Anglicans and Baptists: The Problem of Evil

The University of Wales, Bangor

Happy Canadian Thanksgiving.

Sorry, loyal readers there are no pretty graphs like with the PhD survey.

Please forgive me, or blame my advisor and reviewers for not insisting on them.

It did save me a ton of work. My PhD graphs took a month.

This is edited work from my MPhil thesis:

The Problem of Evil: Anglican and Baptist Perspectives, 2003, The University of Wales, Bangor.

MPhil survey section edited:

Some Anglican and Baptist perspectives will be compared.

4. My Format
This is a work of Empirical Theology. I have chosen Anglican and Baptist because I attended an Anglican church for two years while living in Manchester, England, and I attended a Baptist Seminary for my Master of Theological Studies Degree in Greater Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. I am therefore somewhat familiar with the views of both denominational groups, and both have had writers which have dealt with the problem of evil as recently as post World War II.

CHAPTER SIX
Conclusion
1. The Survey
For my surveys, I have received fifty each, completed of Anglicans and Baptists who have attended a post-secondary denominational college, University or seminary, or are members of one of those denominations who have studied religion at a post-secondary level. There were no other stipulations I set in drawing up the survey. I was not concerned with age, sex or theological position. I was simply looking for people who met the educational and denominational requirements. I used both regular mail and email to send out the questionnaires, and received back forms via both formats.

Statement four:
The fourth statement was perhaps the most controversial. God wills evil for the greater good.

I do take this viewpoint, and I am in agreement with the writings of John Calvin on this matter within The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, as well as in Institutes of the Christian Religion, and has been documented throughout the thesis. This idea has been discussed through this thesis. I am not stating that God sins in any way by willing evil for the greater good, nor does he force people or fallen angels to sin. People sin by nature and choice, and God uses this evil for the greater good. Since he is infinite and dealing with finite creation, all things work under the subjection of his will and I humbly, and without complete understanding, state that he manages the Universe in a far more controlled manner than to simply allow evil to take place. By not preventing all evil, and by using it for the greater good, he is in a sense willing it. The difference between God’s will and the sinful will when evil takes place, is that God’s will and motives alone remain pure and consistent within God’s good purposes.

The idea of human free will alone does not demonstrate why God has to allow evil, as opposed to willing it. God knew there would be a fall, and in a sense willed the results of that fall by not preventing it from taking place, but it was within his right to have evil flourish in his creation for a time until the Kingdom of God culminated. It must be stated again that God did not coerce human beings into sinning and thus causing the fall, but he knew that this fall would take place and did not willingly prevent it. It can be deduced that God thought the evil and suffering in a corrupted creation, willed in sinful disobedience, was a tolerable situation for a time. Jesus Christ would, through his work, restore that creation and culminate a Kingdom of God filled with resurrected human beings who had experienced evil, and now through the Holy Spirit willingly rejected evil completely.

There are, as well, many instances in our creation where God could
have prevented evils from taking place, for instance the American bombings of September 11, 2001. Some may argue that God must allow human free will and that is why these events took place. However, God could have prevented this from taking place, as it can be shown that many evils are prevented and certainly God would have his hand in this. Many times evil plans are thwarted, such as Nazi Germany’s plans to conquer Europe. In that case, Adolph Hitler’s free will was not allowed to completely flourish. It was not that God forced Hitler to think differently, but rather the Fuhrer’s plans were defeated by the Allies.

I do not think free will is the ultimate answer in the matter of the problem of evil, rather it is largely God’s will that determines what will ultimately take place, at the same time not forcing his creation to sin against him. This sin is achieved by people who are in the sinful biological line of Adam and Eve, and thus possess sinful nature which leads to sinful choices.

With Anglican 10% agreed, 18% were not certain, 72% disagreed.

With Baptists 20% agreed, 6% were not certain, 74% disagreed.

Statement seven:
This statement stated: Relative Dualism, a universe containing an eternal, infinite, good God, and a finite created Devil, is permissible within a Biblical world-view.

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?

To me, it is a more difficult task for God to create matter and physical beings when he is spirit, as opposed to creating spiritual beings who are much like him except finite. I do not have a philosophical problem believing in angels and fallen angels, however, I do not base my belief in angelic beings primarily on my experience but in Scripture and reason.

Here 74% of Anglicans agreed, while 14% were not certain, with 12% disagreeing.

With the Baptists, 86% agreed, 4% being not certain, and 10% being in disagreement.

The eleventh statement read: Free will itself is not the main factor in the human rejection of God.

Here 40% of Anglicans agreed, while 30% were not certain, and 30% disagreed.

With Baptists, 62% agreed, 8% being not certain, and 30% being in disagreement with the statement.

Statement nineteen:
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.

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.

Statement thirty-five stated:
Ultimately evil will be confined to an everlasting hell.

I think this is the best position to take from a Biblical perspective, as it appears in Revelation 20:14, that death and hades are thrown into the lake of fire. Some argue that this is describing annihilationism, however, verse 10 describes this as a place of everlasting torment for the devil, beast, and false prophet. It would be too presumptuous, in my view, to assume that human beings thrown into this lake would simply be annihilated.

With this statement there is a substantial difference in opinion between the two groups.

With Anglicans, 54% agreed, 24% were not certain, and 22% disagreed.

With Baptists, 86% agreed, 6% were not certain, and 8% disagreed.

AUGUSTINE. (388-395)(1979) De Liberto Arbitrio (On Free Will), in Earlier Writings on Free Will, Translated by J.H.S. Burleigh, Philadelphia, The Westminster Press.

AUGUSTINE. (421)(1998) Enchiridion, Translated by J.F. Shaw, Denver, New Advent Catholic Website.

BLACKBURN, S. (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, J. (1543)(1998) The Bondage and Liberation of the Will, Translated by G.I. Davies, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

CARSON, D.A. (1981) Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility, Atlanta, John Knox Press.

CARSON, D.A. (1990) How Long, O Lord?, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.

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

MACKIE, J.L. (1971)(1977) Evil and Omnipotence, in The Philosophy of Religion, in Alvin C. Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids,
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

PAILIN, D.A. (1999) Enlightenment, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.

PLANTINGA, A.C. (1977) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

POJMAN, L.P. (1995)(1996) Atheism, in Robert Audi (gen.ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Feminism Theodicy? (PhD edit)

New Westminster (trekearth.com)

Feminism Theodicy (PhD edit)

When preparing my PhD thesis, a kind advisor suggested, for the sake of originality, I attempt to research and write concerning a Feminism Theodicy. We could not find, at the time, what we deemed was a significant enough actual theodicy that we could use. However, we did agree to use the text below and also include some feminism questions in the PhD questionnaire and survey.

GEBARA, IVONE (2002) Out of the Depths, Translated by Ann Patrick Ware, Minneapolis, Fortress Press.

Gebara is a well-known Latin American, Roman Catholic theologian and sister. She presents an academically important text since although it is not a formal theodicy or defence, it does deal theologically specifically with the historical sufferings of women. Gebara (2002: 13-59). I can agree with much of what she states concerning the abuse of women that has taken place in history, but I disagree with her feminist reinterpretations of certain essential Christian doctrines, for example the resurrection. Gebara (2002: 122).

She reasons the resurrection is idealistic theory. Gebara (2002: 122). It should be instead looked at metaphorically as the lives of women are improved and evil is resisted. Gebara (2002: 122). She reasons that actual changed lives of women today, which would be metaphorical resurrections in actual bodies are more beneficial than the traditional concept. Gebara (2002: 122).

Yes, physical evil against human bodies, and female human bodies should be dealt with as much as possible by the forces of relative good in this world, including the Christian Church. But within this view all humanity simply eventually dies, as the physical human body cannot exist forever in the present realm. This no matter how much good is done for humanity and women.

The resurrection of Christ and his followers (1 Corinthians 15), those elected in Christ (Ephesians 1, Romans 8), provides victory against the temporal sufferings and evils Gebara is describing and victory over the even greater everlasting evils which she seems to downplay, that is the eventual death of all humanity including women.

PhD Full Version

From my PhD graphs:

Question 29

Question 37

Question 41

Question 45

Question 52

End

Bibliography: Some key references from my MPhil/PhD and website work

ADAMS, ROBERT. M (1996) ‘Theodicy’, in Robert Audi (ed.), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

ANDERSON, RAY S. (2001) The Shape of Practical Theology, Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

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.

BARNHART, J.E. (1977) ‘Theodicy and the Free Will Defence: Response to Plantinga and Flew’, Abstract in Religious Studies, 13, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

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

BEEBE, JAMES R. (2006) ‘The Logical Problem of Evil’, in The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Buffalo, University at Buffalo.

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

BLOCHER, HENRI. (1994) Evil and the Cross, Translated by David G. Preston, Leicester, InterVarsity Press.

BLOESCH, DONALD G. (1987) Freedom for Obedience, San Francisco, Harper and Rowe Publishers.

CAIRD, GEORGE B. (1977) Paul's Letters from Prison Paperback, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

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.

CHOPP, REBECCA S. (1995) Saving Work, Louisville, Kentucky, Westminster John Knox Press.

COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.

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

DAVIS, STEPHEN T. (1981)(ed.), Encountering Evil, Atlanta, John Knox 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.

ESHLEMAN, ANDREW (1997) ‘Alternative Possibilities and the Free Will Defence’, in Religious Studies, Volume 33, pp. 267-286. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

FEINBERG. JOHN S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, 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.

FERRAIOLO, WILLIAM (2005) ‘Eternal Selves and The Problem of Evil’, in Quodlibet Journal, Volume 7, Number 2, April-June, Evanston, Illinois, Quodlibet Journal.

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.

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press. 

 

FRANCIS, LESLIE J. and Practical Theology Team (2005) ‘Practical and Empirical Theology’, University of Wales, Bangor website, University of Wales, Bangor. http://www.bangor.ac.uk/rs/pt/ptunit/definition.php. 

GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press. 

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

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

GUNDRY, ROBERT (1981) A Survey of the New Testament, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

HARPUR, GEORGE (1986) Ephesians in The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.

HASKER, WILLIAM (1989) God, Time, and Knowledge, Ithaca, Cornell University Press. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (1993) ‘C. Robert Mesle, John Hick’s Theodicy: A Process Humanist Critique’, in Philosophy of Religion, Volume 34, Number 1, pp. 55-56. Dordrecht, Netherlands, Philosophy of Religion. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (1994) ‘Can Philosophy Defend Theology?’, in Faith and Philosophy, Volume 11, Number 2, April, pp. 272-278. Wilmore, Kentucky, Asbury College. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2000) ‘The Problem of Evil in Process Theism and Classical Free Will Theism’, in Process Studies, Volume. 29, Number 2, Fall-Winter, pp. 194-208. Claremont, California, Religion Online. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2003) ‘Counterfactuals and Evil’, in Philosophia Christi, Volume 5, Number 1, pp. 235-249. La Mirada, California, Biola University. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2003) ‘Is Free-Will Theism Religiously Inadequate? A Reply to Ciocchi’, in Religious Studies, Volume 39, Number 4, December, pp. 431-440. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

HASKER, WILLIAM (2007) ‘Peter van Inwagen, The Problem of Evil’, in Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews, Notre Dame, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. 

HENRY, CARL (1983) God, Revelation and Authority: Volume 6: God Who Stands and Stays, Waco, Word 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. 

HILLE, ROLF (2004) ‘A Biblical-Theological Response to the Problem of Theodicy in the Context of the Modern Criticism of Religion’, in Evangelical Review of Theology, Volume 28, Number 1, pp. 21-37. Carlisle, UK, Evangelical Review of Theology. 

HOWARD-SNYDER, DANIEL AND JOHN O’LEARY-HAWTHORNE (1998) ‘Transworld Sanctity and Plantinga’s Free Will Defence’, in International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Volume 44, Number 1, August, Springer, Netherlands, Publisher International Journal for Philosophy of Religion.

HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

HUME, DAVID (1779)(2004) Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Digireads.com/Neeland Media LLC, Lawrence, Kansas.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1998) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated and edited by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

KANT, IMMANUEL (1781)(1787)(1929)(2006) Critique of Pure Reason, Translated by Norman Kemp Smith, London, Macmillan. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1997) Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Mary Gregor (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1788)(1898)(2006) The Critique of Practical Reason, Translated by Thomas Kingsmill Abbott, London, Longmans, Green, and Co. 

KANT, IMMANUEL (1791)(2001) ‘On The Miscarriage of All Philosophical Trials in Theodicy’, in Religion and Rational Theology, Translated by George di Giovanni and Allen Wood, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

KLEIN, WILLIAM W., CRAIG, C. BLOMBERG, AND ROBERT L. HUBBARD, JR. (1993) Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, London, Word Publishing. 

LAFOLLETTE, HUGH (1980) ‘Plantinga on Free Will Defence’, in International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 11, The Hague, Martimus Nijhoff Publishers.

LEIBNIZ, G.W. (1710)(1998) Theodicy, Translated by E.M. Huggard Chicago, Open Court Classics. 

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. 

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

MESLE, C. ROBERT (1986) ‘The Problem of Genuine Evil: A Critique of John Hick’s Theodicy’, in The Journal of Religion, Volume 66, Number 4, pp. 412-430. October, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. 

MESLE, C. ROBERT (1991) John Hick’s Theodicy, New York, St. Martin’s Press. 

MESLE, C. ROBERT (2004) ‘Suffering, Meaning, and the Welfare of Children: What Do Theodicies Do?’, in American Journal of Theology & Philosophy, Volume 25, Number 3, September. Lamoni, Iowa, Graceland University.

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

MOLTMANN, JÜRGEN (1999) ‘Perseverance’, in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Ltd.

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.

LIGHTFOOT, JOHN B. (1993) The Destination of the Epistle to the Ephesians in Biblical Essays, New York, Macmillan. The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee. 

PETERSON, MICHAEL (1982) Evil and the Christian God, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House. 

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. 

QUINN, PHILIP L. (1996) ‘Philosophy of Religion’, Robert Audi (ed.), in The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 

ROTH, JOHN K. ‘Introduction’ (1892-1907)(1969) in The Moral Philosophy of William James, John K. Roth (ed.), Thomas Y. Crowell Company, New York. 

ROTH, JOHN K. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.), Atlanta, John Knox Press.

RUETHER, ROSEMARY R. (1998) Introducing Redemption in Christian Feminism, Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press.

RUSSELL, BERTRAND (1957)(1976) Why I am not a Christian, Simon and Schuster Inc., in John R. Burr and Milton Goldinger (eds.), Philosophy and Contemporary Issues, London, Collier Macmillan Publishers. 

SPENCER, AIDA BESANÇON (1991) ‘Literary Criticism’, in David Alan Black and David S. Dockery (eds.), New Testament Criticism and Interpretation, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

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

TENNANT, F.R.(1906) The Origin and Propagation of Sin, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

TENNANT, F.R.(1930)(1956) Philosophical Theology, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

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. 

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

WILLIAMS, ROWAN (2000) On Christian Theology, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. 

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

WOODWARD, JAMES AND STEPHEN PATTISON (2000)(2007)(eds.), The Blackwell Reader in Pastoral and Practical Theology, Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.

WRIGHT, N.T., Colossians and Philemon, (1986)(1989), IVP, Eerdmans, Grand Rapids.

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

Predestined (PhD)

Solva, Pembrokeshire, Wales (trekearth.com)



The new coat of arms of the University of Wales, Trinity Saint David. I am emailing them now again, this time higher up the chain, way higher, asking for my official paperwork. This will be the third email, or emails perhaps, in three weeks I have sent.

A certain relative said (paraphrased), 'Why don't you apply for a job there and state that your doctorate was confirmed by email (which it was)'.

Predestined (PhD)

In my mind, the concept of compatibilism, although the term is not used,[1] is implied in Scripture. The subject of predestination for salvation, for example, is a complex theological discussion and could be a topic for a Biblical Greek thesis.[2] However, within Ephesians 1,[3] ‘predestined’ which is προορίσας[4] within Ephesians 1: 5,[5] and in the context is ‘predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ’[6] and προορισθέντες[7] at Ephesians 1: 11, as in ‘we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to his purpose’[8] appear to support Reformed compatibilist notions. Strong defines proorizw[9] which is the root word connected to the forms of the word in Ephesians 1, as to limit in advance in figurative terms,[10] and to predetermine, determine before, ordain, and predestinate.[11] Bauer defines the root word as meaning to decide before hand, predestine of God and applies this definition to Ephesians 1: 5 and 11.[12] Minimally, there appears reasonable textual support from this verse[13] that could support a Reformed compatibilistic perspective on how God chooses persons for his ultimate culminated Kingdom.

There are incompatibilist, evangelical counters to the Reformed view.[14] Ephesians scholar Francis Foulkes (1989) explains that predestination is not in opposition to human free will.[15] The gospel of grace was offered to all persons,[16] and those persons that accepted the message were elected.[17] Foulkes insists that the human faith required rests totally on God and not in self.[18] Foulkes then shifts the issue to the idea that election is not simply salvation, but also holiness of life.[19] He defines predestined as ‘marked beforehand.’[20] It is understood as a divine, eternal plan.[21] Foulkes presentation is commendable and reasonable and although his definition is similar to that of Strong[22] and Bauer,[23] he appears to downplay a deterministic aspect of the word.[24] I do not agree, but inevitably, even with the use of linguistic sources there is room for debate and I lean toward a compatibilistic understanding based on Ephesians 1.[25] Browning, an Oxford New Testament scholar,[26] also sides with a view similar to Foulkes noting that God has a plan of salvation for humanity and persons may freely accept or reject this plan on a personal basis.[27] Within Reformed theology, election is based on God’s plan and initiative to save the elect,[28] as opposed to primarily foreknowledge[29] of human acceptance of the gospel message within a Reformed, Calvinistic framework.

Schelling also presents a view on predestination[30] that human beings act today as they have always acted since ‘eternity’ and at the beginning of creation.[31] Persons continue to act wickedly because in eternity human beings took a stand in ‘egotism and selfishness.’[32] Within this view, passion and desire which can at times go wrong, represent freedom in the nature of human beings.[33] All persons are born with a ‘dark principle of evil attached to them.’[34] Persons can be good, even with this darkness through ‘divine transmutation.’[35] This non-traditional perspective would view human beings as predestined to commit evil[36] but allows for God to still work good within persons.[37]

I reason that the Bible when taken in proper context,[38] provides some important insights[39] into the logical and gratuitous problems of evil, and I favour the Reformed perspective strongly without negating the other views, including incompatibilism, in an unfair manner. Although I am a theist, I readily admit that atheists too have some good insights[40] at times, as for example Flew[41] and Mackie[42] make some reasonable criticisms of Plantinga’s work as discussed in Chapter Two.

[1] The term being a modern philosophical one.

[2] This is not a Biblical Studies PhD and I was therefore advised to limit my Biblical work within this thesis, but I seek accuracy in my Biblical interpretations.

[3] A key Chapter for Reformed views on compatibilism.

[4] The Greek New Testament (1993: 654).

[5] The Greek New Testament (1993: 654).

[6] The New American Standard Version Bible (1984: 1322).

[7] The Greek New Testament (1993: 655).

[8] The New American Standard Version Bible (1984: 1322).

[9] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[10] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[11] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[12] Bauer (1979: 709).

[13] I realize many other verses could be examined concerning this subject. I provide Ephesians 1 as a prime Reformed example within a limited space allotted for this topic.

[14] Foulkes (1989: 55).

[15] Foulkes (1989: 55).

[16] Foulkes (1989: 55). Browning (1997: 301).

[17] Foulkes (1989: 55). Browning writes that the New Testament does not state that those that reject this offer are damned to hell. Browning (1997: 301).

[18] Foulkes (1989: 55). Frankly, Foulkes does not explain how this works within his incompatibilistic system.

[19] Foulkes (1989: 55). I can agree that God does work out holiness in his people.

[20] Foulkes (1989: 56).

[21] Foulkes (1989: 56).

[22] Strong (1890)(1986: 81).

[23] Bauer (1979: 709).

[24] Foulkes (1989: 55-56).

[25] I can still consider incompatibilistic notions and other perspectives, when needed.

[26] Browning (1997: i). Browning provides an Anglican perspective.

[27] Browning (1997: 301).

[28] Calvin (1543)(1996: 200).

[29] Thiessen (1956: 344).

[30] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[31] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66). Creation is not passive and is dynamic and in constant activity. Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxiii). This non-passive activity included rebellion within Schelling’s view.

[32] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[33] Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxv).

[34] Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxv).

[35] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[36] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[37] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[38] Franke (2005: 9). Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 4 Volume 1).

[39] Admittedly they are non-exhaustive. This is a major reason why we have discussions in regard to theodicy as God is not crystal clear concerning the issue in Scripture.

[40] I personally relate to many of the objections raised against an all-powerful, good God in this world filled with evil. I simply reason God has perfect motives and a track record in Christ, whereas an atheist would have unbelief. This does not mean we do not share a mutual hatred of much evil and suffering.

[41] Flew (1955: 150-153).

[42] Mackie (1971) in Plantinga (1977)(2002: 32-33). Mackie (1955)(1996: 250-253).

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

BROWNING, W.R.F. (1997) Dictionary of the Bible, 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.

FLEW, ANTONY (1955) ‘Theology and Falsification’, in Antony Flew and A. MacIntrye (eds.), New Essays in Philosophical Theology, London, SCM, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press.

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

FOULKES, FRANCIS (1989) Ephesians, Grand Rapids, Inter-Varsity Press.

GUTMANN, JAMES (1845)(1936) ‘Introduction’ in SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.

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.

SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago.

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

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

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

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


Pea green sea, Solva, Wales (trekearth.com)

Divinity student? Fundamentalist? Hmm

The University of Wales, Trinity Saint David

1. Dr. Russ Murray

September 3

This morning via the postgraduate department, my internal reviewer confirmed he agrees with the external reviewer that my post-viva PhD revisions are acceptable and that I have passed the PhD research thesis and am now a Doctor.

I will await the proper paperwork by regular mail, but email confirmation shall suffice for now.

This has been a long process for which I started with the University in 2004 and have gone through three advisors.

But it is a valuable degree with two stamps. The second stamp is from Wales, Trinity Saint David, which is a new University which is in existence by a merger with the University of Wales, Lampeter, and Trinity University College. I am currently with the Lampeter campus (distance learning), but actually started with Wales at Trinity University, although I have not physically been to the campus.

The merger has slowed up the processing of my Doctorate, but I am pleased with my result.

Trinity Saint David link



Rankings related to Wales, Lampeter, my campus.

Wales, Lampeter Rankings link

'May 2009

In the most recent Complete University Guide published in association with The Independent newspaper, the Department of Theology & Religious Studies at the University of Wales Lampeter was ranked 13th in the UK.'

'In December 2008, the Research Institute for Theology & Religious Studies was rated 9th in the UK for its research strength by Research Fortnight magazine in its RAE 2008 Analysis Power Rankings.'

'Then in February (2009), The Guardian newspaper placed the Department in first position in the UK for the number of postgraduate distance learning students.'

The first stamp is from The University of Wales in Cardiff. Wales is a series of accredited Universities, including Trinity Saint David and is affiliated with Cardiff University. With 100, 000 students the University of Wales would be one of the largest Universities in the United Kingdom.

My first advisor at Wales stated it was the second largest in the UK.

My thinking is that Wales, Lampeter has a high ranking on its own, and this should be boosted by the merger. So, with the second stamp from Wales, Trinity Saint David I have done well.

With the Wales first stamp it is less specific to my degree but the size of the institution does carry much credibility.

I started at Manchester, but this degree is just as valuable. I could have spent months working on passing a GRE (general knowledge test) and signed with Cambridge, but for Theology and Philosophy of Religion, although Cambridge is more famous than Wales, I doubt my CV would be boosted by a Cambridge degree over Wales. The level of work would be identical and Wales is very well-known in my field.

My preferences were London, Cambridge, Durham, Oxford, Wales, Edinburgh, Sheffield and Manchester and I received two research degrees from Wales, and so with God's help I succeeded.

University of Wales link



Now I can upgrade my Curriculum Vitae properly and start the process of looking for employment as a professor, worldwide. This will be much work.

Thanks for all the support, and comments appreciated if you feel so led.

2. Divinity student? Fundamentalist? Hmm

August 31

As some of you may have realized, as well as continuing my education in theology, philosophy of religion and Biblical studies, I also dabble with psychology. I actually took some psychology courses for my degrees.

Desiring a diverse education, I emailed a secular psychologist and businessman a few months ago. He was friendly, somewhat helpful, quite intelligent, and claimed to be so, having worked in special capacities for governments. Now, I basically admitted his greater knowledge and intelligence in some areas by writing him and asking for his advice, even though overall, his formal education was less than mine.

But, in many ways, so what, academic degrees represent types of intelligence in certain areas only.

Although he had some good advice, two major red flags came up in our dialogue.

Now please realize I have worked within secular Religious Studies academia for over ten years and so I have developed a sensitivity with certain semantics.

One, although I clearly pointed out, listing my degrees, I was working within a secular University within the fields of Theology and Philosophy of Religion, concerning theodicy and the problem of evil, he stated that I was a 'Divinity' student. This as opposed to acknowledging me as a Theologian, and Philosopher or more accurately a Philosopher of Religion. I also provided my links to my theology blogs.

Importantly for context, our discussion was in regard to relationships and perceived intelligence, including social and academic intelligence and associated success.

My education was not viewed by him as having notable social status.

Please note, I am not being egotistical here, I realize although I am not typical I suppose, I am an average man in many ways. Perhaps most ways. This post is not primarily about me, but about worldviews.

Now, I realize semantics can be tricky, but in my mind anyway, a 'Divinity' student can be a brilliant academic, and certainly there are ones I can learn from. But typically it is someone studying to be a pastor, church worker or perhaps missionary, which are generally less academic endeavours. I did attend Canadian Baptist Seminary at Trinity Western University but did not take the M.DIV degree, but did the MTS degree.

For example from Loyola, at the University of Chicago, it describes their M.DIV degree.

Chicago

'The Master of Divinity (M.Div.), is a comprehensive degree designed to meet the educational needs of persons called to professional ministerial leadership. Those who elect to pursue this Master of Divinity degree are making a major commitment to prepare for pastoral ministry, choosing to join in the adventure of discerning their gifts and preparing themselves for a life of religious leadership in an evolving church and society.'

From my academic experience, I reason this is a typical description of a M.DIV.

I am not criticizing the intellectual ability of persons taking this degree, but this type of degree is not generally as academic as the MTS, or more so secular MPhil or PhD research only degrees.

Did perhaps this psychologist, not know the difference? Quite likely to some degree, but the red flag comes from his overall downplaying of Religious Studies.

Therefore:

My reasoning is that he views even the higher degrees in Religious Studies as simply glorified Divinity degrees. In other words, Theology and Philosophy of Religion are intellectually secondary as academic disciplines.

So, I kindly corrected the gentleman and pointed out his mistake via email.

There was no answer...which is typical in that type of situation.

I am reading too much into his view? Perhaps. Well, let us go to point two.

Two, he stated I needed to change the type of people that I wished to associate with in certain ways. He claimed that I should avoid certain relationships with fundamentalist Christians, in content seemingly as if all Bible-believing Christians were stereotypical American fundamentalists. Within the context he wrote, he labelled the fundamentalists as being naive in certain aspects. He did not state I was a fundamentalist.

Now, I can admit, certainly some fundamentalists will be naive in certain ways, as will some non-fundamentalists, but the red flag came up in basically labelling all Bible-believing Christians as stereotypical fundamentalists.

C.T. McIntire states that fundamentalism is a movement that arose after World War One in the United States which attempted to reaffirm orthodox Protestant theology and defend it against liberal theology. McIntire (1996: 433). Since then the movement has diversified as has its meanings. McIntire (1996: 433). Connections are made to non-academics that are leaders, such as the now late Jerry Falwell, Tim La Haye, Hal Lindsey and Pat Robertson. McIntire (1996: 435).

Now, I can admit that I, and certain Christian persons I could have actual or potential relationships with would to certain degrees share some of the views of American fundamentalism.

But, in reality, I and many of the Christian persons I could have actual or potential relationships with, are not American fundamentalists.

With me for example:

I am not American.
I was not educated in American fundamentalist or Christian institutions.
My early Christian education was via moderate liberal Christian Sunday school.
I am an academic educated in Canadian Christian institutions of a moderate conservative nature and secular British Universities that would be moderately liberal.
I am not culturally an American fundamentalist, but by years of study I am Christian, Reformed, and Evangelical, although also not culturally American Reformed or Evangelical.
My degrees and my writing topics concerning theodicy, the problem of evil, the nature of God, non-conformity to certain aspects of cultural Christianity and the need for critical thinking clearly place me outside of American fundamentalism in many ways.
I am a moderate conservative.

Now, was the psychologist aware of much of this? No, not likely.

Therefore:

The assumption appears to be Theology and Philosophy of Religion Studies are largely at least, based in fundamentalism and that these disciplines and all Religious Studies are intellectually secondary as disciplines.

In the same reply that I dealt with the Divinity issue, I dealt with the fundamentalism issue and of course received no reply.

I am misreading his views? That is possible, yes. But in my time in the UK, I realized sitting in some meetings that North American religious studies of any conservative nature were primarily written-off as fundamentalist and evangelical and therefore academically lightweight.

The kind of work supposed 'Divinity' students would do.

I reason the kind and intelligent psychologist was basically reasoning the same thing.

MCINTIRE, C.T. (1996) ‘Fundamentalism’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.

End

In this post are ten more of my favourite desktop photos from the last decade plus years.


Grand Canyon, Australia


Anse Couleuvre, France (trekearth.com)


Where is this?


Moezel, Germany (trekearth.com)


Fire Lake, BC (trekearth.com)


The University of Wales, Bangor. Where I earned my MPhil thesis degree. I have never set foot on campus or been in Bangor.


Cha Grande, Brazil (trekearth.com)


Bahia, Honda Bridge, South Florida (trekearth.com)


Maple Ridge, BC (thekingpin68)
My estate is on the right, Mr. Walter T. Franklin's house is down that road heading east.


Maple Ridge, BC (thekingpin68)
From my back window. Sometimes I pray while looking at that crooked Evergreen Tree. I am thinking of me, you, or both of us?;)