 |
| France-Facebook-Travel+Leisure |
My third article today and I would reason that the 32 Celsius local heat and my inability to sleep well up in this basically third floor condo has something to do with it.
Thankfully shortly, I will be playing 'football' outside.
My other two posts from today are short and hopefully sweet: Satire And Theology
A post from the same material and more footnotes February 1 2011
A continuation of the theme of certainty:
Preface
A philosophy point to ponder on in light of progressive attempts to reinvent Christianity for the 21st Century and make human nature as it presently is more acceptable is that universal human death in this realm is a very strong cumulative point and indicator that God is not pleased with humanity in its current state (Genesis 1-3, Romans 1-6) and that the atoning and resurrection work of Christ is essential to be applied to a Christian believer (Hebrew 7-9, I Corinthians 15) for everlasting life with a perfected although still finite nature.
Sovereignty
Theodicy And Certainty
A rejection by
some within the Christian Church of the Reformed idea that God predestines with
soft determinism individuals to salvation is important.[1] This would work hand in hand with the
rejection of the idea that God causes evil by allowing sin to exist. In both
cases God’s divine sovereignty is downplayed, by Reformed standards. With free
will theory God would be viewed as allowing the problem of evil for greater
purposes, but not willing it.[2] A praxis of free will theodicy would be that
God can desire to save all persons, but cannot because human beings refuse to
turn to God.[3] Moral choices are not caused or uncaused by
another being, but are self-caused.[4] God therefore would be unable to save persons
that freely reject him and they have made a moral choice to oppose God.[5] In contrast to the sovereignty perspective,
since God does not cause evil and does not predetermine human actions such as
who shall believe in him, human beings
are a greater impediment to a culminated Kingdom of God with a free will
theodicy than with a sovereignty one.[6]
This fits into Plantinga’s reasoning
that in every situation transworld depravity will cause wrong human actions.[7] Transworld depravity provides the concept
that in any possible world, including our own, each person would make at least
one wrong decision and the resulting bad action would lead to evil occurring
within creation.[8] It can be reasoned that the praxis related
end goal of free will theodicy is for God within an incompatibilist,
libertarian system to convince many human beings to accept Christ and turn from
evil in order to fully establish the Kingdom of God.[9]
In contrast,
with a compatibilistic sovereignty perspective, God is reasoned to transform
and mould persons he chooses for salvation,[10]
so that the culminated Kingdom takes place at God’s appointed time.[11] Both free will and sovereignty perspectives
accept the Biblical idea of the culminated Kingdom, but free will places much
more emphasis on the individual freely deciding that this is for him/her,
rather than being determined in any way to
do so.[12] Free will advocates will understand the
process as God making an offer and over time convincing persons to believe it. A devotion to God can only be a good thing
when persons freely accept it.[13] Sovereignty perspectives reason that God
alone makes the choice to begin a regeneration process that leads to salvation
in a human being. F.F. Bruce (1996)
explains that because of the universal fact of human sin, there is no way to be
accepted by God by human means.[14]
This divinely guided change in a person
must occur in order for salvation to ever take place within a human being with
a corrupted nature.[15]
Free will
theodicy, unlike soul-making theory, does not necessarily accept universalism[16]
as part of its praxis and it could logically be argued that Plantinga’s
transworld depravity would apply in all post-mortem situations.[17] In my view, these are perils of a praxis that
rejects compatibilism and soft determinism.
Even as traditional Christian free will theory would not accept
universalism, it still reasons eventually those citizens saved by Christ would
not sin within the culminated Kingdom. Those within the Kingdom will have been
brought to God through Christ.[18] The resurrection work would be reasoned to
change the entire nature of saved persons to sinless and allow everlasting
life, but without God also determining that sin would never again occur, I
reason that transworld depravity could always be a concern.[19]
A praxis of
sovereignty theodicy would be that, from start to finish, salvation is
primarily the goal directed[20]
plan of God. Human beings are not
brought to Christ through compulsion, but when predestined in election shall be
convinced to accept the offer of salvation. Praxis shifts from the incompatibilism of free
will that assumes God desires to save all persons, but can only save those who
are eventually persuaded to believe, to an understanding that whom God desires
to save shall be regenerated and placed in a process of salvation.[21] The problem of evil is therefore not
primarily subject to, and in existence, because human sin is stalling the
culmination of God’s plans. I do not
doubt that human beings do often oppose God’s plans, but God being almighty can
overcome the problem of evil, and is working through this process slowly in
history. Within a sovereignty
perspective human sin does oppose God, but God will use sin for his purposes
and regenerate and mould those he chooses towards salvation. As long as one can accept the idea that a
perfectly moral God wills and allows evil within his plans for the greater
good,[22]
there is a degree of intellectual certainty with sovereignty theodicy that free
will theodicy lacks. God could
inevitably bring about, through the use of the regeneration and the
resurrection of elected human persons, the
end of human corruption, and even
Plantinga’s concept of transworld depravity.[23] If God willed and created a finalized Kingdom
of restored persons that had experienced the problem of evil and were saved
from it, then it could be reasoned that with God’s constant persuasion through
the Holy Spirit and human experience and maturity, transworld depravity would
never take place again.
No human wrong
decision[24]
would need to occur as God always determines otherwise, and restored human
beings do not lack experience as did the first humans who rebelled against God
causing corruption. I speculate that
theological praxis of sovereignty theodicy is more certain and comforting than
free will theodicy, as transworld depravity is overcome by taking the primary
choice of human belief in God away from corrupted human beings and placing it
in the hands of a sovereign God.
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.
http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/130104.htm
AUGUSTINE
(421)(1998) Enchiridion, Translated
by J.F. Shaw, Denver, The Catholic
Encyclopedia.
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.
BLOESCH,
DONALD G. (1987) Freedom for Obedience,
San Francisco, Harper and Rowe Publishers.
BLOESCH,
DONALD G. (1996) ‘Sin, The Biblical Understanding of Sin’, in Walter A. Elwell
(ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology,
Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
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.
EDWARDS,
JONATHAN (1729)(2006) Sovereignty of God,
New Haven, Connecticut, Jonathan Edwards Center, Yale University.
EDWARDS,
JONATHAN (1731-1733)(2006) Law of Nature,
New Haven, Connecticut, Jonathan Edwards Center, Yale University.
EDWARDS,
JONATHAN (1754)(2006) Freedom of the Will,
Flower Mound, Texas. Jonathanedwards.com.
http://www.jonathanedwards.com
http://www.jonathanedwards.com
GEISLER,
NORMAN L. (1975) Philosophy of Religion,
Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
GEISLER,
NORMAN L. (1978) The Roots of Evil,
Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.
GEISLER,
NORMAN L. (1986) Predestination and Free
Will, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.
GEISLER,
NORMAN L. (1996) ‘Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism’, in Walter A. Elwell
(ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology,
Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
GEISLER,
NORMAN, L (1999) ‘The Problem of Evil’, in Baker
Encyclopedia of Apologetics, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
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.
LUTHER,
MARTIN. (1516)(1968) Commentary On The
Epistle To The Romans, Translated by J.Theodore Mueller, Grand Rapids,
Zondervan Publishing House.
LUTHER,
MARTIN. (1518)(1989) ‘Heidelberg Disputation’, in Timothy F. Lull (ed.), Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.
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.
MCCANN, HUGH
J. (2001) ‘Sovereignty and Freedom: A Reply to Rowe’, in Faith and Philosophy, Volume 18, Number 1, January, pp. 110-116.
Wilmore, Kentucky, Asbury College.
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.
PLANTINGA,
ALVIN C. (2000) Warranted Christian
Belief, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
[4] Geisler (1986: 75).
[6] An atheist and
critic could reasonably and rightly suggest that persons use free will to such
a corrupt degree that God will never be able to culminate a Kingdom where
significantly free creatures do not continue to at times commit horrendous
evils.
[7] Plantinga (1977)(2002: 53).
[8] Plantinga (1977)(2002: 53).
[9] This assumes that
human beings by grace through faith can be convinced into belief in Christ and
then regenerated and indwelled by the Holy Spirit.
[10] Luther (1525)(1972: 133). Calvin (1543)(1996: 204).
[11] Calvin (1539)(1998: Book II, Chapter 3,
6). Calvin (1552)(1995: 13).
[13] Augustine (388-395)(1964: 78).
[14] Bruce (1996: 93).
[17] Plantinga (1977)(2002: 53).
[18] Augustine viewed the atoning work of
Christ as a means by which humanity can be brought back to a proper
relationship with God. Augustine
(398-399)(1992: 178). Christ would
mediate humanity back to God. Augustine
(398-399)(1992: 219).
[19] Without compatibilism in my view,
incompatibilism and free will theory is left with the problem of explaining how
human corruption and Plantinga’s transworld depravity will not prevent the
salvation of persons and the completed and finalized Kingdom of God.
[21] Calvin (1543)(1996: 204).
[22] Calvin (1543)(1996: 37-40). Edwards (1729)(2006: 414).
[23] Plantinga (1977)(2002: 53).
[24] Moral wrong
decisions is meant here. A lack of
infinite knowledge could still lead to a human being making a non-moral mistake,
for example, not playing a perfect game.
