Synonymous with Augustinian thought, Calvin accepted that God was responsible for suffering however refused to believe that God was also guilty of it. Calvin composed the doctrine of Providence, this referred to God’s interaction in all that occurs during our lives; “everything is subject to God and ruled by his will and that when the world has done what it may, nothing happens than what God decrees” . This innovative concept sparked instant controversy as it potentially challenged many standing ideologies of existence and religious understanding; moreover it indirectly suggests that God is responsible and to blame for the sin and corruptness present in the world. Calvin, however, did not recognize the presence of sin as a problem when regarding God’s Providence. I will continue to analyse in detail Calvin’s principles, which refute that God is at all guilty for the suffering that occurs in this world
‘God’s Providence’ illustrated that everything that takes place on earth has not only been authored by God, but is further permitted by him also. God is involved in every happening and decision making on both a large and small scale. According to Calvin each event, including the ‘insignificant’ details of our existence are working towards a significant ending; “Each is a link in the chain of events and many of the great events of history have turned on these apparently insignificant things” .
Although this ideology is an attribute to God’s omniscience it is also
Predestination: A main concept in Calvinism that stated that everyone’s life was predestined, for better or for worse
John Hick argues in this writing that the all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good Christian god is compatible with an abundance of suffering. He offers solutions to the problem of suffering which relies heavily upon a tripartite foundation. Hick divides evil into two: Moral Evil = the evil that human being cause - either to themselves or to each other. And Non-Moral Evil = the evil that is not caused by human activity - natural disasters, etc. He tries to explain that a world without pain and suffering, moral traits such as courage, patience and sympathy would not be developed.
Moreover, Calvinism was highly ascetic. Whereas, Catholicism and Lutheranism maintained that believers could essentially “work” for God’s forgiveness through faith, good works, etc., Calvinism stressed “systematic self-control necessary, in every moment” (Weber [1905] 2011: p. 127) and the “intensification of good works into a system” (Weber [1905] 2011: p. 129). These qualities suggested to Weber that Calvinism was the epitome of rationalism (Weber [1905] 2011: p. 130). In the context of religion, rationalization refers to the process of systematically organizing one’s life according to a methodical approach, with an intense orientation towards discipline, and the absence of “magic” or mystical elements (i.e., sacraments that can save the “damned”) (Kalberg 2011a: p. 422). This characteristic is what distinguishes Lutheranism from Calvinism. As opposed to Lutheranism, Weber ([1905] 2011) argues that “Calvinism forced [a] methodical organization of life upon the believer” (p. 135). This is due to the fact that salvation could always be won back in Lutheranism through penance. In contrast, Calvinism offered no means to acquire salvation, only hints or signs which were based on “uninterrupted self-control” and the “planned regulation of one’s own life” (Weber [1905] 2011: p. 136). Lutheranism was also characterized by less asceticism due to its teaching that salvation could be acquired. Therefore, Weber ([1905] 2011) also maintains that “Lutheranism lacks the psychological
Many of the choices we make, using our free will, lead to suffering. We participate in risky behavior, without thinking of the consequences. For example, people that smoke have greater chances of developing health problem (e.g., cancer), which results in pain and suffering. This type of suffering is caused by our errors and mistakes. Many of the choice we make have consequences, but is it is impossible to live in a way in which we do not take risks. Furthermore, God's existence comes from intellect and not the sense, but suffering is felt through through our senses, whether it be external or internal pain. Suffering is adventitious and not
Just as western religions accept that G-d exists, we know that evil and suffering exists. Western religions know G-d as omnipotent, omniscient, and morally good. With these three fundamental characteristics in mind, G-d would have the power to destroy evil, the knowledge to know what evil is, and the will and desire to destroy it. Thus, the western conception of an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good G-d gives rise to a new Problem of G-d. To answer this problem, many scholars have searched for a theodicy, a rational explanation for evil in the world. When analyzing Judaism, the necessity for theodicy is most prevalent, and possibly most difficult, when trying to come to terms with the Holocaust. Using Elie Wiesel as my starting point, I will address the three conclusions scholars have reached: theodicy is possible, there is a human inability to construct a convincing theodicy, and a completely rejection of any possibility for theodicy. After presenting these options, I will offer criticisms as well as explain my own rationale for supporting Wiesel’s claim that G-d deserves to be questioned because He bears responsibility for evil in the world.
In John Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion he spends a great deal of time expounding his doctrine of God's Divine providence in all of creation. He explains not only how God continually governs the laws of nature, but also how God governs man's actions and intentions to bring about His own Divine Will. Calvin believes that God's providence is so encompassing in creation that even a man's own actions, in many ways, are decreed by God. Because of this belief there arises the question, "Does Calvin leave room for the free will of man?"
The Protestant Reformation of the Catholic Church devastated the religious unity of Christian Europe, resulting in a great deal of antagonism, which in turn led to the persecutions, denial of civil rights, expulsion, and ultimately the torture and death of many men, women and children. The ongoing conflict was not consigned to one distinct European nation, but was experienced in every European nation that the Catholic Church ruled and reigned. There was no worldview in Europe at that time that allowed for the religious differences of men to coexist peaceably.
John Hick discusses in his essay The Problem of Evil, the objections to the belief in the existence of God is the presence of evil in the world. He begins by posing the traditional challenge to theism in the form of the dilemma: That if God was perfectly loving, he must wish to abolish evil, and being all powerful, is able to perfectly do so as he will its. He then proceeds to present some views regarding this issue, giving insights from three point of views, that of contemporary Christian Science, the Boston Personalist school, and the theologian Augustine. The first opinion takes evil as an illusion, as a construct of the human mind. The second confers upon God finity, God as a struggling ruler,
The age old question that is still being debated. In this essay I hope to answer a few of the big questions such as: How can a good God allow suffering? Why does evil exist? Is God like many have attributed to Him, a watchmaker, who winds us up and lets it go until it runs out? How could God allow the Holocaust? The theological field of inquiry called “theodicy”, which investigates the basic question: If God is all powerful (omnipotent), all knowing (omniscient), and all-good, (omni-benevolent) how can evil and injustice exist? Since reading Elie Wiesel’s soul shattering Night, this topic seemed fitting. I will provide rational and logical arguments as to why these things occur and how God can still be who He says He is. I will be stating dispassionately the critics of a free-will defense such as J.L Mackie and B.C Johnson, and then I will proceed to offer my responses. After having read Wiesel’s account, my heart only broke more and my mind was spinning with the question itself of How could God allow this? However, we can be mad at God for the Holocaust or for other human tragedies, but this is like a teenager who begs you to let him drive a car - promising to be responsible -, gets drunk, crashes in to a telephone pole, and then blames you for giving him the keys. If we agree that humanity must have free will, we must accept the consequences of its decisions. As Elie Wiesel wrote, “After the Holocaust I did not loose faith in God. I lost faith in mankind.”
The reformation was a religious renewal in Europe in the sixteenth century that was led by Martin Luther. Luther saw problems within the Catholic Church and wanted to fix those specific problems, not necessarily change the entire religion (Beeke). John Calvin grew up during this era and continued the reformation, but he went about it in a different way than that of Martin Luther. In his eyes it was necessary to start from scratch, which is exactly what he did, and that’s how Calvinism came about.
owe to prove his thesis about the problems of evil and atheism, Rowe asks three fundamental questions. The first question, “is there an argument for atheism based on the problem of evil that could rationally justify atheism?” Supporting his question, Rowe by uses the idea of human and animal suffering.is it reasonable for omnipotent, omniscient being(s) to permits its creation to suffer by extinguish each other for their own personal benefits. If there is such a thing as an omnibenevolent, omnipotent holy being how come the ultimate and unescapable suffering is this world has no vanish. How good is a god(s) that permits humanity to suffer greatly? In religious Christian Bible study, Jesus, many times referred to as god, vanish evil from
The problem of evil has been around since the beginning. How could God allow such suffering of his “chosen people”? God is supposedly all loving (omni-benevolent) and all powerful (omnipotent) and yet He allows His creations to live in a world of danger and pain. Two philosophers this class has discussed pertaining to this problem is B.C. Johnson and John Hick. Johnson provides the theists’ defense of God and he argues them. These include free will, moral urgency, the laws of nature, and God’s “higher morality”. Hick examines two types of theodicies – the Augustinian position and the Irenaeus position. These positions also deal with free will, virtue (or moral urgency), and the laws of nature. Johnson
What does it mean for God to be “sovereign?” This is the question that has perhaps caused more controversy than any other. For John Calvin, God was completely sovereign. Nothing outside the will of God could take place, because everything that has taken place, is taking place, or will take place has been divinely ordained before time began. God is the source of all good, and evil cannot take place without His permission. According to Calvin, all of humankind are lost in their sins, and so depraved that they are incapable of finding salvation without God performing an inner-miracle within them. This being said, God has elected to Himself a chosen people from the beginning of time, not off of merit, but sola gratia.
If God loves us, why does He allow us to suffer? The central question in Shadowlands challenges traditional religious and moral conventions. It is a question asked by many, with few satisfactory answers. Before attempting to answer the question, and explore its relationship to Shadowlands, let us first define the question, so its implications may be more clearly understood. At the heart of the question is a doubt in the goodness of God, "If God loves us". From the beginning it is clear that God is being judged and criticized by the question. Then the second phrase follows"Why does He allow us to suffer?". The assumption made in the second phrase is that God has enough control over the world to prevent suffering. If He can prevent
John Calvin’s doctrine of predestination is arguably one of the most important results of the Protestant reformation. Predestination is the belief that “salvation[entrance into heaven] is given to only those whom god has chosen”. The chosen people were called the elect. John Calvin wrote this important belief during the era of the Protestant Reformation. People often formed negative opinions on predestination or let it rule their lives. Some people who did not think like Calvin loathed predestination because they believed that