Henri Blocher (1994) notes theodicy are failures in themselves and must have ideas within that square with Biblical revelation in order to be true and beneficial.[1] I do not agree that all theodicy are failures in themselves,[2] but can grant a Christian theodicy needs the support of Scripture,[3] which connects the reader to the salvific work of Christ.[4] As mentioned in Chapter One in my Doctorate, he explains that philosophical explanations have failed in dealing with the problem of evil.[5] Although I somewhat disagree with this comment,[6] I can acknowledge philosophical theodicy does not take the place of effective practical theology that can assist a sufferer in having a true Christian religious experience. Carl Henry (1983), also noted in Chapter One, reasons that theistic arguments do not in themselves vindicate God,[7] and God’s revelation is required.[8] In other words, through the study of Scripture and personal experience with God through revelation, the creator can be better understood,[9] even though he willingly allows evil.[10]
July 10, 2013
The understanding can be taken from the works of Blocher and Henry that even reasonable, logical successful theodicies and defences, and I favour a Reformed sovereignty approach, within the disciplines of Philosophy and Theology, still basically primarily deal with the theoretical.
When I passed my Wales, Bangor MPhil thesis only degree it was determined by academic reviewers that I had reasonably and logically dealt with the problem of evil, primarily. When I had passed my Wales, Trinity Saint David, PhD thesis only degree it was determined by academic reviewers that I had reasonably and logically dealt with theodicy and problems of evil, primarily. In both cases I had adequately dealt with complex theories as well as practical and empirical theologies.
In the non-academic, real world massive problems of logical evils, gratuitous evils, and what I deem subtle evils, as well as related sufferings, still exist on personal and corporate levels throughout the world, quite obviously, even if my theodicy is reasonable and for the most part, at least, sound.
But it is the remedy, the atoning work of Christ and the resurrection from Scripture that Blocher and Henry are referring to. Yes, these are definitely and definitively mentioned throughout my two theses, and so in that regard I am in agreement with Blocher and Henry, my works although done via secular Universities in Wales were Biblically rooted. The remedy to the problem of evil is ultimately not in a correct theological or philosophical answer, but in the culminated work of Christ. The academic can however, assist to explain the remedy and related issues.
[1] Blocher (1994: 84).
[2] Blocher (1994: 84).
[3] Henry (1983: 282).
[4] Rowan Williams suggests Scripture becomes the Word in fidelity to Christ, as preaching becomes the Word in fidelity to Scripture, and Christ is himself the divine act as such. ‘God reveals himself through himself.’ Williams (2007: 108-109). I agree, God reveals himself through the Holy Spirit inspiring Scripture and presenting Christ.
[5] Blocher (1994: 84).
[6] Blocher (1994: 84).
[7] Henry (1983: 282).
[8] Henry (1983: 282).
[9] Henry (1983: 282).
[10] Henry (1983: 282).
BLOCHER, HENRI. (1994) Evil and the Cross, Translated by David G. Preston, Leicester, InterVarsity Press.
