What is theodicy?

What is theodicy?

Genesis 1:26-27 The image of God...

“What does Genesis 1:26-27 tell us about the 'image' of God in mankind?” 

Genesis 1:26-27 references the creation of man. The first notable distinction in this creative account is the shift from third person references to God’s creative command (“let there be”) to a personal self reference, “Let Us make.” (Gen 1:6, 26) This majestic plurality is echoed in Isaiah’s experience in Isaiah 6:8 when God asks, “who will go for Us?” God goes on to say, “man in Our own image, according to Our likeness.” (Gen 1:26) Man is later said to be created male and female, thus a plurality of oneness. God’s use of a majestic plural is not to be overlooked in positioning himself to the creation of mankind. John H. Sailhamer concludes that divine plurality is expressed as a reflection of God in mankind, as man and woman, of God’s own relationship with himself. (Gaebelein 1990, 38) Karl Barth calls this an obvious assertion. (Barth 1956, 195) Although the assertion may not be inconclusively wrought dogmatically, the majestic plural certainly opens insight to the Trinity of God.

Regarding the inclusive details of this “image” bestowed upon mankind at his creation, we may perhaps ask, in what aspects and to what decree was the divine nature reflected in human beings? In adherence to contextual surroundings, Genesis 1:28 supplies illuminating insight. Directly following God’s revelation of mankind’s image bearing privilege, we see that he is given dominion, a right given to the “image bearer” to have authority over the life which is to fill the earth, as well as a commission to subdue the earth, taking an active role with a degree of sovereignty, control and direction over nature. (Davis 1998, 81) We may draw assertions regarding the nature of the “image” by the roles wherein God positions man. Man possesses numerous inherent and exclusive abilities [among creation] such as spoken language (Gen 2:19, 20); natural and moral discernment (Gen 2:16, 19; 3:8); and self conscious intellect (Gen 1:20; 3:10). Yet, contextually the image is tied to the purpose and role of man within and over God’s creation. J. Richard Middleton thus describes the image of God as “the royal function or office of human beings as God's representatives and agents in the world, given authorized power to share in God's rule over the earth's resources and creatures.” (Middleton 1994, 12)

Thoughts about the value of life before or after birth...

Here is a scenario:

I have in my hand two ten dollar bills. One has been minted by my niece. She is a very talented artist as you can see, and she has guaranteed the value of the bill in my hand for ten dollars. The other ten dollar bill is minted by the United States government, who guarantees its value.

                Which one would you rather have? Why?

                Which one is actually worth something?

                You may be surprised to know that the price of one piece of paper currency (or one bill) in 2005 was only around 5.7 cents in the United States. I am certain that my niece’s art supplies cost more to produce her ten dollar bill. Think of all the materials: markers, scissors, paper, and of course there is her time: no one wants to work for nothing you know.

                You see what really makes the $10 dollar bill in my hand worth anything to me, is the guarantee that this nation is able to back up its value. Everywhere I go in this country my $10 bill is worth ten dollars. It doesn’t matter if it is brand new and crisp or tattered and partially missing. Even the photo of Thomas Jefferson is a symbol to remind us of the prestige and the financial power represented by this former U.S. president.

                Now, let me ask you this. If a $10 dollar bill is only worth something because of whom it is supposed to represent. And the government that it makes it determines its value, how can we learn from this lesson what makes a person valuable? Who made us? Who is backing us up? Who do we represent? Now remember, I’m not ONLY talking about important people like the president, or the governor, or a popular actor or singer. I’m talking about any person, every person: old, young, popular, or shy… new and crisp or tattered and partially missing…Why are we valuable?

...The Bible explains that God created EVERYTHING in Genesis. In Genesis 1:26 the Bible talks about God making mankind and it gets really specific about what makes mankind different than ALL of the rest of creation! Genesis 1:26 says that God created mankind, male and female, in His own image! That means that we represent Him and we are valuable to Him! That $10 bill is valuable because it was printed by the United States, and we are SO MUCH MORE valuable than $10 because we are created in the image of God! This means that God not only made us in a way that we represent him, but also in a way that we can relate to him! We can speak, we can love, we can think, and we can know! Try having a meaningful conversation with your dog, and you will soon find out that you talk too much, or that people are simply totally different! People are simply different than the rest of the entire creation!

Take a step back and think with me for a second… The largest full moon you’ve ever seen is rising in a crystal clear sky; a centerpiece of splendor framed by millions of stars and galaxies painted across the heavens. David, a young shepherd who would by God’s choosing become King of Israel recognized this as he surely must have spent many evenings sleeping under the stars in the fields around Bethlehem. There were no city lights to drown out the vivid display of the night sky. David saw the handiwork of God and declared: “The heavens declare the glory of God, and the sky above proclaims his handiwork.” (Psalm 19:1 ESV) Yet, as beautiful and majestic as the universe on display before us, it is not made in God’s image. And David realized this fact too. He recognized very clearly that God made him with a specific purpose, and with a special value. In Psalm 139:13 David sings about God forming his “inward parts” and “knitting” him “together in” his “mother’s womb.” Then in verse 16 he goes so far to say that God had already established plan and purpose for the days of David’s life before He was born. These are amazing claims about the value of a person who was not even born yet!

Now another scenario:

Let's add some reason as we get down to “brass tacks.” Is a baby who is unborn really a person, with rights and privileges? Or is it only the mother who is carrying the baby who has rights? If you are on the fence; not ready to make a decision either way, let’s consider an illustration used by Ray Comfort in his documentary the 180 video. Suppose there was an abandoned building set to be imploded with dynamite, and you being the owner of the soon to be vacant lot are the honored guest. The contractor walks over to you and hands you the detonator button, but before you are able to press the button he begins to speak. He tells you that his team was unable to make a final sweep of the building before the big show, and unfortunately there may be a person left inside the building. He tells you not to worry though, because legally you have the right to press the button.  Nobody who values the life of a human being would be willing to take such a big risk, even if they weren’t sure that a person was really still inside. Why would anyone who wasn’t sure if an unborn baby was really a human with rights EVER take the chance of supporting or having an abortion? It just isn’t right!

All-Powerful, Good God in a world with Evil - Is it consistent?

            Natural disasters, wars, and disease are nearly universally recognized as evil and must be reconciled logically if we are to accept the very existence of an all powerful loving God. At face value the problems of moral and physical evil in the world appear to directly conflict with the idea of an all-powerful, good, Creator, yet they are reconcilable.

            First of all, in recognizing evil we must presume that there is a moral standard on which to weigh our viewpoint of the world. If all we know is that of natural process divorced from contingency on a necessary being, then evil is only imaginative or at best an unfounded dogmatic assertion. In fact I would be justified in saying that disasters, wars, and disease are all good because they are part of nature, the highest power, and thus the highest authority. However, if we recognize the presence of such things as evil, then we may continue to search for the source of such a standard by which we judge. Frankly, I can only infer why God permits evil within the confines of man’s willful decisions. The late English preacher Charles Spurgeon stated, “I cannot tell you why God permits moral evil, neither can the ablest philosopher on earth, nor the highest angel in heaven.” However, aside from the question why, we can ask, how can God, being all powerful, and all loving, permit evil? This is the nature of the problem, how can these facts logically coexist?

            We should separate two distinct evils addressed in your question. Moral evil simply yet not equivocally understood as sin should be addressed first as it is a predecessor of natural evil. Moral evil can be defined as “evil produced by the activities of moral agents.”[1] Rape, child abuse, lying, cheating - the list of moral evils cannot perhaps be contained in the binding of a single book. In light of Biblical revelation the potential of moral evil was available to the first moral agents on earth, Adam and Eve, made aware if not for the first time by a serpent, a mere instrument of the fallen angel, Lucifer, who by his own pride transgressed his position in God’s created order. (Eze 28:16, Gen 3:1, Rev 20:2) Evil officially entered the world at a finite time through the first man, Adam, bringing death to mankind and a curse to the creation. (Rom 5:12, Rom 8:22, Gen 3:17) It is also important to understand that in order to measure qualitatively there must be a standard and that in the beginning God measured the world and declared it “very good”. (Gen 1:31) The first moral violation on earth came when Adam disobeyed the standard spoken by God regarding the eating of fruit that God specifically forbade him to eat. The violation of God’s moral standard brought punitive results. In the time of Noah God once again put an end to rampant moral evil by destroying the earth with a flood. (Gen 6:11-13) God gave mankind autonomy in moral reasoning, and yet He requires trust and obedience to those created from nothing, yet in His likeness; Adam failed followed by all mankind. (Gen 1:27, Rom 3:23) One theologian compares the fall of man with the initial splash of a rock thrown in a quiet pond which is “followed by a continuous sequence of ripples,” the ripples are an inevitable succession.[2] Moral evil is explicitly caused by moral agents outside of the perfect will of God, albeit permitted by God for a certain time (2 Tim 4:1, Psalm 9:8, Rom 2:15-16) The groaning of our cursed earth and the disruption of the natural order will one day be fixed, but for now it is a constant reminder of the consequence of sin. (Romans 8:22) It is important not to confuse patience of a just God in judging sin with the nonexistence of a loving God due to sin’s presence. (Rom 2:4)

            The natural evil in the world is present because of sin. The creation “became the recipient of divine judgment” through mankind’s rebellion.[3] We see the effects everywhere. Natural evil could be described as “evil that occurs in the process of the functioning of the natural order.”[4] It is important to not attempt to affix all apparent evils to God’s just judgment on sin. For example, forest fires can cleanse from disease and blight, blizzards can provide necessary precipitation to maintain sufficient water levels, and often times the loss of life is caused by discernible dangers overlooked by the choices of man. (Chambers) Also, obedience to God’s law can prevent natural evils. For example if every person on earth would adhere to the Biblical standard of one man and one woman for marriage, sexually transmitted diseases could be theoretically eliminated in only a few generations. Another interesting example of moral adherence to Divine law negating natural suffering can be found in the accounts of The Bubonic Plague. Jewish communities suffered significantly lower death rates during the ordeal because of their geographical separation and also because of their adherence to Levitical sanitation laws, which drastically lowered the population of rats carrying lice infected with the disease.[5]

            The basic understanding of three premises: God is good, all powerful, and evil is permitted does logically direct us in one avenue. God in His chosen creation cannot logically remove all evil for a specific reason. The two most theologically warranted viewpoints of evil’s presence are of God’s allowance of evil as a “benign” albeit logically irreducible side effect of free will or more finitely the freedom for moral reasoning in man.[6] The second parallels the Apostle Paul in God’s “twofold purpose of evil” that men should freely act rightly toward another and for awareness of the absence of relationship with God.[7] Pessimistic philosophical viewpoints ultimately usurp God’s goodness by having it succumb to His power, while optimists or Universalists subvert God’s justice to His love, ultimately failing to ratify essential attributes of God. Any test of the validity of one’s theodicy is that system’s internal consistency.[8] Simply stating premises from a contradicting system of belief does not disprove that system; however a logically inconsistent system of belief is disproved already. Likewise, while I disagree with the theology of these other systems, they can be presented with a degree logical consistency. According to the Theocentric (opposed to an anthrocentric) testimony of Scripture, I hold that the two- fold purpose of evil is essential in understanding God’s deserved glory and His permission of evil in our world. Pastor and author John MacArthur asserts that God “has allowed evil and sin within His sovereign purposes so that His holiness and grace might be put on display.” (MacArthur 2009) As a necessary being, it is not logically fitting that God should look outside of his own attributes to act, and thus His highest priority of action is that of His own nature. Without evil, mankind cannot know God’s mercy in reconciliation, and without free moral reasoning, man cannot actively love His Creator-Redeemer.

            Aside from these philosophical quandaries lies a more personal aspect of evil contained in the religious problem of evil, namely in the experience of pain wrought by the effects. Pain is most often referred to as “physical sensation of ill feeling” or “emotional or mental stress” and it touches everyone on earth.[9] Perhaps pain or anguish in our life on this earth can best be reconciled in the act of the cross whereby God came into humanity in order to purchase back his bride from a fallen, cursed world. It becomes more evident that God patiently endures sin in order to work out His purposes of redemption for the sake of His own deserved glory. (Rom 9:22) However, God did not remove Himself so far as to not subject His only begotten Son to a most repugnant and undeserving death. This reality may be realized as He prayed to His Father in the Garden of Gethsemane. (Luke 22:44) “And being in anguish, he [Jesus] prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was like drops of blood falling to the ground. (Luke 22:44) The condition of Hematohidrosis is a testimony to the anguish endured in expectation of the agony of the cross.[10] Jesus Christ, fully God and fully man with no mixture of essence persevered being falsely accused, beaten, and crucified on a Roman cross, perhaps the most brutal execution in any time. The reality of the atoning blood shed by Jesus Christ was purposed in the Father’s mind before the foundation of the World. (1 Pet 1:20; Rev 13:8) And so we have a High Priest in Jesus who is able to sympathize with our human nature and the suffering of pain. (Heb 4:15) God has solved the problem of pain, though it is through faith in Christ and His atoning work according to His Word, and we who believe will one day be separated from all evil, pain, and even the memory of such existence (Rev 21:4).

             It is most certainly possible to honestly question and seek truth in relation to God without attacking Him. Yet, one must likewise honestly pursue truth in the Lord Jesus Christ, because “without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. (Heb 11:6)

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lester, Rob. Jewish Sanitary Laws Came from God. Creation Faith Facts.http://preachrr.wordpress.com/2010/04/17/jewish-sanitary-laws-came-from-god/ (accessed March 30, 2012).

Taylor, Paul. “Did Jesus Really Sweat Drops of Blood?” www.ChristianAnswers.net.http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t018.html (accessed March 30, 2012).

Towns, Elmer L. Theology For Today. 2nd ed. Mason, Ohio, USA: Cengage Learning, 2008.

Chambers, Aaron. “Http: //mylordandmyblog.wOrdpress.cOm/2011/06/02/moral-and-natural-evil/.” My Lord and My Blog. Entry posted June 2, 2011 .http://mylordandmyblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/moral-and-natural-evil/ (accessed March 28, 2012).

Elwell, Walter A., ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001.

Lester, Rob. “Jewish Sanitary Laws Came from God.” Creation Faith Facts.http://preachrr.wordpress.com/2010/04/17/jewish-sanitary-laws-came-from-god/ (accessed March 30, 2012).

Vermeer, Paul. Learning Theodicy: the Problem of Evil and the Praxis of Religious Education. Boston: Brill Academic Pub, 1999.

Aaron Chambers, “Http: //mylordandmyblog.wOrdpress.cOm/2011/06/02/moral-and-natural-evil/,” My Lord and My Blog, entry posted June 2, 2011.  http://mylordandmyblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/moral-and-natural-evil/(accessed March 28, 2012).

MacArthur, John. Comment on “Macarthur On Theodicy.” Baa Baa Blog. Comment posted March 9, 2009.http://baasheepbaa.blogspot.com/2009/03/macarthur-on-theodicy.html (accessed March 31, 2012).

---

[1] Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001), 414.

[2] Elmer L. Towns, Theology For Today, 2nd ed. (Mason, Ohio, USA: Cengage Learning, 2008), 504.

[3] Ibid., 505.

[4] Walter A. Elwell, ed., one Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001), 414.

[5] Rob Lester, “Jewish Sanitary Laws Came from God,” Creation Faith Facts,http://preachrr.wordpress.com/2010/04/17/jewish-sanitary-laws-came-from-god/ (accessed March 30, 2012).

[6] Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001), 412.

[7] Paul Vermeer, Learning Theodicy: the Problem of Evil and the Praxis of Religious Education (Boston: Brill Academic Pub, 1999), 33.

[8] Walter A. Elwell, ed., Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic, 2001), 414.

[9] Ibid.,  882.

[10] Paul Taylor, “Did Jesus Really Sweat Drops of Blood?” www.ChristianAnswers.net, http://christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t018.html (accessed March 30, 2012).

Jesus - God and Man

Jesus – God and Man

            Throughout the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) Jesus’ humanity is assumed. He was born of a woman (Matthew 1:18), circumcised according to Jewish law (Luke 2:21), and He died (John 19:30). Philippians 2:7 states that Jesus “made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men.” His own neighbors recognized Him during his ministry saying, “Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not his mother called Mary and his brethren James and Joseph, and Simon and Judas? (Matt 13:55) Jesus was a man, but we must not err regarding the nature and purpose of His humanity.

            Galatians 4:4 says, “But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.” Christ’s incarnation was of a specific and eternal purpose brought about within time, within humanity, and without conflict to His own Divine nature. Jesus claims this nature Himself on eight separate occasions in the Gospel of John. For example, “Jesus said unto them, ‘Verily, verily I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.” (John 8:58) This was a clear parallel between God as revealed in the Old Testament, and The Christ, “for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him.” (Col 1:16)

            Jesus is, as you assume, one person. Scripture says:  “Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.” (Romans 1:3-4) Likewise, we understand that the eternal Son of God became flesh and dwelt among us. (John 1:14) So then eternally God, Jesus became a man as we see the clear Biblical message of His two distinct natures. This reality is most plainly described in the Apostle Paul’s epistle to the Colossian Church; “For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.” (Col 2:9) This understanding cannot be determined through metaphysical reason yet just because a truth is hard to grasp, the validity cannot be rejected. Nature refers to “the inherent character or basic constitution of a person or thing” or as defined by John Wolvoord “the real essence, the inward properties which underlie all outward manifestation.” (Towns 2008, 199)

            Why is this duality of nature so significant, because, there is enmity between the nature of God and the sinful nature of fallen humanity. Furthermore, God’s law was never intended to provide a path to God, but rather reveal our sinfulness. (Rom 3:20) “For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh.” (Romans 8:3) The person Jesus Christ exists with two natures, Divine and human, in one person without necessitating the amalgamation of the two natures in any way so that the enmity could be taken away, and peace could be procured between God and man.

            Jesus’ humanity is necessary for our salvation from sin’s proper consequence through God’s righteous punishment of sin. Jesus is a substitute “who His own self bore our sins in His body.” (1 Pet 2:24) He is the once for all blood sacrifice for the sins of those who receive Him, for “without shedding of blood there is no remission.” (Heb 9:22) Because of our personal violation of God’s law we are under the just wrath of a just God, yet by God’s grace through faith in His atoning work on the cross Jesus “is the propitiation for our sin.” (1 John 2:2) Likewise, Jesus has come to save us from the curse of the law of God. The Law is  a perfect representation of Gods expectations for the ideal man without sin, expressed from His nature. Yet to maintain righteousness a faultless fulfillment of such law over man must be fulfilled by a man, a necessity stated by Jesus Himself in Matthew 5:17. Without a means of salvation provided by God, mankind cannot be saved as was spoken by the prophet Jonah, “Salvation is of the Lord.” (Jon 2:9) Salvation is then through the God-man Jesus Christ, “having abolished in His flesh the enmity, [that is], the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man [from] the two, [thus] making peace, and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.” (Eph 2:15) Jesus reconciled the enmity through offering Himself, perfect harmony of human nature and the nature of God, the acceptable sacrifice for the sin of sinful man. (Towns 2008, 220)

            We must be careful not to overemphasize Christ’s human or divine nature as He is fully God and fully man, no less God than the Father and no less man than you or me, yet He is a perfect man. This is a profound mystery revealed. Use this simple guideline to judge some of the problematic beliefs in Christology. If Christ isn’t fully man he cannot represent us as a fulfillment of righteousness as our propitiation. (Matt 5:17, Col 1:15, Rom 3:25) If Christ isn’t fully God, he cannot forgive sins or bring salvation as only God can forgive sins and salvation is of the Lord. (Jon 2:9, Mark 2:7) Early church fathers spoke in a way as to combat erroneous thinking such as Ebionatism. (Elwell 2001, 241) Jesus was not simply a man who was anointed by God; He is God in flesh who came into the world as the anointed King and who will one day in person reign eternally. God, being immutable, cannot become non-divine, as He reveals, “I the Lord your God do not change.” (Mal 3:6) The Gnostic claim that God cannot dwell in corrupt flesh disregards the “very good” creation of God in the beginning prior to the curse, and further that “the Word became flesh” to deliver the creation. (Gen 1:31, John 1:14) Similarly Arianism made Christ to be of an immutable nature like the Father, but not of one nature or substance with the father. (Elwell 2001, 95) This was quickly rejected by the Church Council of Nicea because it makes Christ to be a sort of demigod. As Moses declared in the Shema, “Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD;” and furthermore Jesus Himself claimed unity with the Father. (Deut 6:4, John 10:30)

            In His humanity Christ became the all encompassing necessity for our salvation. He likewise became our example through His humility, dependence upon the Father and the Word of God, freedom to forgive his own debtors, and his determined love for those who showed him no love on the cross. The Creator certainly is a personal God, “For we have not a high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin.” (Heb 4:15)

Bibliography

Towns, Elmer L. Theology For Today. 2nd ed. Pendleton, Or. (406 S. Main, Pendleton, Or.          97801): Cengage Learning, 2008.

Elwell, Walter A., ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. 2nd ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker   Academic, 2001.