Berkeleyan Idealism, Christianity, and the Problem of Evil (original) (raw)
In response to the recent resurgence of idealism among a cluster of Christian theologians and philosophers, this article raises a difficulty for Christians to be idealists. Unlike traditional accounts of Christianity that must explain why God permits or allows evil, idealists face a different and more difficult problem—namely why does God willfully and directly produce experiences of evil. Because the metaphysics of idealism requires God to produce experiences of evil directly and willfully, it is difficult to reconcile it with the essential goodness of God. The existence of matter, therefore, may play an important role in maintaining God’s innocence while allowing creatures to exercise free will.
Related papers
Berkeleyan Idealism and Christian Philosophy
Philosophy Compass, 2017
Berkeleyan idealism, or ‘immaterialism,’ has had an enormous impact on the history of philosophy during the last three centuries. In recent years, Christian scholars have been especially active in exploring ways that Berkeley's thesis may be fruitfully applied to a variety of issues in philosophy and theology. This essay provides an overview of some of the ways Christian philosophers have deployed immaterialism to solve problems and generate insights in metaphysics, philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, philosophy of religion, and philosophical theology.
The Existence of Evil in Christian and Naturalistic Worldviews
I clarify that an evil state of affairs is a state of affairs that satisfies the following conditions: (a) It entails the physical or mental suffering of a subject of experience, (b) it is morally in excusable, (c) it does not lead to a greater good for the subject involved, and (d) the subject would prefer not to be in this state if it were fully capable to understand its situation. I argue that there are two different kinds of causes of evil: nature and free will. I show that there is no problem of evil implied by the existence of evil as such. I distinguish between problems of evil, solutions to problems of evil, and theories of evil. I argue that the existence of evil is problematic only for those worldviews that cannot provide a theory of evil. I argue that in contrast to naturalistic worldviews, Christian worldviews have the resources to successfully establish a theory of evil.
The Impact of Idealism on Religion
This is the intro essay for the forthcoming CUP volume /The Impact of Idealism Volume 4: Religion/. It introduces the essays and includes some substantial discussion of atheism and evil.
Is There an "Id" in Idealism?: Theological Reflections on the Realism/Idealism Debate
This paper argues that rather than being two competing "academic religions (Lake 2011)," Realism and Liberal Idealism each respond to a fundamental ambiguity within Christianity: that between the angry, unpredictable, and punitive God of the Old Testament and the loving, graceful savior of the New Testament. I do this in order to resolve Doyle's (1986) paradox: why liberal democracies are 'peace loving' in their interaction with one another but extremely bellicose in their dealings with non-democracies. After identifying assumptions at the heart of four points of contention between these two schools of thought-human nature, characteristics of the international system, the difference between sovereignty and governance, and the question of how order comes out of anarchy-I then examine the theological assumptions of Realism. In agreement with social constructivists I claim that the structural features that Realists see in the international system can be understood as coming into existence much as deities do (Freud): as sediments of long forgotten social and political relationships. I then utilize Conrad's Heart of Darkness and Herr's screenplay for Apocalypse Now to introduce Western colonial dynamics into the foreign policy derived from Realism and the fundamental theological ambiguity: because the West has never resolved the question of whether God is loving or punitive, the idealistic colonial mission always creates an externally hostile world that is logically met with bellicose and punitive actions; unable to ensure behavioral predictability thanks to cultural differences, the Liberal Idealist becomes more bellicose than the Realist. While this would seem to favor Realism over Liberal Idealism, I argue that it is the under appreciated colonial dynamics that must take center stage in any comprehensive theory of International Relations.
God and fruitless evil: A holistic response to the problem of evil
2015
The contemporary debate originates with the publishing of J. L. Mackie's "Evil and Omnipotence." 2 In this article, Mackie articulates the standard version of the logical argument from evil by claiming that the three core tenants of theism ("God is omnipotent; God is wholly good; and yet evil exists") are logically inconsistent. 3 H. J. McCloskey follows Mackie by taking a more general approach to the problem and examining a wider range of potential solutions. 4 The logical argument's momentum comes to a screeching halt with the publication of Alvin Plantiga's landmark work, The Nature of Necessity. 5 In this work Plantinga employs modal logic and possible world semantics to demonstrate "that it is possible that God could not have created a universe containing moral good without creating one containing moral evil." 6 By demonstrating this possibility, Plantinga shows that there is no necessary logical inconsistency between the existence of God and evil. Using this demonstration, he accomplishes a rare feat in the contemporary philosophical landscape: near universal agreement. Robert Adams states, "It is fair to say that Plantinga has solved this problem." 7 William Alston agrees: "It is now acknowledged on (almost) 2
The fulfilment of man as knowing God: a Christian theodicy concerning the problem of moral evil
I attempt to address the problem that moral evil poses for the existence of God. I begin by examining more rigorous formulations of the problem in chapter 1. In chapter 2 I defend the way in which I answer the problem. In chapter 3, I analyse the Christian doctrine that human fulfilment is found in knowing God personally; from this, I argue that by allowing human moral evil, God leads humans to a greater depth of everlasting human fulfilment than would be possible without moral evil, because moral evil leads humans to a better personal knowledge of God. I argue that this conclusion defeats the problem of moral evil for the Christian God.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.