C.S. Lewis: Divine Goodness

Saint John-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

Preface

Lewis was an important and key Anglican exemplar for my Wales, MPhil thesis:

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

The link features my work on Lewis, some of which has been edited and presented on this blog previously.

MPhil 2003

I am not a Lewis scholar, but realize that many pastors and Church leaders view him as a major and primary theological source.

In contrast, I acknowledge him as a useful historical Christian apologist.

I present for a second straight time a Lewis post, realizing that he is very popular and that I could edit more of his work for smaller articles.

4. Divine Goodness

Within this chapter, Lewis portrayed God as demanding both discipline and compassion from people and demonstrating both himself in his character. He was a God who punished sin, yet sent his Son to die for that same sin. Lewis stated: You asked for a loving God: you have one. The great spirit you so lightly invoked, the ‘lord of terrible aspect’, is present: not a senile benevolence that drowsily wishes you to be happy in your own way, not the cold philanthropy of a conscientious magistrate, not the care of a host who feels responsible for the comfort of his guest, but the consuming fire himself. Lewis (1940)(1996: 39).

Lewis indicated that God used his love in discipline for the betterment of his creatures, and that this could lead to the temporary suffering of people. Lewis compared a man disciplining a dog to God disciplining human beings. The creature is made better for the purposes of the master through this type of discipline which is often physically and emotionally painful. Kilby stated concerning this view of Lewis: "If we keep Him at center, it is possible to suppose that pain is His method of training us for better things than we understand." Kilby (1965: 67). Lewis noted: "Those Divine demands which sound to our natural ears most like those of a despot and least like those of a lover, in fact marshal us where we should want to go if we knew what we wanted." Lewis (1940)(1996: 46).

This seems plausible that God uses some of his toughest commands to bring about the greatest growth in his creatures. However, I would say perhaps it is more likely that God marshals us where we should go if we wanted what we should. I think that Lewis was correct that God used pain in love to strengthen his creations, but I like Kilby’s observation on the concept that some of the things we need we cannot understand, and often, I would think, do not want to understand. In human beings there often seems to be a certain tendency to believe and act on what is comfortable and brings pleasure at the expense of the truth and right living, which may not be nearly so comfortable. I think there is discipline in love which takes people to places of mental anguish and frustration that are not in the least desirable, even if they knew that things were working for the ultimate good. Nonetheless, God puts people through tough times and they will learn their lessons for the greater good; some will grow closer to God and some will harden in position against God. People, as sinners, generally want to live lives in which their sinful nature can flourish. Even Christians still, at times, need painful discipline in order to take them from wrong attitudes and actions to right attitude and actions. Since God has our best interests at heart, it is my view that no amount of suffering which God gives an individual diminishes at all the total goodness of God. I think it a mistake for the critic of God, to begin to doubt God’s goodness, omnipotence, or very existence, when this individual believes that his/her particular acceptable level of frustration and pain and been surpassed. How is any human to know why or how he/she must suffer?

How is any human being to know God’s reasoning behind it? Lewis raised this problem as Uncle Screwtape in The Screwtape Letters. He noted that it was important for demonic beings to attempt to move a human being struggling with problems from considering philosophical debate to concentrating on the everyday sense experience. Even if a particular train of thought can be twisted so as to end in our favour, you will find that you have been strengthening in your patient the fatal habit of attending to universal issues and withdrawing his attention from the stream of immediate sense experiences.

Your business is to fix his attention on the stream. Teach him to call it "real life" and don’t let him ask what he means by "real". Lewis (1941)(1990: 12). It can become normal for a human being to become so self-absorbed in his/her suffering that serious difficult thinking about God and his reasons for willing suffering for the greater good, are overlooked. Instead, anger and bitterness against God grows and temporal sensory suffering can lead to a philosophy which can seriously doubt God’s ultimate power and goodness. Once one individual holds to what I think is the most plausible explanation, that both reason and revelation demonstrate that there exists an all-powerful, loving God, then this God is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. For if this God does exist, he alone knows completely why a person must suffer and has infinite knowledge in which to draw from. Every human being on the other hand, has finite knowledge on which to build his case against the evil that exists in God’s creation that God does not eliminate.

KILBY, Clyde S. (1965) The Christian World of C.S. Lewis, Appleford, Abingdon, Berks, U.K., Marcham Manor Press.

LEWIS, C.S. (1961)(1983) A Grief Observed, London, Faber and Faber.

LEWIS, C.S. (1941)(1990) The Screwtape Letters, Uhrichsville, Ohio, Barbour and Company. 

LEWIS, C.S. (1940)(1996) The Problem of Pain, San Francisco, Harper-Collins.

C.S. Lewis: The Problem Of Evil/Atheism

Hallstatt, Austria, Facebook-Travel+Leisure

Preface

Lewis was a key Anglican exemplar for my Wales, MPhil thesis:

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

The link features my work on Lewis, some of which has been edited and presented on this blog previously.

MPhil 2003

I am not a Lewis scholar, but realize that many pastors and Church leaders view him as a major and primary theological source.

In contrast, I acknowledge him as a useful historical Christian apologist.

Vienna-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

1. C.S. Lewis Introduction British born, Clive Staples Lewis (1898-1963) was a world renowned British writer whose theological literary works have been influential within Christian apologetics. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, describes Lewis’ beginnings and places of study. Anglican scholar-novelist and Christian Apologist, perhaps best known for his literary fantasies that explore theological concepts. Born near Belfast in Northern Ireland, he received his B.A. from University College, Oxford, in 1924, and was fellow and tutor in English literature at Magdalen College, Oxford, from 1925 until 1954. He then accepted the Chair of Medieval and Renaissance English at Cambridge. Hein (1996: 630).

Concerning the problem of evil, his most related work is The Problem of Pain which will serve as the base text for this section. Within the text are ten Chapters which I will use as nine sections for this part of my work. These Chapters within his book are Introductory, Divine Omnipotence, Divine Goodness, Human Wickedness, The Fall of Man, Human Pain, and Human Pain Continued, which I shall deal with together, Hell, Animal Pain, and Heaven.

2. Introductory Lewis began this chapter by explaining the reasoning for his atheistic belief of the past. He noted that the world and Universe appeared to be consisting of "empty space, completely dark, and unimaginably cold." Lewis (1940)(1996: 1). The world existed by beings "preying upon one another." Lewis (1940)(1996: 2).

Lewis in his past atheism concluded that: "Either there is no spirit behind the universe, or else a spirit indifferent to good or evil, or else an evil spirit." Lewis (1940)(1996: 3).

Clyde S. Kilby described Lewis’ view concerning the idea of a possible God as creator in relation to humanity: "With man it was worse still for, unlike animals, he has both consciousness and reason, the first allowing pain to be a ceaseless reality, and the second making it a reality to be always anticipated until the time of that last and greatest pain called death." Kilby, (1965: 66). Lewis’ atheism appeared to be a plausible explanation of the world and Universe he lived in. He observed throughout most of the Universe, a lack of sustainable life, and that the life that existed on earth was hostile to itself as animals and people inflicted pain upon one another and eventually each individual being ceased to exist.

As Kilby pointed out, Lewis believed human beings’ rational understanding of these problems made their pain far worse than that of the animals who did not fully understand their present suffering, nor their impending doom in death. The spirit behind this reality, if there was one, was either indifferent or evil because it, or he, failed to rid the world of the vast amount of suffering that Lewis observed. There was a troubling obstacle to his atheism. Lewis asked: "If the universe was so bad, or even half so bad, how on earth did human beings ever come to attribute it to the activity of a wise and good Creator?" Lewis (1940)(1996: 3).

Lewis struggled with the idea that the very nature of reality which he saw as being naturalistic and not needing a creator, showed the very signs of being made by a creator. The fact that human beings struggled with what they saw as evil meant that they were by nature contrasting evil with the perfect good which did not make sense as coming from randomness, but rather a perfect God. If this perfect God did not exist, then the supposed evil that humanity suffered should not bother people at all, it is natural, and should not be a problem.

This type of evidence undermined his atheistic conclusions because if an atheist claimed something to be evil, he/she must have something good to contrast it with. Without a perfect creator establishing something as evil or good becomes very difficult and subjective. It could be said that if all the pain and death in the Universe is natural, then there is no evil or good, just existence and no problem at all. The atheist, for example, can argue that rational beings suffering is a wrong because it causes pain which is not good for the mind and body. However, without a perfectly good God as a model, it can be strongly argued that for evolutionary reasons suffering is needed. The weak must suffer and die in order for stronger beings to emerge, so thus what we see as a problem of evil could be seen simply a necessity of reality. When the perfect God is introduced into the equation then his nature can be contrasted with that of fallen creation and indeed we can see that there is a problem of evil!

KILBY, Clyde S. (1965) The Christian World of C.S. Lewis, Appleford, Abingdon, Berks, U.K., Marcham Manor Press.

LEWIS, C.S. (1961)(1983) A Grief Observed, London, Faber and Faber. 

LEWIS, C.S. (1941)(1990) The Screwtape Letters, Uhrichsville, Ohio, Barbour and Company. 

LEWIS, C.S. (1940)(1996) The Problem of Pain, San Francisco, Harper-Collins.

John R. Franke (PhD Edit)

John R. Franke (PhD Edit)

Preface

Saturday, September 19, 2020: PhD Full Version PDF: Theodicy and Practical Theology 2010, Wales TSD

Robert The Bruce statue and Stirling Castle

Seems to me I 'found' this statue as a child on our family trip to Scotland and Stirling Castle. Also on Christmas 2014, I viewed Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975) on DVD. It also seems to me as a child with the family we visited Doune Castle where the cow was thrown in the film. A classic film but I think the ending should still be redone.

---

Reformed Theology

John R. Franke was strongly suggested to me by the external reviewer at my viva for a Reformed Theology source for my final Wales, PhD revisions. Methodology and Theology Methodologically, ‘theology is disciplined consideration and exploration of the content of divine revelation.’ Franke (2005: 13).

Franke cautions that although there is truth in this definition, human knowledge of God is not sufficient without a proper knowledge of humanity while this theology is being considered. Theology is always considered in the light of cultural and historical setting of the day, the implication being that a culture will influence theology and therefore theology needs to be scrutinized with this concept always in mind. Franke (2005: 14).

Erickson explains theology is to use the tools and methods of Biblical research. Erickson (1994: 21). 

The Trinity 

Admittedly the Trinity is a difficult concept, and Franke acknowledges that some, such as Friedrich Schleiermacher, view the Trinity as not a primary but secondary Christian doctrine. Franke (2005: 59). Schleiermacher (1821)(1928)(1976: 751).

The doctrine is a systemized one and not a primary witness of the Christian faith. Franke (2005: 59). Schleiermacher (1821)(1928)(1976: 751). I would not negate the Trinity to a secondary doctrine. Franke reasons the Trinity is a method of self-disclosure of God to and within creation. Franke (2005: 59). Schleiermacher (1821)(1928)(1976: 751).

It is centrally concerned with the coming of Christ and his work, and the work of the Holy Spirit and the concept of everlasting life for believers. Franke (2005: 59). Schleiermacher (1821)(1928)(1976: 751). God within the Trinity is of one essence, Barth explains in his section on the Trinity from Church Dogmatics. Barth (1932-1968: 371).

The Holy Spirit 

Franke suggests that at the heart of traditional Christian and Reformed theology is the idea of the Holy Spirit guiding the community of faith into the truth of the gospel and God’s plan for the Church and the world. Franke (2005: 113). Pneumatology can only be ventured into and understood properly under the umbrella of Christian theology. Franke (2005: 65). It can also be studied within Reformed theology.

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of the Word of God: Volume 1, Part One, Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark.

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of Creation: Volumes 1 and 3. Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark. 

BARTH, KARL (1932-1968) Church Dogmatics, The Doctrine of God: Volume 2, First Half -Volume, Translated by J.W. Edwards, Rev. O. Bussey, and Rev. Harold Knight, Edinburgh, T. and T. Clark.

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 2: God and Creation, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids. 

BAVINCK, HERMAN (1918)(2006) Reformed Dogmatics Volume 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ, John Bolt (gen.ed.), Translated by John Vriend, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids.

BOICE, JAMES, MONTGOMERY (1986) Foundations of the Christian Faith, Downers Grove, IVP 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. 

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.

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. 

FRANKE, JOHN R. (2005) The Character of Theology, Baker Academic, Grand Rapids. 

GREEN, JAY (1971) Five Points of Calvinism, ‘Forward’, Grand Rapids, Sovereign Grace Publishers.

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.

MURRAY, JOHN (1937-1966)(1977) Collected Writings of John Murray, Vol. 2: Select Lectures in Systematic Theology, Edinburgh, The Banner of Truth Trust.

REID, W.S. (1996) ‘Calvinism', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

REID, W.S. (1996) ‘The Reformed Tradition', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

SCHLEIERMACHER, FRIEDRICH (1799)(1961) On Religion, in Elie Kedourie, Nationalism, New York, Praeger University Series.

SCHLEIERMACHER, FRIEDRICH (1821)(1928)(1976) The Christian Faith, Edited by H.R. Mackintosh and J.S. Stewart, Philadelphia, Fortress Press.

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 1, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers. 

SHEDD, WILLIAM G.T. (1874-1890)(1980) Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, Nashville, Thomas Nelson Publishers.

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

WEBER, OTTO (1955)(1981) Foundations of Dogmatics, Volumes 1 and 2, Translated and annotated by Darrell L. Guder, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

WILLIAMS, ROWAN (2007) Wrestling with Angels, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids.

C.E.B. Cranfield: Romans (PhD Edit)

Puglia, Italy-Facebook-Travel+Leisure

I owned a copy of Cranfield’s Roman’s commentary from my Columbia Bible College course work days, and during my Doctoral work one of my advisors at The University Wales opined it was one of the finest commentaries on Romans in print.

The Problem Of Evil

C.E.B. Cranfield (1992) comments that although God can will grievous and evil things to occur,[1] God in Christ works these things towards the greater good,[2] in particular in the context of salvation for those that know Christ.[3] Evil and sin are not to be confused with goodness and obedience[4] within Reformed traditions, but as God willingly allows evil things to occur, his purposes and motives are pure. 

David Ray Griffin (1976) critically disagrees with this concept of John Calvin and others,[5] but correctly defines the idea that God’s will must be regarded as righteous, even when we as human beings cannot fully understand the rightness of his judgments, since God is the definition of righteousness.[6] 

Wright reasons the problem of evil can be solved in a straightforward manner by proposing that God predestines evils to occur for a particular purpose,[7] and that persons do not have an answer back for God.[8] 

This comment from Wright[9] is accurate from a Reformed perspective. 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,[10] 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.[11] 

Creation

Romans, Chapter 1 indicates this idea and C.E.B. Cranfield explains that since creation persons have viewed within that creation God’s eternal power and his divine nature. Cranfield (1992: 32). 

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.

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.

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

GRIFFIN, DAVID RAY (1976) God, Power, and Evil, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

WRIGHT, R.K.McGREGOR (1996) No Place for Sovereignty,  Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press.  

---

[1] Cranfield (1992: 204).

[2] Cranfield (1992: 204).

[3] Cranfield (1992: 204).

[4] Cranfield (1992: 204).

[5] Griffin (1976: 129).

[6] Griffin (1976: 129).

[7] Wright (1996: 197).

[8] Wright (1996: 197).

[9] Wright (1996: 197).

[10] Wright (1996: 197).

[11] This is where practical and empirical theology can be very helpful when they offer practical assistance to those suffering under the problem of evil.