![]() If, instead, we consider that God has to take energy-expending actions to perform miracles (from spitting in his hands to dying on a cross) and that predicting the future might be as much of a speculative (though better informed) act for God as it is for us, then it seems to me the old stories become much easier to parse.Ĭhrist didn’t hang on that cross as part of some cosmic game he designed in the first place, sure of the outcome. ![]() It’s only in the context of medieval theology’s untenable concepts of perfection that theodicy becomes an issue. Why can’t we interpret “All-Powerful” as (merely?) having all the power that’s actually employable, and “All-Knowing” within the confines of things that can actually be known? We’ve got a greater handle than ever on the limits of power and knowledge. I know far too many people who don’t bat an eye at the idea that the literal physics of the universe are relative and even probabilistic, yet the moment God is mentioned, they suppose this divinity must be capable of anything we can possibly imagine or it is not really God. When it comes to theodicy, I wish we could avoid trapping ourselves in ideas of perfection and infallibility. If you’re determined to believe in a god, Zeus makes a lot more sense than the supposed Christian “heavenly father.”Īnother reader, Jonathan, questions the omnipotence of God even further than John but doesn’t think it necessarily negates God: As such, they fit the world we live in.Ĭhristians, Muslims and Jews all describe a god that is benevolent, just, omnipotent, and omniscient-which doesn’t fit our world one bit. Greek gods were petty, arbitrary, powerful and mean-spirited. The ancient Greeks were much more honest, I think, in their depictions of their gods. The real contradictions I see are between the realities of the world, supposedly created and overseen by god, and the descriptions of their god by the faithful. ![]() The question of theodicy, for me (an atheist), is not so much “why does god allow so much suffering?” as it is “what is the nature of this god you believe in?” ![]() To reader John, the problem of suffering leads him to think that “God is a human construct, and somebody needs to send god back to rewrite.” He looks to the ancients for consistency: The theodicy tangent to our series on religious choice continues with several more eloquent emails from readers. Satan pours on the plagues of Job in William Blake’s The Examination of Job ( Wikimedia) ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |