One more thing. Don't you know if ya'll finished Hasker's newest book on theodicy, but he doesn't even claim that he has solved what many people are troubled by. Indeed, at one point he seems to make the point that God is known as a loving being ONLY by scriptural (or experiential?) revelation (this seems to imply he does not hold to the ontological argument for God and His perfections). And even then, he doesn't claim to know all the in's and out's of how that explains the sufferings that are allowed by or were intended by God. Hasker's only point is to argue that we can not prove that the problem of evil is intractable. Those philosophers who ask for more (universalists, etc) think the human heart requires more than that. They want a rational account of the big picture whether or not we can explain every detail. Hasker doesn't even seem to think we can do that.

But I appreciate the honesty of that position. These other guys, like Miller and Southgate, seem to be too easily satisfied with irrelevant points, to me. Miller seems to think that if God did not intend humans, that all the accidental natural evil that befalls them has no implications about God's benevolence. But obviously, if God is powerful enough to have prevented mutations that cause diseases, etc., His mere NON-intervention implies something about God. For as a Catholic, he HAS to believe that God both CAN and HAS intervened providentially into the creational causal nexus. Doesn't he?

Post Edited (Tom) : 1/10/2009 3:37:52 PM (GMT-6)

Post Edited (Similtude) : 1/11/2009 10:15:51 AM (GMT-6)

D, I think I should qualify my statement above about the mind of Christ not necessarily leading to a solution to the problem of evil. There is in a sense, I think, in which the mind of Christ DOES lead to the solution to the problem of evil. But it has to do with faith in God's revelation. And faith is a fruit of the Spirit. So as we have faith and trust what might seem to be counter-intuitive at first, we learn that God's revelation is NOT counter-intuitive. And eventually, we learn to see that the true solution to the problem of evil was there all along. It just isn't spelled out. It's there by implication only. But until we believe His revelation, we can't get to that implication.

There is a reason why God reveals to us many particulars on top of general injunctions like love thy neighbor as thyself. It is because we can be so screwed up and hypocritical in our minds that we would never truly love our neighbor as ourself simply by trying to implement some general principle. After all, most non-Christians will tell you they believe in the golden rule.

But apart from God's revelation about particulars, rather than bearing one another's weaknesses, we would assume our weaknesses or vices were no weaknesses or vices at all. Our self-righteousness would get in the way of truly understanding our own vices, weaknesses, and hypocrises. We have to move from milk to meat in step-wise fashion. And each step along the way, God does not allow us to be tempted above what we are able. We don't need to have a solution to the problem of evil all at once. We need to BELIEVE and act in that FAITH. Then God gives MORE!

What we can do for each other is help each other see that God's revelation is rational and coherent and that it is as plausible as any other competing world-view. Then it's up to us to believe or not. That's up to each individual. And to the extent that people disbelieve God's revelation of Himself, they will misunderstand theodicy.