Evolving theology in a sense

Campo Del Moro, Madrid (photo from trekearth.com)

I have been discussing with my good friend from Florida, Documentary Man, some of the evolution (pardon that term) from my approach with my MPhil thesis (Wales, 2003), to my PhD thesis (Wales, 2010). He is reading the PhD thesis.

Here in this example, we can see how the terms 'in a sense' are relevant to theological and philosophical concepts as what I wrote in my MPhil thesis was more so from a practical theological perspective looking at philosophy of religion, whereas as my PhD thesis has a more developed philosophy of religion perspective.

From MPhil

Within this thesis it will be obvious that my view on God and the problem of evil has been somewhat influenced by the theology of John Calvin. This will be explained throughout the thesis; however, he held that God willed evil for the greater good without being a sinful contradictory being as God’s motives were pure, whereas those that sinned had impure motives. Some would object to this view stating that it is determinism, believing God must be coercing human beings to sin and commit evil actions within this system. Simon Blackburn defines determinism as follows:

The doctrine that every event has a cause. The usual explanation of this is that for every event, there is some antecedent state, related in such a way that it would break a law of nature for this antecedent state to exist yet the event not to happen. Blackburn (1996: 102).

In the case of human sin, John Calvin did not believe that God determined that people sin, and nor do I. God was not the antecedent for sin. I agree that God can use human sin for the greater good, yet human beings have free will and freely sin by choice within a sinful nature. Calvin stated concerning free will:

If freedom is opposed to coercion, I both acknowledge and consistently maintain that choice is free and I hold anyone who thinks otherwise to be a heretic. If, I say, it were called free in this sense of not being coerced nor forcibly moved by an external impulse, but moving of its own accord, I have no objection. Calvin (1543)(1996: 68).

Human beings in Calvin’s thinking were not forced by God to sin, but God as an infinite being had and used the power to use their sin for the greater good. So to say that God willed evil for the greater good means that God could use sinful actions of others in order to accomplish his divine purpose. Calvin stated:

For we do not say that the wicked sin of necessity in such a way as to imply that they sin without wilful and deliberate evil intent. The necessity comes from the fact that God accomplishes his work, which is sure and steadfast, through them. At the same time, however, the will and purpose to do evil which dwells within them makes them liable to censure. But, it is said, they are driven and forced to this by God. Indeed, but in such a way that in a single deed the action of God is one thing and their own action is another. For they gratify their evil and wicked desires, but God turns this wickedness so as to bring his judgements (judgments) to execution. Calvin (1543)(1996: 37).

God could set up events in such a way that someone would freely choose to sin, but this is not done in such a way that God is forcing or determining one to do so. Within this thesis I want to make it clear that I believe the problem of evil is, in large measure, a human problem. I believe in a human fall through sinful choice. God can still will, in a sense, that these sinful actions work for the greater good, but I do not believe in a Universe where God forces and predetermines people to commit individual sin. People are sinful in nature as they are descendants of Adam. This inherited and sinful nature means people will freely choose to sin and God does not coerce them into doing so. He may provide situations where he knows that certain individuals will sin, but his motives in this are for the greater good. This is not the most satisfying doctrine I suppose, but Biblically and philosophically valid nonetheless. This concept will be discussed throughout my thesis.

End of MPhil quote

PhD amendment

The MPhil argument

God wills evil for the greater good.

God does not cause, as in force or coerce significantly free human thoughts and actions.

A practical theological and less philosophical use of the term cause is provided.

Persons cause significantly free human actions.

Therefore:

Hard determinism is not used by God when persons sin.

I wrote my MPhil in 2003, and since then my understanding of compatibilism has increased. Plus, I need to point out that my advisor wanted me to clearly point out that God was not in practical theological terms the antecedent cause of sin, as in making persons sin. I still agree with the statement that God does not determine that people sin in the sense that I do not believe God uses compulsion or force. God was not the antecedent (preceding cause) of sin in the sense of God coercing or forcing people to commit sinful acts.

The point I was making was that God does not use hard determinism to cause people to sin as if they were sinning by compulsion and not freely.

However, it should be pointed out that in another more strictly philosophical sense, as God is sovereign over all events, he is the primary cause of evil and sin and he determines and allows human beings to freely sin as the secondary cause. In that sense God is the antecedent of sin.

However, God's motives remain pure in all that he wills. The statement was denying hard determinism, but not soft determinism.

With my PhD I now approach the topic more from the perspective of philosophy of religion and less from a practical theological perspective as with the MPhil. This is more so the case than a changing of my mind with the topic.

The PhD argument

God wills evil for the greater good.

God is the cause of all things.

A technical, philosophical use of the term cause is used.

God has the power to prohibit evil, and therefore what he does not prohibit he sanctions/causes.

Persons are a secondary cause of significantly free human actions.

Therefore:

Hard determinism is not used by God when persons sin.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
---

Photos from the Skypark in Marina Bay Sands Hotel, Singapore

Thanks, Mom.