of God. Thiessen (1956: 186). God concurs with the laws he has established, and Thiessen reasons that miracles and revelation can occur when God operates outside of laws he established. Thiessen (1956: 186).

With Thiessen’s concept naturalists and moderate Christians would not necessarily disagree on scientific facts, but Biblical Christians would accept a revealed supernatural source behind nature, that the naturalist would deny. Krikorian (1944)(2007: 1). It can reasoned therefore, that Christians can embrace the similarities science has with empirical theology without a necessary abandonment of the belief that God revealed himself and his plan of salvation within history. Empirical theology within practical approaches can therefore without necessary contradiction, complement philosophical, theology in the context of research concerning the problem of evil and theodicy, which concerns the justice of God within his creation which contains evil.

Am I denying that science can make progress in solving some problems, due to its experimental nature? No, science has made discoveries that have assisted humanity, and has helped persons understand many realities. My Reformed perspective deduces that human corruption cannot be entirely corrected scientifically, but human beings are changed permanently to avoid evil, only by the regenerating work of God. I reason that scientific progress has helped humanity tremendously to live better quality lives, but human beings are capable of committing as grotesque and intense evils as ever in the 21st Century. This is so, in my view, because scientific knowledge has not as of yet been able to change the essential nature of human beings. Even if science could perfect the physical nature of persons to avoid evil actions, as the Bible indicates that human beings have a spirit (Luke 16, Luke 23:43, 2 Corinthians 12:2-5) it needs to be considered if materially based science could perfect the human spirit as well to avoid all wrong actions.

This would appear doubtful. Philosophy and theology have assisted human beings throughout history to better understand life, but neither of these disciplines can provide a remedy to the problem of evil, but can help to explain evil and suffering through effective theodicy. The Biblical remedy to the problem of evil is the atoning work of Christ, and his resurrection applied to followers and an ultimately culminated Kingdom of God.

DUBRAY, C.A. (1911)(2007) ‘Naturalism’ in New Advent: Catholic Encyclopedia, New York, Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/10713a.htm

HEIMBROCK, HANS-GUNTER (2005) ‘From Data to Theory: Elements of Methodology in Empirical Phenomenological Research in Practical Theology’ in International Journal of Practical Theology, Volume 9, December, Berlin, Walter D. Gruyter.http://xolopo.de/religionswissenschaften/data_theory_elements_met
hodology_empirical_15063.html

KRIKORIAN, K. (1944)(2007) (ed.), Naturalism and the Human Spirit, New York, Columbia University Press, in Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/naturalism/

PETERS, KARL, E. (1992) ‘Empirical Theology in the Light of Science, in The Journal of Religion and Science, Volume 27 Issue 3 Page 297-325, September, Oxford, Zygon, Blackwell Publishing.http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-
9744.1992.tb01068.x

SIRE, JAME W (1975) The Universe Next Door, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Harehills, Leeds, England (photo from trekearth.com)