Some Problems in Process Theodicy

1981 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Frankenberry
Keyword(s):  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Wallace Stevens ◽  
Human History ◽  
Moral Goodness ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Process Theism ◽  
To Come

What good is divinity if it can come only in dreams and shadows…? (Wallace Stevens)It is a well-known and rarely challenged assumption that one of the chief merits of Whitehead's cosmology is that it enables religious thinkers to come at the problem of God in relation to the presence of evil in an entirely new way. Among the virtues most commonly appealed to in praise of the Whiteheadian theodicy are its emphasis on God's persuasive, rather than controlling power; its defence of the moral goodness of the God whose nature is reconceived in the light of the problem of evil; and its provision for a realistic hope in the redemptive processes operative in divine and human history. However, none of these aspects of process theodicy is without serious problems. In what follows I will present certain reasons why I do not believe process theism has made good its claim to have solved, with the help of Whitehead's philosophy, the problem of evil. Rather, I will suggest that like the story of what happened to the donkey laden with salt, who took to the water, process theology's ‘solution’ to the problem of evil dissolves in the dialectic river of life, until nothing is left but the verbal sack in which it is contained. Much of the force of this critique will hinge on recognizing the systematic implications of the role of ambiguity in a processive-relational universe, a position I will summarize in conclusion.

Sin and Evil

2021 ◽  
pp. 234-249
Author(s):  
David P. Barshinger
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Pastoral Ministry ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Original Sin ◽  
Christian Doctrine ◽  
The Bible ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
In Christ

This chapter describes Jonathan Edwards’s doctrine of sin and evil. It emphasizes the role of the Bible as foundational to his theology while also highlighting his desire to defend the reasonableness of traditional Christian doctrine in light of eighteenth-century intellectual challenges. The chapter explores Edwards’s theodicy in response to the problem of evil—how he sought to absolve God of the charge that he is the author of evil. It describes Edwards’s doctrine of original sin and human depravity, which he explained by defending the universality of sin and the transmission of Adam’s sin to his posterity and in which he developed an innovative metaphysic using occasionalism and continuous creationism. As a pastor, Edwards preached on sin to warn people of punishment, call them to repentance, and emphasize redemption in Christ. The chapter recommends giving greater attention to Edwards’s sermons and pastoral ministry in understanding his view of sin and evil.

Contemporary Moral Apologists

2019 ◽  
pp. 198-209
Author(s):  
David Baggett ◽  
Jerry L. Walls
Keyword(s):  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Divine Command ◽  
Moral Argument ◽  
Divine Command Theory ◽  
Moral Goodness ◽  
William Lane Craig ◽  
Natural Signs ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Moral Duties ◽  
Moral Arguments

A. C. Ewing worked on moral goodness; Austin Farrer focused on the value and dignity of persons; George Mavrodes underscored the odd nature of binding moral duties in a naturalistic world. Robert Adams did work in theistic ethics that produced innovative variants of the moral argument; his wife, Marilyn Adams, demonstrated how God’s incommensurable goodness can address versions of the problem of evil. Linda Zagzebski identified three ways we need moral confidence. C. Stephen Evans defended divine command theory and a natural signs approach to apologetics. John Hare did landmark work on moral arguments. William Lane Craig used the moral argument to powerful effect in books and debates. C. Stephen Layman used the overriding reason thesis and conditional thesis in his variant of the argument. Scott Smith, Mark Linville, Angus Menuge, and Angus Ritchie have offered brilliant epistemic moral arguments. Paul Copan has used history to augment the moral argument.

scholarly journals Is the Theory of Karman the Solution to the Problem of Evil? Some Thoughts from Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (10) ◽  
pp. 862
Author(s):  
Elisa Freschi
Keyword(s):  
Philosophy Of Religion ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Unitary Theory ◽  
Religion And Ethics ◽  
The Problem Of Evil

Several scholars have discussed various versions of the theory of karman as offering a convincing solution to the problem of evil. Arthur Herman even thinks that the theory of karman is the ultimate theodicy (1976). Such scholars tend to imagine that a unitary theory of karman can be reconstructed as the backbone of most of Sanskrit philosophy of religion and ethics. In this article, I discuss the role of the theory of karman and the problem of evil in one of the schools of Sanskrit philosophy which is still alive and thriving, namely Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta. Is karman really the central key to theodicy in this school? Additionally, does the school’s theory of karman correspond to what Herman, Chadha, Trakakis, Sharma and others discuss?

scholarly journals Evil as Privation in Neoplatonism. Simplicius and Philoponus in Defense of Matter

2017 ◽  
pp. 391-408
Author(s):  
R. Loredana Cardullo
Keyword(s):  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Faithful Interpretation

The aim of this paper is to highlight the decisive contribution of Simplicius and Philoponus to the resolution of the problem of evil in Neoplatonism. A correct and faithful interpretation of the problem, which also had to agree with Plato’s texts, became particularly needed after Plotinus had identified evil with matter, threatening, thus, the dualistic position, which was absent in Plato. The first rectification was made by Proclus with the notion of parhypostasis, i.e., “parasitic” or “collateral” existence, which de-hypostasized evil, while at the same time challenging the Plotinian theory that turned evil into a principle that was ontologically opposed to good. In light of this, the last Neoplatonic exegetes, Simplicius and Philoponus, definitely clarified the “privative” role of kakon, finally relieving matter from the negative meaning given to it by Plotinus and restoring metaphysical monism. 

scholarly journals Evil as Privation in Neoplatonism. Simplicius and Philoponus in Defense of Matter

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 391-408
Author(s):  
R. Loredana Cardullo
Keyword(s):  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Faithful Interpretation

The aim of this paper is to highlight the decisive contribution of Simplicius and Philoponus to the resolution of the problem of evil in Neoplatonism. A correct and faithful interpretation of the problem, which also had to agree with Plato’s texts, became particularly needed after Plotinus had identified evil with matter, threatening, thus, the dualistic position, which was absent in Plato. The first rectification was made by Proclus with the notion of parhypostasis, i.e., “parasitic” or “collateral” existence, which de-hypostasized evil, while at the same time challenging the Plotinian theory that turned evil into a principle that was ontologically opposed to good. In light of this, the last Neoplatonic exegetes, Simplicius and Philoponus, definitely clarified the “privative” role of kakon, finally relieving matter from the negative meaning given to it by Plotinus and restoring metaphysical monism.

Can I Believe?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
John G. Stackhouse
Keyword(s):  
Popular Religion ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Human History ◽  
Christian Religion ◽  
The World ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
The Face ◽  
Christian Commitment ◽  
Do So

Maybe Christianity is actually true. Maybe it is what believers say it is. But at least two problems make the thoughtful person hesitate. First, there are so many other options. How could one possibly make one’s way through them to anything like a rational and confident conclusion? Second, why do so many people choose to be Christian in the face of so many reasons not to be Christian? Yes, many people grow up in Christian homes and in societies, but many more do not. Yet Christianity has become the most popular religion in the world. Why? This book begins by taking on the initial challenge as it outlines a process: how to think about religion in a responsible way, rather than settling for such soft vagaries as “faith” and “feeling.” It then clears away a number of misunderstandings from the basic story of the Christian religion, misunderstandings that combine to domesticate this startling narrative and thus to repel reasonable people who might otherwise be intrigued. The second half of the book looks at Christian commitment positively and negatively. Why do two billion people find this religion to be persuasive, thus making it the most popular “explanation of everything” in human history? At the same time, how does Christianity respond to the fact that so many people find it utterly implausible, especially because of its narrow insistence on “just one way to God,” and because of the problem of evil that seems to undercut everything it asserts? Grounded in scholarship but never ponderous, Can I Believe? takes on the hard questions as it welcomes the intelligent inquirer to give Christianity at least one good look.

Augustine on Evil

Evil ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 155-193
Author(s):  
Peter King
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Moral Evil ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Western Tradition ◽  
Full Generality ◽  
Natural Processes ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Positive Feature ◽  
To Come ◽  
Free Will Defense

Augustine’s account of evil has influenced most later thinkers in the western tradition. He argues for three central theses: (a) evil is the lack of some positive feature that ought to be present, a “privation”; (b) moral evil comes about solely from the less-than-perfect free choices of rational beings; and (c) all suffering—which need not be the result of moral evil but perhaps of natural processes or events—is morally justified. As part of his defense of (b), Augustine states in full generality the problem of evil (namely, how can there be any genuine evil in a world presided over by an omnipotent and benevolent deity?), and articulates in reply the free will defense. The arguments Augustine offers in support of the free will defense, and in favor of (a)–(c), are set forth and their implications assessed. The upshot is a coherent account of evil that dominated the debates for many centuries to come.

scholarly journals Facing the problem of evil

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Welz
Keyword(s):  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Visual Images ◽  
Holocaust Survivor ◽  
Mental Images ◽  
Radical Evil ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
The Media ◽  
The One

This article explores imagination as a means of ethical re-orientation in the aftermath of atrocity. The discussion of the problem of evil is based on Hannah Arendt’s critique of Kant and her notion of ‘rootless’ rather than ‘radical’ evil. On this basis, the orienting potential of visual images is investi­gated with regard to images of violence in the media on the one hand, and, on the other, with regard to Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam. Then the role of verbal and mental images of humanity or inhumanity is discussed with reference to the Holocaust survivor Jorge Semprun’s testimony in his book Literature or Life. Finally, the biblical motif of the human being created in the image of an invisible God, the imago Dei, comes into view as an exemplary image of humanity that appears in a framework of interpretation where the invisible is mediated with the help of verbal, visual and/or mental images.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document