 |
| 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 |
