 |
| Dubai-trekearth |
Theodicy Models
Very slight revisions for a posting on academia.edu, April 28, 2023
Theodicy Models from my PhD. A model of God's divine justice was understood from a European, Dutch perspective as a retaliation model.
Vermeer
explains that his three theodicy items are models and not symbols, because they
represent abstract distinct theoretical concepts, as opposed to straight
forward statements associated with certain theodicy ideas.[1] As noted earlier, in contrast, van der Ven
states there is no difference between theodicy symbols and models, and a clear
distinction is not found.[2] Vermeer presents retaliation, plan and
compassion models.[3] He notes that each model contains a different
understanding of divine omnipotence and goodness.[4]
The
retaliation model, to Vermeer, answers the question of why people are
suffering.[5] Vermeer appeals heavily to
Hick’s critical evaluation of Augustine and Calvin,[6]
which has already been reviewed (in my PhD), and views Augustine as the
forefather of retaliation thought in regard to the problem of evil.[7] Vermeer correctly points out that Augustine,
with the use of free will theodicy, blames human evil and suffering on free
will disobedience to God.[8] Augustine writes that divine punishment was allotted to
those that freely sinned.[9] In regard to the suffering of children,
Augustine, as does Calvin in the Reformation era, would appeal to original sin
to explain why this occurs.[10] Children, although innocent compared to
adults, who reasonably comprehend their sinfulness, would still be corrupt
creatures because of original sin and the fall.[11] Vermeer notes[12]
that Calvin, like Augustine, believed human beings freely rebelled in evil against
God,[13] and thus all persons were worthy of divine punishment, the full
extent of this only avoidable through election to salvation.[14] For Vermeer, the retaliation model uses the
‘doctrine of divine omnipotence’ which states that God is all powerful and yet
human suffering is attributed to human sin.[15] So ultimately people receive what they
deserve and are fully punished for their sins outside of God’s grace in
election.[16] Vermeer, unlike Hick,[17]
admits the retaliation model can be reasonably upheld without the justice and
goodness of God being questioned.[18]
The
plan model consists of the assumption that human suffering is part of the
divine plan.[19] Vermeer portrays the plan model as stating
human rebellion causes evil and suffering, and although it opposes God,
suffering is ultimately part of God’s divine plan.[20] The plan model, like the retaliation model,
holds to the doctrine of divine omnipotence, but according to the concepts of
Leibniz,[21] and especially Hick,[22]
as we have seen God uses suffering for the purpose of soul-making.[23] Vermeer points out that with the retaliation
model, divine punishment results in suffering,[24]
in contrast with the plan model where suffering is part of God’s scheme as God
created the best possible world where free will creatures would inevitably sin.[25] For the plan model, for Vermeer, God’s
goodness could not be questioned as the problem of evil was all part of a
divine plan.[26]
This
differentiation presented between the retaliation and plan models seems too
simplistic.[27] It is apparent that the writings of Augustine
and Calvin both include the concept of God saving the elect from sin while, at
the same time, judging humanity for it.[28] Augustine (398-399)(1992) describes God’s
plan for those in Christ that are, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit,
justified, separated from the wicked, subjected to the authority of Scripture,
and gathered together for a single aspiration of acquiring the celestial
reward.[29] This commentary by
Augustine, portrays a divine plan of God to save followers from the evil and
suffering in creation.[30] Calvin (1543)(1996) explains that God can
take the wicked actions of people, yet still accomplish his work and execute
his judgment.[31] Within that statement, one can see a judgment
or retaliation model, and at the same time God is accomplishing his work
concerning humanity which is implying a plan model.[32] Calvin writes, in the same text, that God
does a work of perseverance in a believer, so by grace the believer stays in
Christ for life.[33] God’s work of perseverance in elected
individuals[34]
is clearly not retaliation, but a divine plan to save sinful persons despite
the fact they are worthy of punishment.[35] Instead, the atoning and resurrection work of
Christ allows the elect to avoid the penalty for sin, being part of the divine
plan of salvation.[36]
The
compassion model, for Vermeer, has been largely rejected throughout Christian
history, although in the twentieth century it gathered some support.[37] The concept is that God has compassion for
human beings and does not focus on retaliation or plan ideas.[38] As with van der Ven’s symbols,[39]
the notion of God’s impassibility is discussed in regard to a compassion model.[40] Vermeer correctly points out that there
exists in Scripture, anthropomorphic language[41] to describe God as one who, like the human
beings he created, has feelings and emotions.[42] The fact God is a loving being would allow
for the logical and reasonable deduction that he is a compassionate being.[43]
A
vital point Vermeer makes concerning the compassion model is that it asks how
God responds to human suffering,[44]
while the retaliation and plan models are more concerned with why God permits
evil and suffering.[45] The compassion model envisions a God that is
immanent within his creation,[46]
the emphasis on the creator as a God of love, leads to this conclusion.[47] Within the compassion model, the ‘doctrine of
divine goodness’ clearly takes precedence over the doctrine of divine omnipotence.[48] Theologically and Biblically, the compassion
model is a vital aspect of the atoning work of Christ, and therefore would be
important for Christian theodicy.[49] Christ as God renounced his privileges and
experienced an agonizing death on the cross.[50] For Christ as the God-man, to renounce his
rights as God and die for the humanity he loves, definitely shows compassion[51]
as does God’s participation in the death[52]
and resurrection of Christ. A compassion
theodicy symbol or model is therefore acceptable within orthodox Christianity,[53]
although I believe judgment and plan are vital theodicy concepts.[54]
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.
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.
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.
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.
MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN
(1993) The Crucified God, Minneapolis,
Fortress Press.
PAILIN, DAVID A.
(1999) ‘Process Theology’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology,
Kent, SCM Press Ltd.
VAN DER VEN,
JOHANNES (1993) Practical Theology,
Translated by Barbara Schultz, AC Kampen, Netherlands, Kok Pharos Publishing
House.
VAN DER VEN,
JOHANNES (1998) God Reinvented?,
Leiden, Brill.
VAN DER VEN,
JOHANNES (2005) ‘Theodicy Items and Scheme’, in a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud
University, Nijmegen.
VAN DER VEN,
JOHANNES (2006a) ‘Dates of Nijmegen authors’, in a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud
University, Nijmegen.
VAN DER VEN,
JOHANNES (2006b) ‘Symbols versus Models’, in
a personal email from Johannes van der Ven, Nijmegen, Radboud University,
Nijmegen.
VAN DER VEN,
JOHANNES, PAUL VERMEER, AND ERIC VOSSEN (1996) ‘Learning Theodicy’, in Journal of Empirical Theology, Volume 9,
pp. 67-85. Kampen, The Netherlands, Journal of Empirical Theology.
VAN DER VEN,
JOHANNES AND ERIC VOSSEN (1996) Suffering:
Why for God’s Sake? Grand Rapids, Eerdmans.
VAN HOLTEN,
WILLIAM (1999) ‘Hell and the Goodness of God’,
in Religious Studies, Volume
35, Number 1, March, pp. 37-55. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
VAN TIL,
CORNELIUS (1969) A Christian Theory of
Knowledge, Nutley, New Jersey,
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.
VAN TIL,
CORNELIUS (1977) Christianity and
Barthianism, Nutley, New Jersey,
Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.
VERMEER, PAUL
(1999) Learning Theodicy, Leiden,
Brill.
[1] Vermeer (1999: 18).
[2] van der Ven (2006b: 1).
[3] Vermeer (1999:
21).
[4] Vermeer (1999: 21).
[5] Vermeer (1999:
22).
[6] Hick (1970: 221).
[7] Vermeer (1999: 22).
[8] Vermeer (1999: 22). Augustine (388-395)(1964: 3).
[9] Augustine (388-395)(1964: 3).
[10] Vermeer (1999: 25).
[11] Vermeer (1999: 25).
[12] Vermeer (1999:
26).
[13] Calvin
(1543)(1998: 37). Augustine
(388-395)(1964: 116-117).
[14] Calvin (1543)(1996: 154, 349).
[15] Vermeer (1999:
27).
[16] Vermeer (1999: 27).
[17] In regard to
everlasting hell, for example. Hick
(1970: 377).
[18] Vermeer (1999: 26).
[19] Vermeer (1999: 27).
[20] Vermeer (1999: 33).
[21] Leibniz reasons that
God works all things to the greater good. Leibniz (1710)(1998: 61). This could perhaps include the idea God would
develop in the best possible world, as Leibniz viewed it, human souls.
[22] Hick in Davis
(2001: 48).
[23] Vermeer (1999: 34-35).
[24] Vermeer (1999: 27).
[25] Vermeer (1999: 30).
[26] Vermeer (1999: 36).
[27] Vermeer (1999: 35).
[28] Augustine
(398-399)(1992: 303). Calvin
(1543)(1996: 37, 178-179).
[29] Augustine (398-399)(1992: 303).
[30] Augustine (398-399)(1992: 303).
[31] Calvin (1543)(1996: 37).
[32] Calvin (1543)(1996: 37).
[33] Calvin (1543)(1996: 178-179).
[34] Calvin (1543)(1996: 178-179).
[35] Calvin (1543)(1996: 37).
[36] Augustine
(398-399)(1992: 303). Calvin (1543)(1996:
37, 178-179).
[37] Vermeer (1999: 36).
[38] Vermeer (1999: 36).
[39] van der Ven (1998:
212).
[40] Vermeer (1999: 36).
[41] A figure of speech used in Scripture that
describes God with human physical characteristics. Grenz, Guretzki, and Nordling (1999: 11). Anthropomorphisms are Biblical attempts to
express realities about God through human analogy. Erickson (1994: 268).
[42] Vermeer (1999: 37).
[43] Pailin (1999: 469).
[44] Vermeer (1999:
38).
[45] Vermeer (1999: 38).
[46] Vermeer (1999:
44).
[47] Vermeer (1999: 44).
[48] Vermeer (1999: 45).
[49] Moltmann (1993:
226-227).
[50] Moltmann (1993: 226-227).
[51] Moltmann (1993: 226-227).
[52] Moltmann (1993:
226-227).
[53] Vermeer (1999: 45).
[54] van der Ven (1993:
173). van der Ven (1998: 212-213). Augustine (398-399)(1992: 303). Calvin (1543)(1996: 37, 178-179).
