By: dtomolson

dtomolson — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 01:23:54 +0000

Isn’t God at all responsible for the way the universe turned out, i.e. for evil? I mean he is the creator of the universe and as such endowed us with the freedom to rebel and commit atrocious acts on ourselves, the world and others, or, depending on your theological perspective, such as that of Edward’s, the God who determined us to such a rebellion and damned, for no apparent reason, certain people to suffer this damnation eternally while others eternally receive grace.
In ether case it seems that such a God is in some way responsible. In the second he is totally, and as such not good, no matter how you think “good” in regards to God, whether univocal or analogical. Thus the reason one must reject Edward’s staunch Calvinistic perspective from my view.
Regardless, I believe that this is part of what the incarnation, crucifixion and resurrection is about, not just justice, but, rather, God’s acceptance of his complicity in the human condition (the fall) and his willingness to take the responsibility in making it right. Justice is most definitely apart, but not the whole, and should never be isolated from the Christ event and the grace therein. Plenary Substitutionary atonement theory can never capture the complete picture.
Lastly, why the need to defend God’s justice? Doesn’t this defense itself assert that something is lacking, that is, that it is contingent and provisional? Instead of attempting to avert the anxiety that the process of theodicy addresses, why not enter into the anxiety and attempt to think “God” in ways that take account of this anxiety? Is this not what Job did? Is this not what Jesus did on the cross? Why must we who stand piously before this God, defend our piety? What is at stake?

Comments on: “Only a Good God Would Do___”

By: dtomolson