We have hinted throughout this chapter that the ultimate solution to the question of evil's continued existence is faith. The rhetorical question Abraham put to God in Genesis 18:25 sums it up well: "Will not the judge of all the earth do what is right?" The answer for the Christian is an unequivocal "Yes." We have little reason to believe in God at all if God is not all powerful and benevolent, and the alternative to God is not a friendlier world.
Accordingly, if a good God exists, we must assume that everything that happens fits with His existence. We must assume that despite the fact that we cannot always understand why He does not stop certain evils and sufferings, that God is in control and that God loves us. Part of the solution is thus to recognize that our understanding of things is extremely limited.
The soul making and free will theodicies make a certain amount of sense as well, even if they do not seem to account fully for the issue. It seems true that not all pain is bad and that to some extent we may as a culture be spoiled by the possibilities Western culture affords to avoid displeasure. It also makes sense in general to us that a world in which we are free to choose the good is a better world than one in which we must choose the good.
But none of these explanations eliminates the necessity for faith. Kierkegaard as usual shakes his head at us for even thinking we might be able to understand the workings of God. Blaise Pascal (1600's) similarly suggests that if God made everything entirely clear, He might move our head but not our heart.
“We can understand nothing of God’s works unless we accept the principle that he wished to blind some and enlighten others (232)... God wishes to move the will rather than the mind. Perfect clarity would help the mind and harm the will (234).”
Perhaps he assumes that human beings are more rational than they are. Nevertheless, he highlights the fact that whatever equation we come up with to explain the continued existence of evil in the face of a loving God, one of the most significant elements will be faith.
5 comments:
You are speaking here as if God truley intervens in the affairs of men...Isn't it about human leadership and whether they have "won the right" to influence our lives? And if not, why not...and is that important to address....the issue of trust....We see everyday in our political "world" how failures to be upfront about the issues affect the publice's ability to trust and elect and freely follow...
In some of my reading, the issues are too individual and complex to assess...you are saying that when cognition limits faith, then behaviorists "come in" to
"make sure" to verify faith! This is absurd, because that means an individual's faith is still dependent on human leadership.
Aren't Wesleyans more inclined toward a "moral government" theory of atonement? If that is so, then moral order would be the epitome of "what God wants"...and it is the Church's responsiblity to underwrite the "will of God" even by force...even if that means injustice is done...for the Church's "evangelical" message is all about "faith, grace and mercy"...at least the current understanding of atonement...
Hebrews would be the epitome of what God would do "in the church" via the church in "disciplining" and "making diciples"....and coercion is necessary at times in the name of dicipline and "for the common good". This could be palatable IF everyone was treated with the same information of "vision" in specifying needs of the organization and function of the individual...But, blind faith??? NO, I don't believe that God desires "blind faith" as it regards human leadership...
On a personal level again, cultish mentality is "blind faith" as it regards following...I have been duped before and my defenses are up.
I believe more in God's gifting of self responsibility as it pertains to life and its goals.
I am making some of these assumptions, all of which are open to examination.
1. That God truly intervenes in the affairs of humans.
2. That Christian faith is assumed in the conclusion.
I haven't assumed that this is blind faith but have assumed somewhat of a "I believe in order to understand" posture.
Let's say for the sake of argument that all these things are false. Then we are left with Machiavelli's "might makes right" and Foucault's "power is knowledge." And since the contract for this philosophy textbook is at an evangelical Christian institution, which sells the book, employs me, and to which parents send their children thinking they will receive an evangelical education, then this is the truth for this book :-)
So we are left with a dilemma. Either these assumptions are correct in which case this approach is valid. Or if these assumptions are wrong then there is only power and that power doesn't care about high minded ideals. There is no basis for arguing or complaining about such powers when I take this position. Either God exists and loves us or the world is a cold, uncaring place that will run us over if we don't get out of the way.
I think I'll choose to believe--it's ultimately a much nicer option!
Many have already been "run over', that is what "human rights" is all about!!!
In understanding your approach, "I believe in order to understand", you are approaching and defending faith By faith...this is a tautology, isn't it?
In looking at things diferrently, "I understand to believe", means that we verify faith through our senses. This is true but cannot be addressed except indiviudally, as each individual is a specific "context"...and because we are personable, then we are made not to be objectified and studied in the abstract, but loved and known...
Anytime someone presumes upon another, there is a wounding of relationship and relationship must be built on trust, which is built on knowing....
Behaviorists believe in social conditioning, which has "truth" in it, but is not true in totality, for it is only in defining the meaning of the behavior that a behavior can be understood. And it is only in understanding the reasons for doing something that a cultural or social value is understood...and rejected, modified or embraced.
So, even though I adhere to faith in faith, as faith is about an unseen God and our understanding of him remains beyond our limited minds....I do believe that there are reasons about the creation order that are imperative to "understand" and some of these are paradoxal truths...
And unfortunately, without "ideals" we have no vision of God's nature to base what we do in this world...so I believe that leadership should care about ideals....
Post a Comment