Lacampagna, Italy-Facebook |
Edited and revised for another version of this work posted on academia.edu on August 20, 2022
---
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (July 1, 1646 – November 14, 1716)
Leibniz was a vital secondary exemplar in my United Kingdom/European theses work, especially the PhD. I have edited sections from my Doctorate to summarize his contributions to my work.
The term theodicy arose from G.W. Leibniz’ book in 1710 entitled Theodicy.[1] Robert M. Adams (1996) notes that the word theodicy is from the Greek, as theos is God and dike is justice.[2] Theodicy is a defence of the justice of God in the face of objections arising from the problem of evil in the world.[3]
Leibniz noted that evil itself only comes from privation.[14] Privation has been discussed on this blog, please see archives.
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.
This was posted on Facebook by Chucky. Thanks
Leibniz was a vital secondary exemplar in my United Kingdom/European theses work, especially the PhD. I have edited sections from my Doctorate to summarize his contributions to my work.
The term theodicy arose from G.W. Leibniz’ book in 1710 entitled Theodicy.[1] Robert M. Adams (1996) notes that the word theodicy is from the Greek, as theos is God and dike is justice.[2] Theodicy is a defence of the justice of God in the face of objections arising from the problem of evil in the world.[3]
The Eighteenth century[4]
was when Leibniz’ book Theodicy[5] was
published as was previously noted, and this era of history was when much of the
modern debate concerning the problem of evil and theodicy began[6]
Leibniz reasons God always chooses what is best, freely
within his nature and is vindicated within his creation, even though it
contains evil.[7] God co-operates in all the actions of his
creatures, and yet is not the author of sin.[8]
He made it clear that human beings must be free, even
though human freedom may appear incompatible with divine nature, as persons
must have freedom in order to be considered worthy of punishment for wrong
actions.[9]
Leibniz writes that the holy God co-operates in human evil.[10] Leibniz has a different view than Thiessen,[11]
which would be incompatibilistic, that is deterministic and reasons that
foreknowledge has to do with God’s determined will and is not dependent on free
human actions.[12] This predetermination should not be
understood as by necessity eliminating all human choice.[13]
Leibniz noted that evil itself only comes from privation.[14] Privation has been discussed on this blog, please see archives.
Leibniz believes God had an infinite number of worlds to
choose from to create, and chose the best possible world.[15]
He explains that God permits and promotes evil without
distracting from divine holiness and supreme goodness.[16]
Modified rationalism would oppose the
best possible world concepts of Leibniz from the Enlightenment era, and Mackie
from the modern era.[17]
In Theodicy, God’s
knowledge of future events in itself does not make them determinate, rather
because certain things will occur, God foreknows them.[18] This concept means that God can foresee human
rebellion as he knows all human souls, but he does not force or coerce persons
to oppose him.[19] However, since I accept that God is an infinite
and omnipotent deity,[20]
I think it reasonable that he has the ability to influence through
circumstances certain individuals to commit wrong actions, but I would consider
it possible for God to remain pure in nature as his motives remain good, as
Luther and Calvin noted.[21]
For Leibniz, God has the ability to allow angelic and human
sin and the suffering it promotes, yet God can promote and use sinful evil for
the greater good.[22] Leibniz’ approach would be within a
traditional Christian perspective,[23]
as are many free will and sovereignty approaches, although as discussed in the
theoretical Chapters in my Doctorate, Plantinga and Feinberg would deny
Leibniz’ claim that God could create a best possible world and would,[24]
instead, hold to ‘Modified Rationalism’ which states God, freely and without
necessity, created a good world that was one of many he could create.[25]
I too hold to Modified Rationalism.
Leibniz reasoned that God had very good reasons for his
election and dispensation of grace to some persons and recognized that these
reasons were unknown to persons in any detail.[26]
ADAMS, ROBERT. M. (1996)
‘Theodicy’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The
Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
AUGUSTINE (426)(1958) The City of God, Translated by Gerald G.
Walsh, Garden City, New York, Image Books.
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.
CALVIN, JOHN (1543)(1996) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will,
Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker
Book House.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (2003) What Does God Know and When Does He Know
It? Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, in David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books.
FLEW, ANTONY, R.M. HARE, AND BASIL MITCHELL (1996) ‘The Debate on the Rationality of Religious Belief’, in L.P. Pojman (ed.), Philosophy, The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.
FLEW, ANTONY AND A.MACINTRYE (1999) ‘Philosophy of Religion’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.
HILLE, ROLF (2004) ‘A
Biblical-Theological Response to the Problem of Theodicy in the Context of the
Modern Criticism of Religion’, in Evangelical
Review of Theology, Volume 28, Number 1, pp. 21-37. Carlisle, UK,
Evangelical Review of Theology.
HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A
Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New
York, The Free Press.
HUME, DAVID (1779)(2004) Dialogues
Concerning Natural Religion, Digireads.com/Neeland Media LLC, Lawrence,
Kansas.
LEIBNIZ, G.W. (1710)(1998) Theodicy, Translated by E.M. Huggard
Chicago, Open Court Classics.
LUTHER, MARTIN. (1525)(1972) ‘The Bondage of the Will’, in F.W. Strothmann and Frederick W. Locke (eds.), Erasmus-Luther: Discourse on Free Will, New York, Frederick Ungar Publishing Co., INC.
MACKIE, J.L. (1955)(1996) ‘Evil and Omnipotence’, in Mind, in Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruce Reichenbach, and David Basinger (eds.), Philosophy of Religion, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
MACKIE, J.L. (1955)(1996) ‘Evil and Omnipotence’, in Mind, in Michael Peterson, William Hasker, Bruce Reichenbach, and David Basinger (eds.), Philosophy of Religion, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
MACKIE, J.L. (1971)(1977)(2002)
‘Evil and Omnipotence’, in The Philosophy
of Religion, in Alvin C. Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids.
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
PETERSON, MICHAEL (1982) Evil and the Christian God, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
PHILLIPS, D.Z. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.
PHILLIPS, D.Z. (2005) The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God, Fortress Press, Minneapolis.
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.
POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company.
SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated
by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.
THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology,
Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
[1] Leibniz, G.W. (1710)(1998) Theodicy.
[2] Adams (1996: 794).
[3] Adams (1996: 794). David Hume in Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion explains that geniuses over
the ages have continued to look for proofs and arguments concerning God. Hume (1779)(2004: 2). Theodicy would involve demonstrating that God
exists and is good even as the problem of evil exists.
[5] Leibniz, G.W. (1710)(1998).
[6] Hille (2004: 22).
[7] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 61).
[8] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 61).
[9] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 123).
[10] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 123).
[13] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 147).
[14] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 219). Schelling also discusses this view of
Leibniz. Schelling (1845)(1936: 45).
[16] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 61).
[17] Leibniz
(1710)(1990). Mackie (1971) in
Plantinga (1977)(2002: 32-33).
[18] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 144). Augustine (426)(1958: 106).
[19] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 144).
[21] Luther (1525)(1972: 130). Calvin (1543)(1996: 37-40).
[22] Leibniz (1710)(1998: 61).
[23] Leibniz would
likely be the equivalent of a modern day compatibilist. Leibniz (1710)(1998: 61).
[25] Feinberg (1994: 36).
Bayern, Germany-trekearth |
Oh, your first landscape is wonderfull. I love the red color, it's incredible!Get some wonderful photos
ReplyDeleteHave a good days DR!
I agree, I really like the red. Facebook is a very good source.
ReplyDeleteBlessings, Miss Winter.:)
Maybe you should write a book, either on theology/philosophy/theodicy, etc., or maybe it should be a book that has questions that blogger and Facebook friends have asked you, and your answers to them. Maybe you could compile questions from past blog article comments, and maybe ask new ones on Blogger and on Facebook, and then, once the book is published, advertise it on Blogger and on Facebook. I think I remember that you did write an e-book in the past, but I haven't heard much about that.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the marketing idea, Jeff.
ReplyDeleteSomething to consider.
Yes, I wrote an ebook that is on the right side of the blog.
Hey! This is my 1st comment here so I just wanted to give a quick
ReplyDeleteshout out and tell you I really enjoy reading your articles.
Can you suggest any other blogs/websites/forums that cover the same topics?
Many thanks!
My web-site ... novoline automaten tricks
Dear Buzz user,
ReplyDeleteIn October 2011 we announced that Google Buzz was shutting down. On or after 17 July 2013, Google will take the last step in the shut-down and will save a copy of your Buzz posts to your Google Drive, a service for storing files online. Google will store two (2) types of files to your Google Drive and the newly-created files will not count against your storage limits.
The first type of file will be private, only accessible to you, containing a snapshot of the Google Buzz public and private posts that you authored.
The second type of file will contain a copy of only your Google Buzz public posts. By default it will be viewable by anyone with the link and may appear in search results and on your Google Profile (if you've linked to your Buzz posts). Note, any existing links to your Google Buzz content will redirect users to this file.
Any comments that you made on other users' posts will only be saved to those users' files and not to yours. Once the change described in this email is final, only that user will be able to change the sharing settings of those files. This means that if you have commented on another author's private post, that author could choose to make that post and its comments public. If you would like to avoid that possibility, delete all your Buzz content now.
The new Google Drive files will only contain comments from users who previously enabled Google Buzz, and the files will not contain comments that were deleted prior to moving the data to your Google Drive.
Once the files have been created, they will be treated the same as any other Drive file. They are yours to do with as you please. This includes downloading them, updating who can access them or deleting them.
Before these files are created, you can view the Google Buzz posts that you have authored here. If you do not want any of your Buzz posts or comments to be saved to Google Drive files, you can immediately delete your Google Buzz account and data.
Thank you for using Google Buzz.
'Hey! This is my 1st comment here so I just wanted to give a quick
ReplyDeleteshout out and tell you I really enjoy reading your articles.
Can you suggest any other blogs/websites/forums that cover the same topics?
Many thanks!'
Check out my links...
Google Buzz, buzzed off?
ReplyDeleteNo shock with Google+.
Dear Customer,
ReplyDeleteOur Technical Service department has recently updated our online banking
services, and due to this upgrade we sincerely call your attention to follow
below link, click to reconfirm your online account details. Failure to
confirm the online banking details will suspend you from accessing your
account online. If you get this message in your spam, move it to inbox to
enable the link to be clickable.
https://www1.royalbank.com/cgi-bin/rbaccess/rbc
We use the latest security measures to ensure that your online banking
experience is safe and secure. The administration asks you to accept our
apologies for the inconvenience caused and expresses gratitude for
cooperation.
Thanks for banking with us.
Royal Bank of Canada Security Advisor
RBC Financial Group
Never had a Royal Bank account...
ReplyDeleteThanks for sharing your thoughts about marc gasol. Regards
ReplyDeleteReview my blog post; cantabria
marc gasol?
ReplyDeleteAre you stoned or drunk early this morning?
Wow, this post is good, my sister is analyzing these kinds of
ReplyDeletethings, so I am going to inform her.
Cheers...
ReplyDeleteHowdy! I simply want to give an enormous thumbs up for the nice info you could have right here on
ReplyDeletethis post. I will likely be coming back to your weblog for extra soon.
Newest Post
ReplyDeleteThanks for ones marvelous posting! I definitely
ReplyDeleteenjoyed reading it, you're a great author. I will always bookmark your blog and will often come back from now on. I want to encourage you to ultimately continue your great work, have a nice day!
my website ... www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0ZOJ8dcQIA
Hi Russ,
ReplyDeletebeen a long time since I've done this. I see Jeff still has the "good looking" picture of himself as his avatar.,,
Of course, God does not force us to oppose him. That was an argument from your work, here that stuck in my mind. My thoughts went immediately to Job 1. Satan needs permission to harm people. The idea, I believe in this part of Job's story is, Satan's job is to test man's loyalty to God. Not that God wants to harm men. Neither is he wanting to force men to pledge commitment, devotion,...etc. However, if there were nothing to test our loyalty, devotion and love for God, (i.e, the tree?) would there be hatred, disdain, disloyalty...etc? We know the question here has been posed more times than can be counted. For that reason and the Bibles record of God's Angels and Satan working for God, God does not push us to oppose Him. He asks us to edify Him.
Russ, I need help on a Webmaster Tools thing. I attempted to submit sitemap data and was given an error for each url I submitted. The tools have a place where I can delete the URL that is causing the offense. So, I did delete them. Now, I have lost my online presence. I'm not in the Google search engine, unless you specifically search for my website. or Blog site. Should I have deleted the Url in the sitemap section of Web master tools? I still have a blog. Those urls are still in the blog and have not disappeared.
Jim
Thanks, Jim.
ReplyDeleteAs Erickson has noted, cited on my blogs, God has a perfect and permissible will and most of what occurs in fallen reality is permissible will. Even so, God does will all things, thoughts, acts, actions theologically and from philosophy we would see this as first cause. Human beings, and angelic beings, when involved secondary causes. As Calvin noted, being useful on this subject, God's motives are pure in all that he causes/wills as first cause where as secondary finite causes can sin, and have wrong motives. This assumes significant freedom for secondary causes although limited free will, not libertarian.
I am not actually familiar with your URL issue. The new Blogger template, if that is what you are discussing is far more tricky than previous. I would sign in to your blog (s) and make sure that is much is activated as possible, correcting errors where you can.
'It appears as though some of the written text in your content are running off the screen.'
ReplyDeleteI run/jog up here in the loft, as it is fine for the knees on carpet...
Hеу admіn, I just wanted tо give уou а bгіef hеаds up that your сurrent URL is being flаggeԁ аs a ρoѕѕibly maliciοus internet sіte in mу brοwseг safari. Ι'd highly suggest having somebody look into it. You could possibly lose a lot of guests due to this problem.
ReplyDeleteNo, doubt it.
ReplyDeleteNew Post: Karl Barth
ReplyDeleteBowman template, custom by me.
ReplyDeleteCheers
The main difference between them is that you
ReplyDeleteare going to need some basic equipment, and
the pace will slower down.
The main difference between you and I is my comments make sense in context...
ReplyDeleteGood day! I simply want to give an enormous thumbs
ReplyDeleteup for the great data you might have right here on this post.
I shall be coming again to your weblog for more soon.
Thank you. Good week to you.
ReplyDeleteWhat's up mates, how is everything, and what you would like to say concerning this post, in my view its genuinely amazing in support of me.
ReplyDeleteMates?
ReplyDeleteFrom the Southern Hemisphere or the British Isles?
Fresh shark or fish n' chips...
Great post! We are linking to this great
ReplyDeletepost on our site. Keep up the good writing.
Whoa! Тhis blog looks еxactly lіke my
ReplyDeleteold one! It's on a completely different topic but it has pretty much the same page layout and design. Wonderful choice of colors!
Cheers.
ReplyDeleteYes, I like the dark red, rare to see in much anything.
ReplyDeleteCheers