Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Theodicea / Journal articles

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Theodicea.

Journal articles on the topic 'Theodicea'

Author: Grafiati

Published: 4 June 2021

Last updated: 12 February 2022

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Theodicea.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

SIMPSON, ROBERT. "Some moral critique of theodicy is misplaced, but not all." Religious Studies 45, no. 3 (April 27, 2009): 339–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412509009974.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractSeveral recent critiques of theodicy have incorporated some form of moral objection to the theodical enterprise, in which the critic argues that one ought not to engage in the practice of theodicy. In defending theodical practice against the moral critique, Atle O. Søvik argues that the moral critique (1) begs the question against theodicy, and (2) misapprehends the implications of the claim that it is inappropriate to espouse a theodicy in certain situations. In this paper I suggest some sympathetic emendations for Søvik's theodical apologetic, but I argue against Søvik's claim that the moral critique of theodicy is altogether irrelevant.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Wiertel, Derek Joseph. "Classical Theism and the Problem of Animal Suffering." Theological Studies 78, no. 3 (August 21, 2017): 659–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0040563917715490.

Full text

Abstract:

In the Western theological tradition, nonhuman suffering was not perceived as a “live” problem until the early modern period. Constrained by classical theism, the early modern figures of René Descartes, Anne Conway, and G.W. Leibniz developed three distinct approaches to animal theodicy based upon their unique reconceptualization(s) of the world. These three approaches, (1) denial of animal suffering (Descartes); (2) cosmic fall and vale of soul-making (Conway); and (3) necessary suffering of creation (Leibniz), remain the prevailing theodical options with respect to animal suffering in contemporary theological reflection. In light of the limitations of such theodicies, an engagement with the Christian theological narrative provides a framework for revisiting classical theism in relation to animal suffering.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

SØVIK, ATLE OTTESEN, and ASLE EIKREM. "A critique of Samuel Shearn's moral critique of theodicies." Religious Studies 51, no. 2 (September 18, 2014): 261–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412514000328.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn ‘Moral critique and defence of theodicy’ (2013) Samuel Shearn argues that ambitious theodicies trivialize horrendous suffering in an unacceptable way by reinterpreting evils in a way sufferers do not accept. Against Shearn, the authors of this article will argue that sufferer acceptance should not be used as a criterion for the moral acceptability of what theodicies say about horrendous evils. Also, since theodicy is done in the public square, Shearn does not find it relevant to distinguish between contexts in which it is morally improper to communicate theodicies and those in which it is not. We disagree, and present some arguments as to why making such distinctions is morally relevant. Furthermore Shearn argues that theodicy is self-defeating if it aims to comfort sufferers of horrendous evils. We will critically re-examine the examples used to support his conclusion, and suggest that theodicies do have a comforting function. Finally, Shearn describes the difference between theodicy and anti-theodicy as an aesthetic impasse, rather than a moral issue. Against this, we find good reasons to affirm its predominant moral character.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Boase, Elizabeth. "Constructing Meaning in the Face of Suffering: Theodicy in Lamentations." Vetus Testamentum 58, no. 4 (2008): 449–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/156853308x325029.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis article explores the existence of theodic elements within the book of Lamentations. Drawing on the typology outlined by A. Laato and J. C. de Moor (Theodicy in the World of the Bible [Leiden, 2003]) it is identified that Lamentations explores both retributive and educative theodicy within its poems. Other theodic solutions are not, however, present. Although these theodic solutions are present, it cannot be argued that Lamentations constitutes a theodicy as such. Rather, the poems raise and in turn subvert a range of possible theodic assertions in response to the existential crisis which emerged in the wake of the fall of Jerusalem in 586 BCE.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Williams, Brian M. "C. S. Lewis & John Hick on Theodicy: Superficially Similar but Significantly Different." Journal of Inklings Studies 7, no. 1 (April 2017): 3–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/ink.2017.7.1.2.

Full text

Abstract:

In the April 2014 edition of The Journal of Inklings Studies, Mark S. M. Scott compared the theodicies of C. S. Lewis and John Hick, concluding that there are ‘significant structural and substantive affinities’ between the two. In my essay, I too analyze these theodicies but arrive at a different conclusion. I argue two points: First, I argue that Lewis’ and Hick’s theodicies bear merely superficial similarities. Second, and more importantly, I argue that they stand in significant opposition to one another at fundamental points. The purpose of this essay is to set Lewis’ views on suffering apart from Hick’s and to suggest that, in the end, perhaps Lewis’ theodicy should not be included in the broad category of ‘greater-good’ theodicies, and would therefore be immune to attacks leveled against Hick’s theodicy as well as the various attacks leveled against the greater-good approach in general. For those who reject the greater-good approach and who hold that gratuitous evil does not count against God’s moral perfection, Lewis’ theodicy could serve as a helpful starting point from which one could develop more thoroughly a non-greater-good theodicy.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Byron, Chris. "WHY GOD IS MOST ASSUREDLY EVIL: CHALLENGING THE EVIL GOD CHALLENGE." Think 18, no. 51 (2019): 25–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1477175618000325.

Full text

Abstract:

The evil God challenge argues that for every theodicy that justifies the existence of an omnibenevolent God in the face of evil, there is a mirror theodicy that can defend the existence of an omnimalevolent God in the face of good. People who invoke the evil God challenge further argue that because we find evil God theodicies to be implausible, we should find good God theodicies to be equally implausible. This article argues that in fact evil God theodicies are more reasonable than good God theodicies by expanding upon arguments offered by David Benatar regarding the nature of existence, and David Hume regarding the asymmetry in our sensations of pain and pleasure.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Smith, Jason M. "Toward a Theodicy of the Body: Liturgy and Explanation." Anglican Theological Review 101, no. 3 (June 2019): 427–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/000332861910100303.

Full text

Abstract:

This essay examines recent attempts to remake the enterprise of theodicy. Both Eleonore Stump and David Burrell analyze the story of Job in an attempt to move theodicy beyond the mode of explanation and into the mode of address. While Mark Scott's theodicy of navigation is a notable advance of this paradigm, such theodicies are still limited to speech and thought. I argue that liturgical practice functions as a sort of “theodicy of the body,” a theodicy of address that includes embodied practice as its predominant medium.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

SØVIK, ATLE O. "Why almost all moral critique of theodicies is misplaced." Religious Studies 44, no. 4 (November 6, 2008): 479–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412508009554.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractMuch moral critique of theodicies is misplaced. Firstly, much of the critique begs the question because it presupposes something else to be true than what the theodicy claims; had the theodicy been true, it would not be immoral. Secondly, much of the moral critique shows situations where theodicies are inappropriate, and argues that they should never be communicated because of these situations. But if a theory is true, there will be some situations where it is appropriate to communicate it, and others where it is not. This is no basis for a moral dismissal of the theory.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

SHEARN, SAMUEL. "Moral critique and defence of theodicy." Religious Studies 49, no. 4 (May 3, 2013): 439–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412513000164.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn this essay, moral anti-theodicy is characterized as opposition to the trivialization of suffering, defined as the reinterpretation of horrendous evils in a way the sufferer cannot accept. Ambitious theodicy (which claim goods emerge from specific evils) is deemed always to trivialize horrendous evils and, because there is no specific theoretical context, also harm sufferers. Moral anti-theodicy is susceptible to two main criticisms. First, it is over-demanding as a moral position. Second, anti-theodicist opposition to least ambitious theodicies, which portray God's decision to create as an ‘all-or-nothing’ scenario, requires a moral commitment to philosophical pessimism. Thus anti-theodicists should not be quick to take the moral high ground. However, this should not encourage theodicists, since theodicies may well be self-defeating in so far as they attempt to provide comfort.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Balfour, Dylan. "Second-personal theodicy: coming to know why God permits suffering by coming to know God himself." International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 88, no. 3 (May 9, 2020): 287–305. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11153-020-09763-x.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The popularity of theodicy over the past several decades has given rise to a countermovement, “anti-theodicy”, which admonishes attempts at theodicy for various reasons. This paper examines one prominent anti-theodical objection: that it is hubristic, and attempts to form an approach to theodicy which evades this objection. To do so I draw from the work of Eleonore Stump, who provides a framework by which we can glean second-personal knowledge of God. From this knowledge, I argue that we can derive a theodicy which does not utilise the kind of analytic theorising anti-theodicists accuse of intellectual hubris.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Kravitz, Amit. "Kant’s Conception of Theodicy and his Argument from Metaphysical Evil against it." Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 102, no. 3 (September 25, 2020): 453–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/agph-2020-1017.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractA series of attempts have been made to determine Kant’s exact position towards theodicy, and to understand whether it is a direct consequence of his critical philosophy or, rather, whether it is merely linked to some inner development within his critical philosophy. However, I argue that the question of Kant’s critical relation to theodicy has been misunderstood; and that in fact, Kant redefines the essence of the theodicean question anew. After introducing some major aspects of Kant‘s new conception of theodicy, I show how understanding this conception is necessary for correctly analysing his specific arguments against theodicy. I demonstrate this point by examining Kant’s second argument against theodicy, in which he tackles the Leibnizian problem of ‘metaphysical evil’, and show why, in light of the above, interpretations thus far have failed to capture the essence of Kant’s claim in this regard.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Scott, Michael. "The Morality of Theodicies." Religious Studies 32, no. 1 (March 1996): 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412500024021.

Full text

Abstract:

Kenneth Surin has argued that theoretical theodicies of the kind associated with Swinburne and Hick face two major moral criticisms: first that they tacitly sanction evils; second that they display moral blindness in the face of unconditional evils. The paper upholds Surin's criticisms in the light of recent defences of theodicy. It concludes by considering and criticizing Wetzel's arguments for saying that theodicy is unavoidable for those who believe in God.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Kravitz, Amit. "Divine Gütigkeit, Divine Güte: Kant on an Ancient Query." Sophia 60, no. 2 (March 10, 2021): 349–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11841-021-00825-9.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn his essay on theodicy, Kant explicitly claims that while the disproportion between crime and punishment poses a theodicean challenge concerning God’s justice, the suffering of the righteous is compatible with God’s justice [Gerechtigkeit], goodness [Gütigkeit], and holiness [Heiligkeit]. In light of this, Kant’s reason for addressing the book of Job in this context is puzzling. However, the location of Job’s story in the text reveals that Job’s suffering is rendered relevant only concerning the relation between two of God’s moral attributes: goodness as subordinated to holiness, i.e., God’s benevolence [Güte]. Implications concern the difference between ‘authentic’ and ‘doctrinal’ theodicy.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Shihadeh, Ayman. "Avicenna’s Theodicy and al-Rāzī’s Anti-Theodicy." Intellectual History of the Islamicate World 7, no. 1 (January 1, 2019): 61–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2212943x-00701004.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Avicenna’s Neoplatonic account of divine providence and theodicy was hugely influential on later philosophical and religious thought in the Islamic world. However, it was severely criticised by one of his earlier commentators, the theologian-philosopher Faḫr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210). While Avicenna champions an optimist theodicean thesis of a plenitude of good to support the theory of providence integrated into his cosmogony, his commentator counters by arguing for a plenitude of evil and an overall pessimist anti-theodicy. Rejecting Avicenna’s ontological-cum-cosmological account of evil, al-Rāzī argues that a theodicy must be strictly subject-centred and is ultimately a futile exercise. This article includes a study and translation of the relevant section in his commentary on Avicenna’s al-Išārāt wa-l-tanbīhāt (Pointers and Reminders).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Huhtala, Hanna-Maija. "Anti-theodicies – An Adornian approach." Human Affairs 31, no. 2 (April 1, 2021): 223–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2021-0018.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The question of why bad things happen (to good people) has puzzled individuals over generations and across different cultures. The most popular approach is to turn the issue into a question about God: Why does he allow bad things that lead to the suffering of often innocent bystanders? Some have drawn conclusions that there can be no God. These attempts that seek to find meaning in suffering are called theodicies. Thus, theodicies promise that the torment of the innocent is not in vain. In this article, I argue that theodicy as a viewpoint, independent of its intention, does injustice to the experience of the sufferer. Furthermore, an Adornian approach to suffering avoids the instrumentalization of others’ suffering and that instead of relating to another person’s suffering through theodicy, Adorno’s notion of non-identity opens up an alternative, non-coercive avenue.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

CORABI, JOSEPH. "Intelligent design and theodicy." Religious Studies 45, no. 1 (February 4, 2009): 21–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412508009773.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThis paper explores a seldom discussed difficulty for traditional theists who wish to embrace the purported evidence employed in biochemical intelligent design arguments, and who also employ a commonly used element in their theodicies – namely, the claim that God would have reason to make a relatively orderly and self-sufficient world with stable and simple natural laws. I begin by introducing intelligent design arguments and the varieties of theodicy at issue, then I argue that there is at least a strong prima facie tension between these theodicies and the claim that God intelligently designed biochemical systems in humans and other organisms. Subsequently, I examine three strategies for resolving this tension, in increasing order of plausibility. At the end of the paper, I raise and briefly discuss some wider issues for theists enamoured with theodicy approaches that emphasize natural orderliness and the stability of laws of nature.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

Hernandez, Jill Graper. "There’s Something about Mary: Challenges and Prospects for Narrative Theodicy." Journal of Analytic Theology 9 (September 22, 2021): 26–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.12978/jat.2021-9.090811070425.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper explores the constraints of narrative theodicy to account for the misery of the powerless and uses Mary of Bethany as a case study as evaluated through the early modern theodical writings of Mary Astell and Mary Hays. Eleonore Stump has pointed out that Mary of Bethany’s misery is interesting because it is so personal; it results from losing her heart’s desire. But, Mary of Bethany’s case fails as narrative theodicy because it cannot (unlike other cases, such as Job) sufficiently demonstrate the power of God in situated expressions of suffering, speak to plight of the powerless, nor put the sufferer in a stronger epistemic position. Astell and Hays provide a solution for the problem of lived experiences of systemic oppression for the project of narrative theodicy (it must be for and about suffering), and in so doing, remind us of the continued significance of their work to the philosophical canon. To succeed, narratives used for theodicy must speak directly to the plight of those who suffer, and must allow the powerless, miserable, unprivileged, and oppressed to have access to religious knowledge of the relationship between God and the one in misery, the one powerless.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Edwards, Rem B. "Conflicting Process Theodicies." Process Studies 48, no. 1 (2019): 19–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/process20194813.

Full text

Abstract:

This article examines the process theodicies of David Ray Griffin and Philip Clayton. It explains their differences on such issues as God’s primordial power and voluntary self-limitation, creativity as an independent metaphysical principle that limits God, creation out of nothing or out of chaos, and God’s voluntary causal naturalism. Difficulties with their positions are discussed. The Clayton-Knapp “no-not-once” principle is explained, and a more comprehensive theodicy is outlined.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Scott, Mark. "C. S. Lewis and John Hick: An Interface on Theodicy." Journal of Inklings Studies 4, no. 1 (April 2014): 19–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/ink.2014.4.1.3.

Full text

Abstract:

In The Problem of Pain (1940), C. S. Lewis explores the problem of evil for a non-specialist, popular audience. In Evil and the God of Love (1966), John Hick examines the same problem for a specialist, scholarly audience. Whereas Lewis writes self-consciously as a lay theologian, Hick writes authoritatively as an academic theologian. In my essay, I analyze the striking parallels between their theodicies and ask: did Lewis influence Hick? If he did, then Lewis shaped scholarly discourse on theodicy while operating completely outside of it. If he did not, then their structural and stylistic intersections illustrate the possibility of dialogue between two distinct modes of theological discourse that fail to stay in conversation long enough to notice their close substantive affinities. Either way, the surprising and widely unnoticed parallels between C. S. Lewis’s ‘megaphone theodicy’ and John Hick’s ‘soul-making theodicy’ demonstrate the common ground between lay and academic theology, and indicates the potential for mutual enrichment, without eliding their distinctive methodologies, contexts, and audiences.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Stone, Mark P. "Vindicating Yahweh: A Close Reading of Lamentations 3.21-42." Journal for the Study of the Old Testament 43, no. 1 (September 2018): 83–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0309089215701325.

Full text

Abstract:

Recent scholarship on Lamentations has focused on the voice of Daughter Zion in chs. 1–2. Interpreters argue that the frank protests constitute an antitheodicy and have placed these poems in opposition to the voice of the man in Lamentations 3, specifically 3.21-42. This section utilizes Deuteronomistic and Wisdom material to offer a theodicy, counseling penitent acceptance of God's righteous judgment. This article nuances previous analyses of Lam. 3.21-42, arguing in particular that vv. 33–39 subtly manipulate the expected theodic solution until Yahweh's culpability as oppressive agent is denied rather than justified. It is argued that the poet glimpses a ‘secular’ theodicy. This is accomplished through close exegesis of Lam. 3.21-42, and by utilizing Mikhail Bakhtin's concepts of ‘dialogism’ and ‘double-voicing’.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Vilkova, Evgeniya. "American Theodicy: The Content and Origins of the Apologia of David Bentley Hart." Philosophy. Journal of the Higher School of Economics IV, no. 4 (December 30, 2020): 35–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/2587-8719-2020-4-35-49.

Full text

Abstract:

This paper attempts to examine an unconventional solution to the problem of theodicy proposed by the modern Orthodox theologian and philosopher David Bentley Hart. The purpose of the study is to provide insights into Hart's interpretation of the issue of theodicy. The paper discusses David Hart's counterarguments regarding the most popular current-day trends in understanding the problems of theodicy in the Western world, which, in his opinion, do not provide a response to anyone inquiring about God, but only serve as further grounds for atheistic attacks on Christianity. Particular attention is paid to the positive side of the theologian's teachings, which is a daring attempt to provide a response to atheism without resorting to the rational arguments of classical theodicies. The scientific value of this work lies in identifying the conceptual parallels of David Hart's apologetic views, which enables a conclusion to be drawn about the possible Russian footprint in the philosophy of the Orthodox American. This is of particular interest in terms of the further study of the influence of Russian religious philosophy on the establishment of modern English-speaking Christian philosophers and theologians. The study employed the historical and philosophical methods of scientific knowledge, along with the so-called philosophical hermeneutics method, which enabled the philosophy of David Hart to be analyzed as a phenomenon existing in the context of modern culture and the deep meaning of his texts and relation between the principles of his philosophical system to be revealed.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Perkins, Anna Kasafi. "Oh, Sufferah Children of Jah: Unpacking the Rastafarian Rejection of Traditional Theodicies." Open Theology 6, no. 1 (September 4, 2020): 520–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/opth-2020-0134.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe article maintains that the theological perspectives of RastafarI continue to be under-researched in the Caribbean context with perhaps more attention being paid to their contributions to the racial, musical and linguistic traditions of the region. In particular, Rasta theodicies are not as clearly articulated as other elements of its belief system even as it is recognised that RastafarI mansions and individual members do not hold homogenous beliefs about many things. The discussion takes as its starting point two prior reflections, “Just Desert or Just Deserts?: God and Suffering in these Perilous Days” (Perkins 2016) and “The Wages of (Sin) is Babylon: Rasta Versus Christian Religious Perspectives of Sin” (Perkins 2012); the former reflection highlights the insufficiency of traditional theodicy to answer the question: “if God is good, why does evil exist?” No one answer can sufficiently do justice to the many dimensions of the question. In that regard, Perkins (2016) argues for attention to the important “answer” that the radical suffering perspective offers to the discussion (Sarah Anderson Rajarigam (2004) too emphasises divine suffering or theopathos, as the response to radical suffering. She frames theopathos not just as an option within theodicy but as an alternative to theodicy, which she derides as “the spoilt child of enlightenment that self-destructively craves for theoretical and philosophical remedies for radical human suffering” (27).). Perkins (2012) explicates a particular Rasta understanding of sin and evil, which are important elements of any theodicy. For Rasta, sin is tri-dimensional – personal, inherited and corporate. Sin in its corporate or social dimension is the most salient as it is moral evil – a rejection of Jah’s will – which leads to the oppression of Jah’s people.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

Syafieh, Syafieh. "KEJAHATAN DAN CAMPUR TANGAN TUHAN (Sebuah Tinjauan Teodesi dan Teologi Islam)." Lentera: Indonesian Journal of Multidisciplinary Islamic Studies 1, no. 1 (December 1, 2020): 69–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.32505/lentera.v1i1.671.

Full text

Abstract:

This article discusses God 's omniscience and interference in the theological and Islamic’s theological perspectives. Theodical problem that centered on causality and the administration of God since the days of Greece God presented as a defendant. Berger uses theodicy concept to give meaning to the suffering experienced by humans in the world, while simultaneously promising happiness "in the world there". In this connection religion is clearly a force of alienation. Crime and suffering as a privacy are always present in reality and life. While Islamic’s theological reject the theodetic concept, according to Muttahharri, that on the plains of phenomena there is no "real evil" or "true goodness", while on plain noumena there is only one essence, namely goodness, because the substance of evil is truly pure nothingness.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

COLLINS, JOHN M. "The evil-god challenge: extended and defended." Religious Studies 55, no. 1 (March 19, 2018): 85–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412518000070.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractStephen Law developed a challenge to theism, known as the evil-god challenge (Law (2010) ). The evil-god challenge to theism is to explain why the theist's responses to the problem of evil are any better than the diabolist's – who believes in a supremely evil god – rejoinders to the problem of good, when all the theist's ploys (theodicy, sceptical theism, etc.) can be parodied by the diabolist.In the first part of this article, I extend the evil-god challenge by showing that additional theist replies to the problem of evil (more theodicies, the privation view of evil, and others) also may be appropriated, with just as much plausibility, in support of the diabolist position. In the second part of the article, I defend the evil-god challenge against several objections.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Durbin, Sean. "Violence as Revelation." Journal of Religion and Violence 7, no. 3 (2019): 231–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/jrv202031070.

Full text

Abstract:

Drawing on Russell McCutcheon’s (2003) redescription of the theological category of theodicy as a socio-political rhetoric that functions to conserve social interests, this article examines the way that American Christian Zionists employ theodicies to explain historical, contemporary, and anticipated acts of violence. It argues that violence is central to Christian Zionists’ conception of God’s revelation, and thus to their identity. Rather than requiring the intellectual wrangling often associated with religious explanations for why violence is inflicted on or by a certain group of people, Christian Zionists identify acts of violence as either God’s punishment for insufficient support for Israel, or as God’s vengeance upon those who wish to harm his chosen people. In any given context, Christian Zionists draw on acts of violence to reaffirm their truth claims, and to ensure their desired social order is maintained.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Coelho, Allan Da Silva. "Legitimation theological of suffering as pedagogy: critical in Veena Das." Educação 40, no. 1 (May 31, 2017): 41. http://dx.doi.org/10.15448/1981-2582.2017.1.22628.

Full text

Abstract:

understand the relationship that the Indian anthropologist Veena Das articulates between pedagogy and theodicies in social legitimacy of human suffering. How the theological legitimacy of suffering constitute pedagogic fundamentals of practices that educate the body and administer the sense of living in the framework of the capitalist ethos? For Das, a theodicy, as necessary suffering, displaced from the religious to the secular uses pain and suffering as a basis for Pedagogy. In Modernity, pain and suffering are played in the symbolic universe, the configuration and adherence to modern apitalist ethos, indicating the “way of being” normal as acceptance of a moral sense to the suffering and subordination in the face of laws and institutions. It is pedagogy for subalternizar, but not always resign. Sometimes in dispute of meanings, prepares a form of resistance facing the absurdity non-sense of pain.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Bier, Miriam J. "“We have Sinned and Rebelled; You have Not Forgiven”." biblical interpretation 22, no. 2 (February 18, 2014): 146–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15685152-0022p03.

Full text

Abstract:

Conventional readings of Lamentations invariably appeal to the “central” chapter 3 and its male character, the רבג, as pivotal for the meaning and purpose of Lamentations. Such readings emphasize the sin of humanity and the justice of God and can be broadly described as theodic in character. A number of more recent readings that can be aptly described as antitheodic, however, react against this centralizing tendency, emphasizing instead the protesting voice of Zion in chapters 1 and 2. Neither the רבג nor Zion’s discourses, however, is as homogeneously theodic or antitheodic as these readings and counter-readings would suggest. Rather, both speakers present elements of penitence and submission to suffering (theodicy), on the one hand, and protest and accusation of God (antitheodicy), on the other. In light of the pervasive influence of the “central” chapter 3 in readings of Lamentations, I focus this paper on the רבג’s discourse. I read Lamentations 3 as the רבג’s internal dialogue as he expresses various understandings of the extreme suffering in which he finds himself. I use Mikhail Bakhtin’s concept of the dialogic interaction between authoritative and internally persuasive discourses as a framework for illustrating the various moods through which the רבג moves. While the רבג appeals to authoritative discourses, I conclude that he does not, finally, find the “central” faithful statements, so often appealed to as determinative for meaning, to be internally persuasive.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Vind, Ole. "- En historisk Theodice." Grundtvig-Studier 64, no. 1 (May 29, 2015): 95–109. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/grs.v64i1.20911.

Full text

Abstract:

En historisk Theodice[A Historical Theodicy]By Ole VindGrundtvig’s first World Chronicle from 1812 (VK 1812) is noted especially for itssharp criticism of contemporary culture. It can be read as a Lutheran revivalistsermon passing judgment on great historical as well as contemporary figures who are condemned for their lack of orthodox Christian faith. Read in the light of Grundtvig’s later works, however, the book carries the seeds of that philosophy of history which from 1832 onwards became the mainstay of all his writings.Thus, in VK 1812 are found the first traces of that original vision which inChristenhedens Syvstjerne (The Seven Sisters of Christendom, Grundtvig’s greatcycle of church historical poems written 1854-55, published 1860) follows churchhistory through seven national Churches of which the future Hindu (Christian)Church is the last. Likewise, in the chronicle are found Grundtvig’s first speculations on ethnic origins, later clarified into his idea of four principal peoples in World History (i.e. the Jews, the Greeks and the Romans in antiquity and the Scandinavians in modern times).In spite of his harsh condemnation of his contemporaries, Grundtvig concludesVK 1812 optimistically, prophesying a spiritual and Christian renewalin Scandinavia through the future university in Kristiania (i.e. Oslo) in Norway(founded 1811 and opened 1813). Such a trust in learning and scholarship wascharacteristic of the European age of Enlightenment with its belief in progress. In later major works, Grundtvig expressed this attitude in an original Nordic version which also formed the basis of his thoughts about education and folk high schools.In VK 1812 Grundtvig briefly characterizes the German thinkers who werethe foundation of his philosophy of history. Even if they are all blamed fortheir lack of orthodox faith, his delineation of them is remarkably mild. Later,rather surprisingly, Grundtvig appeared to reconcile himself to a great extentwith the German “naturalists imbued with spirit”.The quite positive words about those German philosophers whom he otherwiserather criticized, presage the deep inspiration in Grundtvig’s mature worksparticularly from Herder and Fichte. An exceptional role is played to Grundtvigby Lessing who raised the principal question of Protestant religious philosophyabout the relationship between Christianity and history. Already in VK 1812,Grundtvig’s philosophy of history is also a philosophy of religion in the shapeof a historical theodicy. As in his works to come, Grundtvig’s answer to Lessing’s question is thus quite the opposite of Søren Kierkegaard’s to whom Lessing, too, meant a serious philosophical challenge.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Kunstmann, Joachim. "Theodizee." Evangelische Theologie 59, no. 2 (March 1, 1999): 92–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.14315/evth-1999-0203.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Maidl, Lydia. "Theodizee." Spiritual Care 9, no. 4 (October 9, 2020): 381–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/spircare-2020-0010.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

SØVIK, ATLE OTTESEN. "More on moral critique of theodicies: reply to Robert Simpson." Religious Studies 47, no. 3 (July 12, 2010): 383–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412510000296.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe article discusses moral critique of theodicies, and suggests the need for several distinctions in order to avoid misunderstanding. It distinguishes between moral critique of concrete theodicies and theodicies in general, and between moral critique of the content of theodicies and the consequences of theodicies. But there are also different kinds of moral critique of the content and the consequences. After presenting these distinctions, the article responds to Robert Simpson's ‘Some moral critique of theodicies is misplaced, but not all’.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Martin, Edward N. "Carl F. H. Henry on the Problem of (Good and) Evil." Perichoresis 17, no. 3 (July 1, 2019): 3–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/perc-2019-0019.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Carl Henry devotes a few chapters directly (and a few indirectly) in volume 6 of his God, Revelation, and Authority [GRA] to the problem of evil [POE]. The author examines Henry’s contribution as a theologian, noting that GRA is a work of theology, not philosophy proper. However, Henry had a PhD in Philosophy (Boston, 1949), and one finds present several presuppositions and control beliefs that are philosophically motivated. Observation of the text reveals several of these. Chief here is Henry’s working assumption that to understand and explain the nature of evil, one must first understand and explain the nature, origin and etiology of good. This point and its implications are developed at length in this article. Unsurprising is Henry’s contribution exhibiting an awareness of methods and theodical approaches traditionally used by philosophers of religion such as Rowe, Plantinga, and Hick. Surprising is the fact that Henry does not clearly take a side on the nature of human free will. What he does say seems to underdetermine his exact position. Finally, the importance of Kant vis a vis Henry’s theodicy and entire theological program is emphasized as well.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Kim, Young Hoon. "Theodicy, Undeserved Suffering, and Compassionate Solidarity: An Interdisciplinary Reading of Hwang Sok-Yong’s The Guest." Religions 11, no. 9 (September 10, 2020): 463. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rel11090463.

Full text

Abstract:

The author explores theological questions regarding the Korean novelist Hwang Sok-yong’s The Guest from interdisciplinary perspectives. This paper analyzes the novel in relation to the emotional complex of han as understood in Korean minjung theology, the political theology of Johann Baptist Metz, and Ignacio Ellacuría’s liberation theology. Drawing upon the perspectives of Korean, German, and Latin American scholars, this approach invites us to construct a discourse of theodicy in a fresh light, to reach a deeper level of theodical engagement with the universal problem of suffering, and to nurture the courage of hope for human beings in today’s stressed world. Contemplating the concrete depiction of human suffering in The Guest, the paper invites readers to deepen their understanding of God in terms of minjung theology’s thrust of resolving the painful feelings of han of the oppressed, Metz’s insight of suffering unto God as a sacramental encounter with God, and Ellacuría’s idea of giving witness to God’s power of the resurrection in eschatological hope. The paper concludes that the immensity of today’s human suffering asks for that compassionate solidarity with the crucified today which can generate hope in the contemporary milieu.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Mjöberg, J., and Vidar Svensson. "Theodiga." World Literature Today 59, no. 3 (1985): 446. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/40140986.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

35

Davis, Todd. "Theodicy." Christianity & Literature 58, no. 4 (September 2009): 604. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014833310905800407.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

36

Goostree, Toby. "Theodicy." Christianity & Literature 66, no. 4 (September 2017): 707. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0148333117715254.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

37

Mawson, T. J. "Theodical Individualism." European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 3, no. 1 (March 21, 2011): 139–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v3i1.385.

Full text

Abstract:

In this journal Steve Maitzen has recently advanced an argument for Atheism premised on Theodical Individualism, the thesis that God would not permit people to suffer evils that were underserved, involuntary, and gratuitous for them. In this paper I advance reasons to think this premise mistaken.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

38

Schulte, Christoph. "Jüdische Theodizee?" Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschichte 49, no. 2 (1997): 135–59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157007397x00092.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

39

Griffin, David Ray. "Traditional Free Will Theodicy and Process Theodicy." Process Studies 29, no. 2 (2000): 209–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/process20002923.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

40

Watt, Alan. "Nietzsche’s Theodicy." New Nietzsche Studies 4, no. 3 (2000): 45–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/newnietzsche2000/200143/412.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

41

Fales, Evan. "Antediluvian Theodicy." Faith and Philosophy 6, no. 3 (1989): 320–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/faithphil19896333.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

42

Vermeer, Paul, Johannes A. Van Der Ven, and Erik Vossen. "Learning Theodicy." Journal of Empirical Theology 9, no. 2 (1996): 67–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157092596x00141.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

43

Betenson, Toby. "Anti-Theodicy." Philosophy Compass 11, no. 1 (January 2016): 56–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12289.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

44

RAGLAND, C. P. "Descartes's theodicy." Religious Studies 43, no. 2 (April 16, 2007): 125–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0034412506008766.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn the Fourth Meditation, Descartes asks: ‘If God is no deceiver, why do we sometimes err?’ Descartes's answer (despite initial appearances) is both systematic and necessary for his epistemological project. Two atheistic arguments from error purport to show that reason both proves and disproves God's existence. Descartes must block them to escape scepticism. He offers a mixed theodicy: the value of free will justifies God in allowing our actual errors, and the perfection of the universe may justify God in making us able to err. Though internally coherent, Descartes's theodicy conflicts with his view of divine providence.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

45

Goetz, Stewart. "A Theodicy." Philosophia Christi 5, no. 2 (2003): 459–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/pc20035249.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

46

Black, Andrew G. "Malebranche's Theodicy." Journal of the History of Philosophy 35, no. 1 (1997): 27–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hph.1997.0016.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

47

Wettstein, Howard. "Against theodicy." Philosophia 30, no. 1-4 (March 2003): 131–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02383305.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

48

Monton, Bradley. "Against Multiverse Theodicies." Philo 13, no. 2 (2010): 113–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philo20101321.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

49

박영식. "Die Theodizee Luthers." Korean Jounal of Systematic Theology ll, no. 32 (June 2012): 149–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.21650/ksst..32.201206.149.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

50

Lindinger, Helge. "Trieblehre und Theodizee." Archive for the Psychology of Religion 18, no. 1 (January 1988): 38–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/157361288x00036.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!