Satanic beings are a major force of evil?

From

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

MPhil  

Statement twenty: 

The statement was: Satanic beings are a major force of evil. There was much more skepticism concerning these beings within the Anglican camp in comparison to the Baptist group; however, the ministry of Jesus and his Apostles interacted with Satanic beings and there is no scriptural indication that these beings would not exist today. With the Anglicans, 62% agreed, 18% were not certain, 20% disagreed. With the Baptists, 92% agreed, 6% were not certain, and 2% disagreed.

Also from my MPhil

Edited

Some observers of Christianity like to think of Satan and his fallen angels as a metaphor for evil and wish to deny that these beings exist. Professor David Pailin, who was my advisor for a short time, criticized me for believing in these beings as there was no proof of their existence. I think that Scripture is historical and it certainly accepts their existence. As well, and this was a point that I made to Professor Pailin, if theists believe that God, who is spirit (John 4:24) created human beings who are of a physical nature, why is it more difficult to believe that God made angels who were of spiritual nature?

When I examine the Book of Job for example, I see in 1:8 God mentioning Job to Satan, it seems that God was desiring Satan to take action against Job. Indeed in 1:12, he allows Satan to destroy Job’s possessions, and later in 2:6 Satan was allowed to harm Job but not take his life. This story certainly seems to demonstrate God’s power over Satanic evil. God is sovereign over it and indirectly sanctions it.

Calvin also discussed in The Institutes the case of the Chaldeans attacking Job, that God, Satanic beings and human beings can all participate in the same evil acts:

How can we attribute the same work to God, to Satan, and to man, without either excusing Satan by the interference of God, or making God the author of the crime? This is easily done, if we look first to the end, and then to the mode of acting. The Lord designs to exercise the patience of his servant by adversity; Satan’s plan is to drive him to despair; while the Chaldeans are bent on making unlawful gain by plunder. Such diversity of purpose makes a wide distinction in the act. . . . We thus see that there is no inconsistency in attributing the same act to God, to Satan, and to man, while, from the difference in the end and mode of action, the spotless righteousness of God shines forth at the same time that the iniquity of Satan and of man is manifested in all its deformity. Calvin, (1539)(1998) Book II, Chapter 4, Section 2.

From

2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter 

Edited

A traditional approach to Biblical interpretation tends to lead to an acceptance of the existence of satanic beings. Erickson explains these beings are understood as Biblical, literal, and historical. Erickson (1994: 445-451). Roman Catholic scholar Peter Kreeft, working with Ronald K. Tacelli, states Satan is a deceiver of humanity, and this implies the assumption that Satan has personality. Kreeft and Tacelli (1994: 294).There is of course a debate between those of traditional conservative perspectives and those of liberal, progressive, mainline perspectives on the existence of satanic beings.

October 30, 2019 

A reasonable researched, exegesis and contextual review of the scripture, demonstrates that the biblical worldview is of actual, satanic beings that exist.

I noted in my PhD thesis, although less dogmatically for a secular university context than on this website:

Greek scholar, Walter Bauer (1979) in agreement with Strong, Strong (1890)(1986: 152), describes ‘Satan’ or ‘Satanas’ as the Adversary, enemy of God and those who belong to God. Bauer (1979: 744). Bauer goes on to note that Revelation, Chapter 2, verse 13, is describing Satan as persecuting the Church. Bauer (1979: 745). It appears by studying the Greek copies of the New Testament and assuming a type of contextual, literal hermeneutical method of examining Scripture, it is possible to view satanic beings as literal and historical beings…

BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

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

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book II.

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.

KREEFT, PETER AND RONALD K. TACELLI (1994) Handbook of Christian Apologetics, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.

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

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

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

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Burlington, Welch Publishing Company.

Sufficient cause?

Sandy, Utah, May 2018

Reasons to Believe: Newsletter (2019), September/October, Reasons to Believe, Covina, California.

(Science and theology)

Another interesting and helpful newsletter article from Reasons to Believe. Can we escape the beginning? Excerpt from Escaping the Beginning? By Jeff Zweerink.

It is asked (paraphrased), did the universe began to exist, or did it always exist. (2). The universe has no conscious thought, no personality. (2). It exists but does not consciously provide life for what exists (paraphrased).

It is reasoned that the universe must have a sufficient cause. (2). The possibility of a physical sufficient cause is listed (2), as is the possibility of a nonphysical sufficient cause. (2).

Possibly 'something nonphysical, conscious and personal created the universe for a purpose.' (2).

The writer states that scientists have developed scientific tools that 'address this question.' (2). But these do not offer the 'certainty' that 'comes with the deductive arguments of philosophy or declarative statements of theology.' (2).

The article explains 'the models that best account for all the data are those where the universe began to exist.' (2).

Perhaps here, 'declarative statements' arise from biblical theology. Deductive arguments with premises and conclusions exist within the academic disciplines of philosophy, philosophy of religion, philosophical theology and systematic theology (as examples). I think deductive arguments could arise from biblical theology, but I can appreciate the intellectual distinction provided by the writer in this short article.

Arriving in Vancouver via Toronto, April 2018

First Cause (Philosophy of Religion &Theology) 

(My own work)

First cause is a major philosophical problem.

As matter (physical reality) is finite and cannot be its own cause as this would cause a vicious regress, it requires a cause beyond matter, including beyond time and space, which are also finite.

As example, one also cannot have a vicious regress of time or the present time would never be arrived. A vicious regress never solves its own problem...(logical or not).

Philosophical arguments for first cause do not prove the existence of the Biblical God but can serve as parallel truth to the creation story of Genesis 1. I use arguments for God being philosophically and theologically the first cause and this parallels the Genesis (1-3) creation account without being explicitly biblical. My biblical arguments, based on the ancient texts, are separate.

Deism or a related theism, in my mind is a far more likely alternative to Christianity than a non-theistic view, although I fully believe in the Biblical texts. Although Deism, and related theisms, do not accept a God that reveals self it still accepts the God of first cause. First cause provides premises which prove, philosophically and theologically, in a sense, the existence of God. God, as infinite, eternal and omnipotent, the deduced first and sufficient cause of all that is finite. God would also be conscious and within Judaism and Christianity, personal.

Eastern British Columbia tour, July-August, 2018

BLACKBURN, S. (1996) ‘Regress’, in Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

BRADLEY, RAYMOND D. (1996) ‘Infinite Regress Argument’, in Robert Audi, (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Reasons to Believe: Newsletter (2019), September/October, Reasons to Believe, Covina, California.

2 Peter 3: 10 (Non-exhaustive)

From

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

Statement nineteen: This statement is related. The earth will be perfected only when Christ returns. 

With Anglicans, 70% agreed, 12% were not certain, 18% disagreed. The Baptists were more emphatic as 88% agreed, 8% were not certain, and 4% disagreed.

MPhil 2003

October 21 2019 

In regard to the type of perfection meant in 2 Peter 3...

David F. Payne in his 2 Peter commentary opines that everything on the earth will be 'laid bare' (2 Peter 3: 10), is probably a more correct text than stating everything will be 'burned up'. (1569). This would lead to the theology of eschatological restoration as opposed to eschatological recreation.

There is indeed textual variance with 2 Peter 3: 10: (Non-exhaustive)

εὑρεθήσεται

Galaxie

Cited

A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 -- By: R. Larry Overstreet Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra Volume: BSAC 137:548 (Oct 1980) 

Article: A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 Author: R. Larry Overstreet BSac 137:548 (Oct 80) p. 354 A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 R. Larry Overstreet [R. Larry Overstreet, Professor of Homiletics, Grace Theological Seminary, Winona Lake, Indiana] 

Second Peter 3:10–13 presents two major problems to the interpreter. The first of these is determining the text in the conclusion of verse 10, that is, whether the text reads that the earth and its works “shall be burned up” or “shall be found.” 

The second problem is the actual interpretation of the passage. This study will examine each problem in order to seek to gain a solution that will be in harmony with the Word of God as a whole and in harmony with the immediate context of 2 Peter. The Textual Difficulty The Greek Text Interestingly, Robertson makes no definite decision on the textual problem here, but merely says that “the text is corrupt.”1 

At the conclusion of 2 Peter 3:10 the United Bible Societies’ Greek text gives the word εὑρεθήσεται, a future passive indicative of the verb εὑρίσκω, meaning, in general terms, “to find.” The verb has various shades of meaning, such as, “to find after seeking,” “to find without seeking,” or “to obtain.”2 However, for the present discussion the meaning “to find” is sufficient. The word in the text would thus be translated “shall be found.” Although some dissenting opinion can be found, most modern textual critics would regard this reading as having the strongest manuscript support.

Metzger comments that this reading is the “oldest reading, and the one which best explains the origin of the others that have been preserved….”3 BSac 137:548 (Oct 80) p. 355 

Several variant readings must be noticed and examined before a conclusion can be drawn regarding the text. One of these is a major variation involving the substitution of another word with a complete change of thought while the others are minor variations in comparison with the first.

The Variant Readings The major variation is the substitution of κατακαήσεται for εὑρεθήσεται. The translation would then read, “the earth and the works that are therein shall be burned up,” as κατακαίω means “to burn up.”4...
---

The footnotes are unfortunately numbered but not presented in this linked version...

If indeed, based on scholarship, the sufficient and stronger, manuscript evidence supports the new heaven and new earth being 'found' and 'obtained', this fits better with an interpretation of 'laid bare' than 'burned up'.

The new heaven and new earth are more likely restored versions of the old, than complete replacements of the old. Based on my reading, I reason that the new heaven and new earth of Isaiah 65-66. 2 Peter 3, Revelation 21-22, are more likely a restored, recapitulated universe and earth, than a completely ex nihilo, second creation.

Similarly to how those in Jesus Christ at the resurrection (1 Corinthians 15) will have new (enhanced) bodies made immortal from their original mortal bodies as did the resurrected Jesus Christ.

In other words, resurrected physical Jesus Christ, was the same physical Jesus Christ, in a sense, although enhanced for everlasting life.

Although resurrected persons have a spiritual body (1 Corinthians 15: 44), they still have physical qualities and live in a physical universe. As resurrected human beings in Christ still have a restored, physical nature and attributes, quite reasonably, the universe and earth should also have restored physical attributes. Perhaps a restored earth will be similar to the pre-fall Garden of Eden? Perhaps it will have more spiritual aspects than at present?

Theologically, this allows God to not have given up on his original creation via Genesis, but to have restored it.
---

A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 -- By: R. Larry Overstreet: Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra Volume: BSAC 137:548 (Oct 1980) Article: A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 Author: R. Larry Overstreet BSac 137:548 (Oct 80) p. 354 A Study of 2 Peter 3:10-13 R. Larry Overstreet [R. Larry Overstreet, Professor of Homiletics, Grace Theological Seminary, Winona Lake, Indiana]

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

BAUER, WALTER. (1979) A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Translated by Eric H. Wahlstrom, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996) Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

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

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

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

EDWARDS, PAUL AND ARTHUR PAP (1973)(eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

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. 

GRENZ, STANLEY J. DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.

HOCKING, DAVID (2014) The Book of Revelation, Tustin, California, HFT Publications.

MARSHALL, ALFRED (1975)(1996) The Interlinear KJV-NIV, Grand Rapids, Zondervan. 

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

OXFORD DICTIONARY OF SCIENCE (2010), Sixth Edition, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

PAYNE DAVID F.(1986) ‘2 Peter’, in F.F. Bruce, (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/Zondervan. 

POJMAN, LOUIS P. (1996) Philosophy: The Quest for Truth, New York, Wadsworth Publishing Company. 

STACE, W.T. (1952)(1976) Religion and the Modern Mind, in John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger (eds.), Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, London, Collier Macmillan Publishers.

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Burlington, Welch Publishing Company.

THE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT (1993) Stuttgart, United Bible Societies. 

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

THE ORTHODOX STUDY BIBLE AND PSALMS (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.

WENHAM, J.W. (1991) The Elements of New Testament Greek, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

WHALE, J.S. (1958) Christian Doctrine, Glasgow, Fontana Books.

 

A bad conscience leads to bad theology

Blacked out, power outage, bible study, last night...

Our church, bible study (home group) discussed 1 Timothy 1: 18-19, from last Sunday's sermon.

1 Timothy 1:18-19 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 18 This command I entrust to you, Timothy, my [a]son, in accordance with the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you fight the good fight, 19 keeping faith and a good conscience, which some have rejected and suffered shipwreck in regard to [b]their faith.

Footnotes: 1 Timothy 1:18 Or child 1 Timothy 1:19 Lit the

Bible Hub συνείδησιν 1 Timothy

Noun, accusative, feminine, singular

Bible Hub Strongs

4893 Strong's Concordance suneidésis: consciousness, spec. conscience Original Word: συνείδησις, εως, ἡ Part of Speech: Noun, Feminine Transliteration: suneidésis Phonetic Spelling: (soon-i'-day-sis) Definition: consciousness, conscience Usage: the conscience, a persisting notion.
---

In my agreement with my pastor and his sermon (paraphrased by my theology)...

A bad conscience leads to bad theology.

A significantly corrupted conscience, is not under submission to the Holy Spirit and therefore produces corrupted theology, which is also not in submission to the Holy Spirit, and is not biblically correct.

Verse 20 from the NASB, quote Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan, so that they will be taught not to blaspheme. These men are placed put of the Church, until they do not present blasphemous doctrines, which are not based on divinely inspired apostolic teachings.

They are excommunicated. Nute (1476).

John Calvin explains in the Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 13, Section 3:

Conscience, when it beholds God, must either have sure peace with his justice, or be beset by the terrors of hell.

A regenerated (Titus 1), justified (Romans) Christian conscience, under the applied atoning and resurrection work of Jesus Christ, must either submit to God's justice, including doctrines, dogmas and theology, or else be beset by philosophies and theologies of hell. I am not stating that all in the Church that embrace key false doctrines are hellbound; the Apostle Paul, for example, does not indicate this in the 1 Timothy, example. But, I agree with John Calvin (paraphrased) that a scarred conscience, spirit and mind that embraces bad theology is facing the terrors of hell, even if just in this temporal life, in a filtered 'hellish' sense.

Allan G. Nute in his 1 Timothy commentary explains that when a consciousness of sin fails to repent in forgiveness, it creates a destructive faith, which the Apostle Paul calls blasphemous. (1476).

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 III, 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.

NUTE, ALAN G. (1986) in '1 Timothy', The International Bible Commentary, F.F. Bruce, General Editor, Grand Rapids, Zondervan/Marshall Pickering.

STRONG, J. (1890)(1986) Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, Pickering, Ontario, Welch Publishing Company.
---

Bonus

Burning a bridge is a way to prohibit potentially threatening premises and conclusions.

(Not usually my recommendation)

The second coming and remedy for problems of evil

From

MPhil  

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

Statement eighteen: This statement stated: The remedy set in motion through Christ’s atoning work on the cross will not culminate until Christ’s second coming.

For Anglicans, 68% agreed, 18% were not certain, 14% disagreed. For Baptists, 66% agreed, 12% were not certain, and 22% disagreed. I am in agreement with this statement that obviously Christ’s work will not be culminated until he returns and fully establishes his kingdom.

From

2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter

Erickson writes that God plans to eventually eliminate evil from the culminated Kingdom of God which will not contain sin or evil of any kind. From a Reformed, Calvinistic perspective for this Kingdom to be inhabited by human beings as God created them there is first a period of time, the duration only known by God, for which the problem of evil exists.

The doctrines of the last things, including the Second Coming of Christ, the Resurrection, Judgments, the Millennium and the Final State. Thiessen (1956: 440).

(In contrast)

Clarence Darrow doubts there are proofs available for life after death, and states there is strong evidence against the idea of personal consciousness after death. For Darrow the immaterial soul does not exist and cannot be reasonably conceived. It is true that a culminated Kingdom of God is not presently empirical, but has been presented as Biblical teaching and theology in academic circles for two millennia.

October 14, 2019 

The scripture presents documented, religious history that claims God revealed self in the Hebrew Bible and New Testament (manuscripts full and in part). This is in a sense, empirical evidence for Christian faith and philosophy.

I am not stating that the immaterial, infinite, eternal, triune, God is ontologically, empirically provable  God is immeasurable and untraceable by scientific, finite, means. But there is biblical evidence for God revealing self to humanity. There are the writings of the Church Fathers that quote and rely on the New Testament books.

The New Testament does present a documented, resurrection of Jesus Christ as the God-man. This historical premise supports the second coming and restored creation as premises.

DARROW, CLARENCE (1928)(1973) ‘The Myth of the Soul’, in The Forum, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

DARROW, CLARENCE (1932)(1973) ‘The Delusion of Design and Purpose’, in The Story of My Life, October, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

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.

THIESSEN, HENRY C. (1956) Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Why does this realm contain evil?

Caught speeding by...

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University

MPhil link

Statement seventeen: The seventeenth statement stated: The Bible does not fully explain why God’s creation contains evil. 

For Anglicans, 68% agreed, 12% were not certain, and 20% disagreed. For Baptists, 60% agreed, 10% were not certain, and 30% disagreed. I would take the position that Scripture does not fully explain the problem.

October 10, 2019 

Within my Christian worldview and my Reformed tradition, I embrace the view that the triune God has revealed divine self historically and progressively from the Hebrew Bible to the New Testament. A reasonable contextual exegesis and evaluation of this scripture will lead to a reasonably correct interpretation of both the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, texts/books. 

The corruption, fall and further corruption of humanity is explained in Genesis 3, in the Hebrew Bible and then in particular, theologically explained within the Apostle Paul's, New Testament, Book of Romans (but not only in Romans). Such biblical texts and others including the gospels and Revelation explain the nature of human sin and evil, in contrast to the holiness and perfect goodness of God.

The key theology of the bible is that God the Son, God incarnate, Jesus Christ, working within the trinity, provides atonement from sin, and ultimate resurrection (victory over death, post mortem) for those in Jesus Christ leading to an eventual culminated Kingdom of God (2 Peter 3, Revelation 20-22) where this present realm is recapitulated with a new perfected realm.

However, I do not reason that the Bible, with either Testament, exhaustively explains why God's creation contains evil. I agree with the majority of the responders.

I therefore, within my MPhil and PhD theses, and on my websites, besides bible and theology, have relied highly on philosophy of religion. For me, theology provides me with biblical explanations in regards to problems of evil; philosophy of religion provides me philosophical explanations is regards to problems of evil.

As Reformed, my final authority in worldview matters is the scripture, and therefore is Christian theology, but as all truth is God's truth, reasonable and good philosophy of religion can also provide truth. It certainly aids my theology in my academic study of problems of evil, theodicy, free will and determinism. My British work was completed in religion and theology departments, but roughly, as many of my exemplars were within the fields of philosophy and philosophy of religion, as theology.

That was a requirement to pass my MPhil and PhD theses, that being a significant use of both theology and philosophy of religion.

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

BRUCE, F.F. (1986) ‘Revelation’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.

ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

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.

PAYNE. DAVID F.(1986) ‘2 Peter’, in F.F. Bruce, (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/Zondervan.

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.

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.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Honour The King

Italia: Ernest Hepnar photo

Grace Baptist Church: Honor The King

Another sermon from Grace Baptist Church

1 Peter 2:17 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 17 Honor all people, love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the [a]king. Footnotes: a 1 Peter 2:17 Or emperor

Romans 13: 1-2 New American Standard Bible (NASB) 13 Every [a]person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except [b]from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2 Therefore [c]whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves.

Footnotes: a Romans 13:1 Or soul b Romans 13:1 Lit by c Romans 13:2 Lit he who

Cited from sermon notes

(In regards to the western Christian Church)

We no longer respect our leaders-unless they're in the same party we are or implement the policies we support. 
---

Bluntly, many Christians on the left, centre and right, biblically and theologically, should be more respectful to politicians and leaders that they dislike and disagree with. Like it or not, persons are under divine sanctioned authority. As a Christian scholar, theologian and philosopher of religion, I have to agree with 1 Peter and Romans, in context that I, and others in the Christian Church, should honour the government (s) and its leaders. We are to obey the State, as it maintains law and order.

However, for balance to what Michael Phillips preached on in the sermon, Jesus Christ did call King Herod 'that fox' in Luke 13: 32...

Bible Hub  

Thayer's Greek Lexicon STRONGS NT 258: ἀλώπηξ ἀλώπηξ, (εκος, ἡ, a fox: Matthew 8:20; Luke 9:58. Metaphorically, a sly and crafty man: Luke 13:32; (in the same sense often in the Greek writings, as Solon in Plutarch, Sol. 30, 2; Pindar Pythagoras 2, 141; Plutarch, Sulla 28, 5). Strong's Exhaustive Concordance fox. Of uncertain derivation; a fox, i.e. (figuratively) a cunning person -- fox.

ἀλώπεκι

Bible text.com

Part of Speech: Noun Case: Dative Gender: Feminine Number: Singular
---

Based on the Lord's example as God-incarnate, there is some room for negative, intellectual rebuke of political leaders by those within the Christian Church, perhaps? If we view Jesus Christ as 'the' example here.

Back to the sermon

Cited

Are you willing to turn off the radio talk shows, walk away from the gossip, and simply obey Jesus Christ because you are His disciple?
---

Concerning Romans 13, F.F. Bruce writes that human government is a divine ordinance and has the powers of coercion and commendation which it has been given by God. By Christians obeying the state, they are serving God. Bruce (1987: 221). Bruce reasons that Paul does not deal with the issue of unrighteous government here, but as with Acts 5: 29, Christians must obey God and Christ and not the state when the state claims divine honours. Bruce (1987: 221).

Cranfield explains that in Romans 13, Paul is not asking for an uncritical obedience to the state, but rather that God has placed the state in authority over persons. Cranfield (1992: 321).

Mounce states that in Romans 13, that there is a divinely sanctioned role of government and that Christians are responsible to that government. It did not make any difference that the governing authorities were secular. God is the sole source of authority and established the authority for the state. If the government oversteps its rightful domain, then according to Mounce the Christian should not obey the ruler and he notes this was done in Acts 4: 9 and 5: 29.

Concerning 1 Peter 2 13-15, Barclay explains that the concept of anarchy by the Christian is far from New Testament thought. Barclay reasons what belongs to Caesar (the state) should be given to it, and what belongs to God should be given to God (Matthew 22: 21). Barclay (1976: 205). Both Cranfield and Barclay mention that Paul is discussing the concept of submitting to an authoritarian state, as in the Roman Empire of the New Testament era. Barclay (1976: 206) Cranfield (1992: 321). Barclay correctly point out in my view that in our modern West the need for Christians to participate in democratic government as it is for and by the people, at least idealistically. Barclay (1976: 206).

Cited

And what about "honor the king"? We have no king in America, yet the word is not limited to a king, but it stands for all men in authority. We know this by comparing our verse to others very much like it. Just a few verses before, Peter says we're to "Submit ourselves to every ordinance of man, whether to the king as supreme or to governors."

Cited  

Paul makes the same point in Romans 13, where he lumps together kings, governors, judges, and even tax collectors, as "the governing authorities".

Not live link: see link at top of article

Cited  

Including the Caesars of Imperial Rome. Yet it was these men Peter had in mind when he told his readers to "honor the king". If you know the history of Rome at all, you know the men who got to the throne were-without exception-bad men. Every one of them demanded worship for himself; most of them persecuted the Church and some of them were perverts! If you want to look up the names, start with Nero and Caligula! Jesus Christ commands us to honor such men.

Archives accessed for article

BARCLAY, WILLIAM (1976) The Letters of James and Peter, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Remedy to problems of evil

Conwy Castle, 2001

From

2003 The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives: MPhil thesis, Bangor University 

MPhil 2003

Statement sixteen: This statement was stated as: The only true solution to the problem of evil is through the death and resurrection of Christ. 

Here we have 82% of Anglicans in agreement, 8% not certain, 10% in disagreement. With Baptists, there is definitely a stronger opinion, as 96% are in agreement, with 4% not certain. I placed this statement after the philosophical statements because I believe that the true solution to the problem of evil, in practical terms, is the work of Christ. His work leads to the culminated Kingdom of God where evil is arrested. At this point, the philosophical problem may still exist, but it is rather academic!

From

2010 Theodicy and Practical Theology: PhD thesis, the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David, Lampeter

As a moderate conservative that holds to Reformed theology, I reason that the atoning and resurrection work applied to believers in the eventual culminated Kingdom of God is the ultimate remedy for the problem of evil. Mounce (1990: 369-397). I must be clear: theodicy is not the remedy to the problem of evil, but a speculative, and in my case, Biblically based attempt to explain how God deals with evil in his creation. In similar fashion, practical and empirical theology do not offer solutions to the problem of evil, but are theological disciplines which assist persons to understand how evil is comprehended and dealt with in the Christian community and in society at large.

Philosophy (Philosophy of Religion, within Philosophy, in particular) and theology have assisted human beings throughout history to better understand life, but neither of these disciplines can provide a remedy to the problem of evil; however, they can help to explain evil and suffering through effective theodicy.

CALVIN, JOHN (1539)(1998) The Institutes of the Christian Religion, 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.

FEINBERG, JOHN S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House.

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

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1990) The Book of Revelation, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.

October 3, 2019 

I will add that my PhD work also dealt with concept of problems of evil.

Quote:

I can interject and state that academically solving the logical and gratuitous problems of evil by tying them back to God is an ultimate intellectual solution, but there are still practical ramifications to deal with, such as why certain evils occur. The fact that a sovereignty theodicy can logically and reasonable solve its problem of evil, does not mean that suffering often comes with an explanation.

The atoning and resurrection work of God the Son, God-incarnate in Reformed, Christian, biblical, New Testament, theology, applied, ultimately remedies all problems of evil, logical and gratuitous. This includes the eventual biblically promised existence of post-mortem, perfected, resurrected persons in Christ (1 Corinthians 15), the judgement/judgment of those whose names are not in the Book of Life (Philippians 4, Revelation 3, 20, 21) and the restoration of creation to the new heaven and new earth (Revelation 21-22). I would reason this equates to a restored universe, solar system and planet earth.