DOCSLIB.ORG

ON TAKING EVIL SERIOUSLY Gijsbert Van Den Brink

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ON TAKING EVIL SERIOUSLY Gijsbert Van Den Brink SHOULD WE DROP THE FALL? ON TAKING EVIL SERIOUSLY Gijsbert van den Brink ‘The Fall Above All is the Place Where Biology and Theology Conflict’1 Van de Beek on Creation in the Light of the Cross “The roaring lion and the lethal bacteria are God’s creatures, as is the laboring human being with his deadly suffferings. That is the way God cre- ated the earth, not as a world that was alien to Him, but as his own world, with which he was as familiar as with the cross on which He was nailed.”2 Viewing creation through the lens of the cross of Jesus Christ, Bram van de Beek offfers an account of creation which is sensitive to the fact that the natural world we inhabit has been a world “red in tooth and claw” (Alfred Tennyson) from the very beginning of its existence. Rather than being at odds with what might be expected from a loving God, the myriad forms of predation, waste, sufffering and death in the natural world are reflected in the sufffering and death of Jesus at the cross—which according to the Christian faith tradition is at once a shocking cruelty and the supreme revelation of God’s love. Van de Beek’s doctrine of creation is very much in line with theologi- cal accounts of Christian science-and-religion thinkers who take seriously the ramifijications of evolutionary theory. Many of them—among others, Arthur Peacocke, John Haught, George Murphy, Niels Henrik Gregersen, Christopher Southgate, and Celia Deane- Drummond—resort to Christol- ogy and especially to the cross of Christ in an attempt to come to terms with the problems of theodicy with which an evolving creation con- fronts us.3 As far as I know, however, Van de Beek nowhere in his work 1 R.J. Berry, “Did Darwin Dethrone Humankind?,” in: R.J. Berry & T.A. Noble (eds), Darwin, Creation and the Fall. Theological Challenges (Nottingham: IVP, 2009), 72. 2 Bram van de Beek, Toeval of schepping? Scheppingstheologie in de context van het mod- erne denken [Incident or Creation? The Theology of Creation in the Context of Modern Thought] (Kampen: Kok, 2005), 183. 3 Cf. e.g. Arthur Peacocke, “The Cost of New Life,” in: John Polkinghorne (ed.), The Work of Love: Kenosis as Creation (London: SPCK, 2001), 21–42; Niels Henrik Gregersen, “The Cross of Christ in an Evolutionary World,” Dialog 40 (2001), 192–207; George L. Murphy, The Cosmos in Light of the Cross, (Harrisburg: Trinity Press, 2003); John F. Haught, God after Darwin, 2nd ed., (Boulder: Westview Press, 2008), 49–60; Christopher Southgate, The 762 gijsbert van den brink interacts with any of these authors except Peacocke. Apparently then, it was his keen theological intuition (and probably his conscience as a biologist as well) which led him to a vision that closely resembles that of leading experts in the science-and-religion debate. However this may be, being a theological maverick in many respects, Van de Beek appears to be quite an ‘ordinary’ modern theologian in his doctrine of creation. Perhaps we should even say that he is at the forefront of where Christian theology is heading in the wake of the discoveries of contemporary evolutionary science. On closer inspection, however, Van de Beek’s main argument for his view of creation as imbued with evil, sufffering and sin is intriguingly dif- ferent from that of his peers. In fact, Van de Beek hardly appeals to the current state of the art in the evolutionary sciences. Rather, his argument is that we should not attribute all forms of sufffering that we encounter in creation to some kind of historical Fall. That is not because this notion has been falsifijied by evolutionary history, but because it would turn human sin into a merely accidental and accessory phenomenon—thus not taking it seriously enough. “What concerns me is that we humans are sinful rather than just having sins. One may connect this with a historical Fall, but usually things don’t work that way. Rather, the idea that humans have been created well and that only then sin came in is used as an argu- ment to underline the goodness of present-day human beings, with their human possibilities and talents.”4 In short, Van de Beek rejects the notion of a historical Fall because according to him it implies an overly opti- mistic anthropology that fails to take evil seriously enough. Instead, we should consider the many evils and suffferings of our world as inherent to God’s creative purposes, although we do not know why God created such a world.5 But is that true? Does the traditional notion of a historical Fall indeed detract from the seriousness of sin and evil, so that we should rather admit that creation was ‘fallen’ right from the beginning? Van de Beek’s Groaning of Creation. God, Evolution, and the Problem of Evil (Louisville: WJK Press, 2008), 48–52, 56–59, 75–77 (but cf. the caveats on 50); Celia Deane-Drummond, Christ and Evolu- tion (London: SCM Press, 2009), 170–185. 4 Bram van de Beek, “De vrije gunst die eeuwig Hem bewoog” [The Free Grace that Eternally Moved God], Reformatorisch Dagblad, September 24th 2010. 5 “Christ brings to light the truth of the world: the truth of the cross, of sufffering, guilt and death. We don’t have to close our eyes for these things in the world. For they are real. This is God’s world. Why this is so? I can’t give an answer. I can only observe it.” Van de Beek, Toeval of schepping?, 236..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plantinga Argues That There Is Superficial Conflict but Deep Concord Between Science and Theistic Religion
    This is an accepted manuscript of an article published in Philosophia Reformata, 79 (I) (2014), 66-82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22116117-90000563 Where the conflict really lies: Plantinga, the challenge of evil, and religious naturalism Elizabeth D. Burns, Heythrop College, University of London In this paper I argue that, although Alvin Plantinga’s Felix Culpa theodicy appears on only two pages of his recent book Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion and Naturalism (2011) (i.e. 58-59), it is of pivotal importance for the book as a whole. Plantinga argues that there is superficial conflict but deep concord between science and monotheism, and that there is superficial concord but deep conflict between science and naturalism. I contend that the weakness of the Felix Culpa theodicy lends support to the view that there is more than superficial conflict between science and monotheism, and offer an alternative response to the challenge of evil which suggests that there might be, after all, concord between science and (religious) naturalism. 1. Plantinga and the challenge of evil In order to show that, although there is superficial conflict, there is deep concord between science and monotheism, central to which is ‘the thought that there is such a person as God: a personal agent who has created the world and is all-powerful, all- knowing, and perfectly good’ (ix), Plantinga argues that God creates by means of the process of natural selection (39), that Michael Behe’s writings about irreducible complexity constitute a series of ‘design discourses’ for which there aren’t any defeaters (258), and that God’s miraculous interventions are not incompatible with an interpretation of natural laws as ‘descriptions of the material universe when God is not treating what he has made in a special way’ (119).
    [Show full text]
  • Religion and Science1
    Phil 3303 Phil of Religion Religion and Science1 Four Models for Understanding the Relationship Between Religion and Science I. Conflict A. Areas of conflict 1. Creation and evolution 2. Freudian psychoanalytic theory calls into question the legitimacy of the religious way of life by suggesting that its roots are in wish fulfillment and repression (Totem and Taboo; The Future of an Illusion; Moses and Monotheism 3. Einsteinian relativity theory which drastically reinterprets our conceptions of space, time and causality and thus challenges us how God relates to the world (see Einstein's Relativity: The Special and General Theory). 4. Technological advances in computers and artificial intelligence seem to endanger the unique status of homo sapiens (originally, see A. M. Turing, "Computing Machinery and Intelligence," Mind 59 (1960); D. Hofstadter and D. Dennet, The Mind's I). 5. Biotechnology and the discovery of the DNA molecule threaten to put the secret of life into the hands of scientists. B. Scientific materialism or philosophical naturalism Many evolutionary scientists adopted the perspective of PN (Philosophical naturalism) as the control belief and basis of evolution. (1) that physical nature alone is real; (2) all phenomenon are configurations of matter or nature; (3) there is no supreme being or supernatural realm governing nature or overseeing humanity; 1 Taken from Michael Peterson, et. al. Reason and Religious Belief, 3rd ed. (New York: Oxford UP, 2003), pp. 246ff. (4) natural processes are responsible for the origination of life and diverse life forms. This control belief led to the full-fledge world view of evolutionary naturalism which holds the following: (1) that humanity stands alone in an essentially hostile universe; (2) that humanity has no overarching purpose; (3) reject religion as an illusion, and view science as the only hope for the progress of humanity and as the only way to explain human experience, existence, and destiny.
    [Show full text]
  • Hesitations About Special Divine Action: Reflections on Some Scientific, Cultural and Theological Concerns
    HESITATIONS ABOUT SPECIAL DIVINE ACTION: REFLECTIONS ON SOME SCIENTIFIC, CULTURAL AND THEOLOGICAL CONCERNS ALISTER E. MCGRATH Oxford University Abstract. The new interest in special divine action has led to a close reading of the great debates and discussions of the early modern period in an attempt to understand contemporary resistance to the notion of divine action, and to develop strategies for reaffirming the notion in a refined manner. Although continuing engagement with and evaluation of the Humean legacy on miracles and divine action will be of central importance to this programme of review, there are other issues that also need to be addressed. In this article I identify some of the factors that have caused or continue to cause difficulties for the articulation of a concept of special divine action and I suggest how they might be engaged. The last two decades have witnessed a renewed surge of interest in the question of whether, and to what extent, God may be said to act in the world. Can God be understood to act entirely in and through the regular structures and capacities of nature, or does a robust account of divine action also require us to affirm that God acts specially in order to redirect the course of events in the natural world, thus delivering outcomes that would not have occurred if God had not acted in this way? Although this discussion is sometimes framed in terms of a generic notion of divinity,1 the most significant recent engagements with the question have reflected Judeo-Christian conceptions of God, and the questions arising from these.
    [Show full text]
  • Pansacramentalism, Interreligious Theology, and Lived Religion
    religions Article Pansacramentalism, Interreligious Theology, and Lived Religion Hans Gustafson College of Arts and Sciences, University of St. Thomas, 2115 Summit Avenue, Mail 57P, St. Paul, MN 55105, USA; [email protected] Received: 21 May 2019; Accepted: 26 June 2019; Published: 28 June 2019 Abstract: Opening with a philosophical definition of sacrament(ality) as a mediator (mediation) of the sacred in the concrete world, this article offers pansacramentalism as a promising worldview—especially for those rooted in or emerging from the Christian traditions (since, for them, the language of sacramentality may have a stronger resonance)—for bringing together interreligious theology and data mined by Lived Religion approaches to the study of religion. After articulating the concept of pansacramentalism and emphasizing interreligious theology as an emerging model for doing theology, growing trends and changing sensibilities among young people’s religious and spiritual lives (e.g., the “Nones”) is considered insofar as such trends remain relevant for making contemporary theology accessible to the next generation. The article then considers the intersection of pansacramentalism and interreligious theology, especially the issue of determining sacramental authenticity. To explain how this challenge might be met, Abraham Heschel’s theology of theomorphism is offered as but one example as a nuanced means for determining sacramental authenticity of the sacred in the world. Turning to “Lived Religion” approaches, rationale is offered for why pansacramentalism and interreligious theology ought to be taken seriously in the contemporary world, especially considering recent data about the nature of contemporary religious identities among young people living in the West. Keywords: pansacramentalism; sacramentality; interreligious; lived religion; interreligious studies 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploration Towards God in a Scientific Age
    ST GEORGE’S LECTURES 8 - Exploration Towards God in a Scientific Age No 8 - © Arthur Peacocke 2002 Exploration Towards God in a Scientific Age 1 Arthur Peacocke MBE, DD, DSc, SOSc Honorary Canon and Chaplain, Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford Little Gidding is a small village in Huntingdonshire, England, to which Nicholas Ferrar, a doctor well-connected politically, retired with his family in 1626 to lead an ordered life of prayer and good works (medical, book binding, etc.) in a lay community – the first one in England (lay or ordained) since the English Reformation. It lasted for 21 years before being broken up by Puritan Protestants. In May 1936, T.S. Eliot visited its 17th-century chapel, which still exists, and later he composed the last of his influential Four Quartets . The poem, entitled Little Gidding , is a profound reflection on the significance of time in the divine purpose and four lines provide the leit-motif of this lecture: We shall not cease from exploration And the end of all our exploring Will be to arrive where we started And know the place for the first time. (T.S. Eliot, Little Gidding ) Nicholas Ferrar had been a Fellow of Clare College, Cambridge, where I was for 11 years Dean (of Chapel). One of my great experiences at that college was, once a year, to go with students to Little Gidding. There we conferred in the adjacent farm house and then celebrated the Eucharist, Holy Communion, the Mass, in its unforgettable, evocative and dignified small 17th-century chapel with the light of the setting sun streaming through its west door.
    [Show full text]
  • Thesis.Pdf (274.2Kb)
    Speaking of God in an Age of Science Torbjørn W. Engel REL-3901: Masteroppgave studieretning i teologi Institutt for religionsvitenskap Det samfunnsvitenskapelige fakultet Universitetet i Tromsø Mai 2008 2 Contents CONTENTS............................................................................................................................. 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................................... 5 PREFACE ................................................................................................................................ 7 CHAPTER I: P EACOCKE AS A FUNCTIONALIST ........................................................................ 9 Life and work of Arthur R. Peacocke................................................................................ 9 Opening remarks............................................................................................................. 10 Bridging religion and science......................................................................................... 14 Summary of introduction................................................................................................. 25 CHAPTER II: A D ISCUSSION OF PEACOCKE ’S FUNCTIONALIST PERSPECTIVE ....................... 27 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 27 Discussion......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Science and Religion: a Philosophical Analysis Course Number: Phi 81.1
    Science and Religion: A Philosophical Analysis Course Number: Phi 81.1 Institution: St. John's University Instructor: Marie George Course Outline and Reading List (subject to revision): I. INTRODUCTION -Students will be asked to write out their views on the relation of religion and science. -Instructor will present various positions taken by scientists. Readings: Einstein, "About Religion" Aristotle on the Virtue of Religion Suggested reading: Cosmos, Bios, Theos. II. THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND ITS SCOPE: AN OVERVIEW A. General considerations regarding method Readings: Aristotle: Nicomachean Ethics 1098a28-b5, 1094b24; De Caelo 306a; Physics 193b33; Parts of Animals, Bk. I, c. 1; Metaphysics, Bk. II, c. 3. B. The scientific method as developed and used in Physics (the hypothetical deductive method) 1. the scientific observation 2. laws; statistical laws 3. hypotheses and theories Readings: 3 handouts C. The scientific method and biology Reading: Handout Suggested reading: Arthur Peacocke, God and the New Biology, cc. 1-4. D. Science, Natural Philosophy, and Metaphysics: a comparison of method and objects of study Readings: Handout Excerpts from Aquinas’s commentary on Boethius De Trinitate, qq. 5 & 6. Aristotle, Metaphysics, 993b10. E. Science and Theology: Readings: Summa Theologiae, I.1, articles 2, 7, 8. (Theology as science) Augustine (as quoted in Leo XIII, “Providentissimus Deus,” 23-25 and Pius XII, “Divino Afflante Spiritu”, 7). Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I, 70.1 ad 3; Summa Contra Gentiles, Bk. II, art. 4. John Paul II, “Letter of 1988 to Rev. George V. Coyne, S.J., Director of the Vatican Observatory”. (excerpts) John Paul II, “Address to the Pontifical Academy of Science,” 10-31-92.
    [Show full text]
  • Encounters of Science and Religion
    ENCOUNTERS OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION Course Number: Religious Studies 3NN3 Institution: McMaster University, Department of Religious Studies Instructor: John C. Robertson “When we consider what religion is for [humanity] and what science is, it is no exaggeration to say that the future course of history depends upon the decision of this generation as to the relations between them.” (A. N. Whitehead) CALENDAR DESCRIPTION: A study of contemporary encounters of science and religion, (a) in light of their historical background, focusing on (b) comparisons of their respective methods, aims, and points of conflict and possible collaboration and (c) two religious doctrines common to Judaism, Christianity, and Islam--i.e., creation and providence--in light of selected modern natural sciences. TEXTS: Required texts, readings from which serve as common basis for discussion: Ian G. Barbour, Religion and Science: Historical and Contemporary Issues (San Francisco: Harper San Francisco, 1997) [hereafter RSHC] Arthur Peacocke, Theology for a Scientific Age (London: SCM Press Ltd., 1990, 1993) [hereafter TSA] Supplementary readings, occasionally assigned to augment assigned readings, and always useful to students wishing to explore in depth particular issues for a term paper or special interest, are to be found in: John C. Robertson, Encounters of Science and Religion: Selected Readings (McMaster University Courseware, 1998). [hereafter Coursepk.] Other supplementary texts, some mentioned below, are placed on reserve under this course name and number in the reserve reading room of Mills Memorial Library. [hereafter: Rsrv.] SYLLABUS AND OUTLINE Each week there will be 2 lectures and 1 tutorial discussion around the following topics, questions, and readings. Each lecture will begin with a brief recapitulation of the past lecture, so as to maintain continuity, and will end with opportunity for questions.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arthur Peacocke Graduate Studentship in Theology
    EXETER COLLEGE, OXFORD The Arthur Peacocke Graduate Studentship in Theology Following a generous gift made in memory for the late Arthur Peacocke (who matriculated at Exeter College in 1942 to study Chemistry, before pursuing an eminent career as a scientist and theologian), Exeter College seeks to elect to the Arthur Peacocke Graduate Studentship from among students who have an offer of admission to study for a DPhil researching on the relationships between the sciences and religion, based in the Faculty of Theology at Oxford University. The successful candidate will: – be an applicant to the University of Oxford for admission to read for a DPhil on the relationships between science and religion, who has been offered a place in the Faculty of Theology at Oxford University. The value of this Studentship is: – Course Fees, up to the full “Home/EU” rate; – A maintenance stipend up to that of the UK’s Arts & Humanities Research Council stipend (£14,777 in 2018-19). It should be noted that candidates who will be liable for Course Fees at the “Overseas” rate and who are eligible for this Studentship will be considered; but this Studentship cannot fund all the course- related costs of such a student (this Studentship may be held by such a candidate in conjunction with another award which makes up a full-cost funding package, if the student has obtained such an additional award). The Studentship shall be tenable for one year in the first instance, and shall be renewable – subject to satisfactory academic progress – for the remainder of the candidate’s normal period of fee liability for their course.
    [Show full text]
  • Concepts of Divine Action for a Theistic Approach to Psychology
    Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive Theses and Dissertations 2013-06-27 Concepts of Divine Action for a Theistic Approach to Psychology Brent S. Melling Brigham Young University - Provo Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd Part of the Psychology Commons BYU ScholarsArchive Citation Melling, Brent S., "Concepts of Divine Action for a Theistic Approach to Psychology" (2013). Theses and Dissertations. 3680. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/3680 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by BYU ScholarsArchive. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of BYU ScholarsArchive. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Concepts of Divine Action for a Theistic Approach to Psychology Brent Sladyk Melling A dissertation submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Brent D. Slife, Chair Edwin E. Gantt Jeffrey S. Reber Terrance D. Olson James E. Faulconer Department of Psychology Brigham Young University July 2013 Copyright © 2013 Brent Sladyk Melling All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Concepts of Divine Action for a Theistic Approach to Psychology Brent Sladyk Melling Department of Psychology, BYU Doctor of Philosophy Recent years have seen increased interest in using theism (the perspective that assumes that God is currently actively in the world) as a conceptual framework for scientific inquiry. This interest has built particular momentum in psychology where several scholars have expressed that traditional naturalistic approaches limit understanding and investigation of psychology’s subject matter and thus are insufficient to fully account for human phenomena.
    [Show full text]
  • The Impact of Einstein's Relativity on Christian Thought
    ISCAST Online Journal 2005, Vol. 1 The Impact of Einstein‘s Relativity on Christian Thought John R Pilbrow Emeritus Professor of Physics, Monash University & Fellow of ISCAST This paper was presented at COSAC 15-17 July 2005, Australian National University Abstract The purpose of this article is to expose the extent to which a representative collection of Christian writers have incorporated Einstein's relativity into their thinking. Key words Time, eternity, relativity, space-time, special relativity, general relativity, cosmology, God and time, divine foreknowledge, spatio-temporal. Introduction 2005 is the World Year of Physics–in the UK simply ”Einstein Year‘–a year of celebration in honour of Einstein‘s four ground-breaking papers published in 1905 and also of his crowning achievement, General Relativity, published in 1915. In 1990, Arthur Peacocke wrote: Relativity theory, in its special and general forms, and, even more iconoclastically, quantum theory, together caused a complete revolution in human understanding of the physical world, the consequences of which are still to be absorbed into philosophy–and hardly yet into theology. (Peacocke 1990 p. 30). The purpose of this presentation is to expose the extent to which a representative collection of Christian writers–theologians, scientists and scientist/theologians (of which there are a good many these days), have incorporated Einstein‘s relativity into their thinking. I have sought: 1. to identify those who addressed relativity in a consistent manner. 2. to see how relativity impacted on their thinking, if at all. Amongst theologians, TF Torrance has championed Einstein‘s views more than most. This is widely acknowledged.
    [Show full text]
  • Heraclitean Nature and the Comfort of the Resurrection: Theology in An
    Brian D. Robinette Heraclitean Nature and the Comfort of the Resurrection Theology in an Open Space In his masterful sonnet, “That Nature is a Heraclitean Fire and the Comfort of the Resurrection,” Gerard Manley Hopkins places us in a landscape recently ravaged by a storm (“yestertempest’s creases”). Spellbound for the moment by the shifting contrast of “cloud-puffball” against blue sky, and the “down dazzling whitewash” at his feet as sunlight and tree shadow dance upon the land’s pock- marked and rutted surface, the poet imagines the whole of nature as did Heraclitus: as a massive, “ever living fire,” where all things arise from and again are consumed by flame.1 With senses saturated and self-consciousness porous, the poet stands transfixed by nature’s ri- otous display, a reflective filament in the glittering cascade of it all. “Million-fuelèd, | nature’s bonfire burns on.” Though seemingly timeless in its peculiar duration, the moment of ecstasy does not last. For as the poet takes notice of the tire tracks and footprints now succumbing to erasure by sun and wind—the only traces left by previous countryside travelers (“manmarks”)— his initial feelings of expansion congeal into thoughts, into hardened and heavy reminders that his own human life is no less subject to volatility and eventual oblivion. He too participates in the cease- logos 14:4 fall 2011 14 logos less flow that Heraclitean Nature awesomely displays, but with this difference (which in the end, he fears, makes no difference at all): he has become grippingly aware of the contingency of things.
    [Show full text]