Theodicy Models

Dubai-trekearth

Theodicy Models

Very slight revisions for a posting on academia.edu, April 28, 2023

Theodicy Models from my PhD. A model of God's divine justice was understood from a European, Dutch perspective as a retaliation model.

Vermeer explains that his three theodicy items are models and not symbols, because they represent abstract distinct theoretical concepts, as opposed to straight forward statements associated with certain theodicy ideas.[1]  As noted earlier, in contrast, van der Ven states there is no difference between theodicy symbols and models, and a clear distinction is not found.[2]  Vermeer presents retaliation, plan and compassion models.[3]  He notes that each model contains a different understanding of divine omnipotence and goodness.[4] 

The retaliation model, to Vermeer, answers the question of why people are suffering.[5]  Vermeer appeals heavily to Hick’s critical evaluation of Augustine and Calvin,[6] which has already been reviewed (in my PhD), and views Augustine as the forefather of retaliation thought in regard to the problem of evil.[7]  Vermeer correctly points out that Augustine, with the use of free will theodicy, blames human evil and suffering on free will disobedience to God.[8]  Augustine  writes that divine punishment was allotted to those that freely sinned.[9]  In regard to the suffering of children, Augustine, as does Calvin in the Reformation era, would appeal to original sin to explain why this occurs.[10]  Children, although innocent compared to adults, who reasonably comprehend their sinfulness, would still be corrupt creatures because of original sin and the fall.[11]  Vermeer notes[12] that Calvin, like Augustine, believed human beings freely rebelled in evil against God,[13] and thus all persons were worthy of divine punishment, the full extent of this only avoidable through election to salvation.[14]  For Vermeer, the retaliation model uses the ‘doctrine of divine omnipotence’ which states that God is all powerful and yet human suffering is attributed to human sin.[15]  So ultimately people receive what they deserve and are fully punished for their sins outside of God’s grace in election.[16]  Vermeer, unlike Hick,[17] admits the retaliation model can be reasonably upheld without the justice and goodness of God being questioned.[18] 

The plan model consists of the assumption that human suffering is part of the divine plan.[19]  Vermeer portrays the plan model as stating human rebellion causes evil and suffering, and although it opposes God, suffering is ultimately part of God’s divine plan.[20]  The plan model, like the retaliation model, holds to the doctrine of divine omnipotence, but according to the concepts of Leibniz,[21] and especially Hick,[22] as we have seen God uses suffering for the purpose of soul-making.[23]  Vermeer points out that with the retaliation model, divine punishment results in suffering,[24] in contrast with the plan model where suffering is part of God’s scheme as God created the best possible world where free will creatures would inevitably sin.[25]  For the plan model, for Vermeer, God’s goodness could not be questioned as the problem of evil was all part of a divine plan.[26]

This differentiation presented between the retaliation and plan models seems too simplistic.[27]  It is apparent that the writings of Augustine and Calvin both include the concept of God saving the elect from sin while, at the same time, judging humanity for it.[28]  Augustine (398-399)(1992) describes God’s plan for those in Christ that are, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, justified, separated from the wicked, subjected to the authority of Scripture, and gathered together for a single aspiration of acquiring the celestial reward.[29]  This commentary by Augustine, portrays a divine plan of God to save followers from the evil and suffering in creation.[30]  Calvin (1543)(1996) explains that God can take the wicked actions of people, yet still accomplish his work and execute his judgment.[31]  Within that statement, one can see a judgment or retaliation model, and at the same time God is accomplishing his work concerning humanity which is implying a plan model.[32]  Calvin writes, in the same text, that God does a work of perseverance in a believer, so by grace the believer stays in Christ for life.[33]  God’s work of perseverance in elected individuals[34] is clearly not retaliation, but a divine plan to save sinful persons despite the fact they are worthy of punishment.[35]  Instead, the atoning and resurrection work of Christ allows the elect to avoid the penalty for sin, being part of the divine plan of salvation.[36] 

The compassion model, for Vermeer, has been largely rejected throughout Christian history, although in the twentieth century it gathered some support.[37]  The concept is that God has compassion for human beings and does not focus on retaliation or plan ideas.[38]  As with van der Ven’s symbols,[39] the notion of God’s impassibility is discussed in regard to a compassion model.[40]  Vermeer correctly points out that there exists in Scripture, anthropomorphic language[41]  to describe God as one who, like the human beings he created, has feelings and emotions.[42]  The fact God is a loving being would allow for the logical and reasonable deduction that he is a compassionate being.[43]

A vital point Vermeer makes concerning the compassion model is that it asks how God responds to human suffering,[44] while the retaliation and plan models are more concerned with why God permits evil and suffering.[45]  The compassion model envisions a God that is immanent within his creation,[46] the emphasis on the creator as a God of love, leads to this conclusion.[47]  Within the compassion model, the ‘doctrine of divine goodness’ clearly takes precedence over the doctrine of divine omnipotence.[48]  Theologically and Biblically, the compassion model is a vital aspect of the atoning work of Christ, and therefore would be important for Christian theodicy.[49]  Christ as God renounced his privileges and experienced an agonizing death on the cross.[50]  For Christ as the God-man, to renounce his rights as God and die for the humanity he loves, definitely shows compassion[51] as does God’s participation in the death[52] and resurrection of Christ.  A compassion theodicy symbol or model is therefore acceptable within orthodox Christianity,[53] although I believe judgment and plan are vital theodicy concepts.[54]

AUGUSTINE (388-395)(1964) On Free Choice of the Will, Translated by Anna S.Benjamin and L.H. Hackstaff, Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.

           

AUGUSTINE (398-399)(1992) Confessions, Translated by Henry Chadwick, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

AUGUSTINE (400-416)(1987)(2004) On the Trinity, Translated by Reverend Arthur West Haddan, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series One, Volume 3, Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia.

AUGUSTINE (421)(1998) Enchiridion, Translated by J.F. Shaw,  Denver, The Catholic Encyclopedia.

http://www.knight.org/advent

AUGUSTINE (426)(1958) The City of God, Translated by Gerald G. Walsh, Garden City, New York, Image Books.

AUGUSTINE (427)(1997) On Christian Doctrine, Translated by D.W. Robertson Jr., Upper Saddle River, N.J., Prentice Hall.

AUGUSTINE (427b)(1997) On Christian Teaching, Translated by R.P.H. Green, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book IV, Translated by Henry Beveridge, Grand Rapids, The Christian Classic Ethereal Library, Wheaton College.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/institutes.html

CALVIN, JOHN (1540)(1973) Romans and Thessalonians, Translated by Ross Mackenzie, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

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

CALVIN, JOHN (1550)(1978) Concerning Scandals, Translated by John W. Fraser, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books. 

CALVIN, JOHN (1553)(1952) Job, Translated by Leroy Nixon, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CALVIN, JOHN (1554)(1965) Genesis, Translated by John King, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust.

HICK, JOHN (1970) Evil and The God of Love, London, The Fontana Library.

HICK, JOHN (1978) ‘Present and Future Life’, Harvard Theological Review, Volume 71, Number 1-2, January-April, Harvard University.

HICK, JOHN (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.),  Atlanta, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1993)  ‘Afterword’ in GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

HICK, JOHN (1993) The Metaphor of God Incarnate, Louisville, Kentucky, John Know Press.

HICK, JOHN (1994) Death and Eternal Life, Louisville, Kentucky, John Knox Press.

HICK, JOHN (1999) ‘Life after Death’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press.

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

PAILIN, DAVID A. (1999) ‘Process Theology’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (1993) Practical Theology, Translated by Barbara Schultz, AC Kampen, Netherlands, Kok Pharos Publishing House.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (1998) God Reinvented?, Leiden, Brill.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (2005) ‘Theodicy Items and Scheme’, in a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud University, Nijmegen.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (2006a) ‘Dates of Nijmegen authors’, in a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud University, Nijmegen.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES (2006b) ‘Symbols versus Models’, in a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud University, Nijmegen.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES, PAUL VERMEER, AND ERIC VOSSEN (1996) ‘Learning Theodicy’, in Journal of Empirical Theology, Volume 9, pp. 67-85. Kampen, The Netherlands, Journal of Empirical Theology.

VAN DER VEN, JOHANNES AND ERIC VOSSEN (1996) Suffering: Why for God’s Sake? Grand Rapids, Eerdmans.

VAN HOLTEN, WILLIAM (1999) ‘Hell and the Goodness of God’,  in Religious Studies, Volume 35, Number 1, March, pp. 37-55. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

VAN TIL, CORNELIUS (1969) A Christian Theory of Knowledge, Nutley, New Jersey,  Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.

VAN TIL, CORNELIUS (1977) Christianity and Barthianism, Nutley, New Jersey,  Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.

VERMEER, PAUL (1999) Learning Theodicy, Leiden, Brill. 

---

[1] Vermeer (1999: 18). 

[2] van der Ven (2006b: 1).

[3] Vermeer (1999: 21).

[4] Vermeer (1999: 21).

[5] Vermeer (1999: 22).

[6] Hick (1970: 221). 

[7] Vermeer (1999: 22).

[8] Vermeer (1999: 22).  Augustine (388-395)(1964: 3).

[9] Augustine (388-395)(1964: 3).

[10] Vermeer (1999: 25).

[11] Vermeer (1999: 25).

[12] Vermeer (1999: 26).

[13] Calvin (1543)(1998: 37).  Augustine (388-395)(1964: 116-117).

[14] Calvin (1543)(1996: 154, 349).

[15] Vermeer (1999: 27).

[16] Vermeer (1999: 27).

[17] In regard to everlasting hell, for example.  Hick (1970: 377).

[18] Vermeer (1999: 26).

[19] Vermeer (1999: 27).

[20] Vermeer (1999: 33).

[21] Leibniz reasons that God works all things to the greater good.  Leibniz (1710)(1998: 61).  This could perhaps include the idea God would develop in the best possible world, as Leibniz viewed it, human souls.

[22] Hick in Davis (2001: 48).

[23] Vermeer (1999: 34-35).

[24] Vermeer (1999: 27).

[25] Vermeer (1999: 30).

[26] Vermeer (1999: 36).

[27] Vermeer (1999: 35).

[28] Augustine (398-399)(1992: 303).  Calvin (1543)(1996: 37, 178-179). 

[29] Augustine (398-399)(1992: 303).

[30] Augustine (398-399)(1992: 303).

[31] Calvin (1543)(1996: 37).

[32] Calvin (1543)(1996: 37).

[33] Calvin (1543)(1996: 178-179).

[34] Calvin (1543)(1996: 178-179).

[35] Calvin (1543)(1996: 37).

[36] Augustine (398-399)(1992: 303).  Calvin (1543)(1996: 37, 178-179). 

[37] Vermeer (1999: 36).

[38] Vermeer (1999: 36).

[39] van der Ven (1998: 212).

[40] Vermeer (1999: 36).

[41] A figure of speech used in Scripture that describes God with human physical characteristics.  Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 11).  Anthropomorphisms are Biblical attempts to express realities about God through human analogy.  Erickson (1994: 268).

[42] Vermeer (1999: 37).

[43] Pailin (1999: 469).

[44] Vermeer (1999: 38).

[45] Vermeer (1999: 38).

[46] Vermeer (1999: 44).

[47] Vermeer (1999: 44).

[48] Vermeer (1999: 45).

[49] Moltmann (1993: 226-227).

[50] Moltmann (1993: 226-227).

[51] Moltmann (1993: 226-227).

[52] Moltmann (1993: 226-227).

[53] Vermeer (1999: 45).

[54] van der Ven (1993: 173).  van der Ven (1998: 212-213).  Augustine (398-399)(1992: 303).  Calvin (1543)(1996: 37, 178-179).  

PhD Full Version PDF