Is Evil Inevitable for Creation and Human Life? Studies on Martin Luther’s Biblical Interpretation Jussi Koivisto 1 Jussi Koivisto Is Evil Inevitable for Creation and Human Life? Studies on Martin Luther’s Biblical Interpretation Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by due permis- sion of the Faculty of Theology at the University of Helsinki in Auditorium XII, The Main Building of the University of Helsin- ki, on the 18th of May 2012 at 12 o´clock. 2 © Jussi Koivisto ISBN 978-952-10-7976-4 Unigrafia Helsinki 2012 3 Table of Contents Abstract (p. 5) Acknowledgements (p. 6) 1. Introduction (p. 9) 1.1. (Inevitable) Evil in the Discourse (p. 9) 1.2. Aim of the Dissertation (p. 12) 1.3. Methods (p. 14) 1.4. Structure of the Dissertation (p. 15) 1.5. Main Sources (p. 17) 1.6. Fatalism, Determinism or Inevitability? (p. 21) 1.7. Definition of Inevitable Evil in Luther’s Works (p. 25) 1.7.1. Inevitabilis and its German Equivalences (p. 25) 1.7.2. Necessitas (p. 28) 1.8. Abstracts of Articles (p. 30) 2. “The common future of Luther and Biblical Studies,” – Six- teenth Century Journal. The Journal of Early Modern Stud- ies, Volume XL, No. 1, Spring 2009, pp. 251–252. (p. 33). 3. “Martin Luther’s Conception of fascinare (Gal. 3:1),” – Bibli- cal Interpretation. A Journal of Contemporary Approaches (Brill) 19:5–6 (2011), pp. 471–495. (p. 36). 4. “Martin Luther’s Conception of the Serpent Possessed by the Devil (Gen. 3) and the Antecedent Tradition,” – Wim François & August Hollander (eds.), ‘Wading Lambs and Swimming Elephants’: The Bible for the Laity and Theologi- ans in the Medieval and Early Modern Era. Bibliotheca Ephemeridum Theologicarum Lovaniensium (Peeters Pub- lishers), in print. (p. 57). 4 5. “Is it Possible to Choose Evil? Interpretation of the Fall in Early Lutheranism,”1 – Teologinen aikakauskirja 115 (2010), pp. 228–248. (p. 97). 6. “God and Evil in Luther’s De servo arbitrio” – Harvard Theo- logical Review, the second revision of the article is under re- view. (p. 134). 7. Conclusions (p. 159) 7.1. Luther’s Idea of Inevitable Evil (p. 159) 7.2. Luther and the Problem of Evil: How Satan Fell and Why God Let Satan and Humankind Fall? (p. 163) 7.3. Luther’s Interpretation of the Bible and his Connec- tion to the Augustinian Tradition (168) 7.4. Further Research Questions (p. 174) Sources, Translations, Dictionaries, and Literature (p. 175) 1 This article was originally published in Finnish and has been translated in English for this dissertation. 5 Abstract This article dissertation examines Luther’s idea of evil in his Biblical inter- pretation. In Luther’s central works and in his various comments on Bibli- cal passages he seems to repeat over and over again the idea that individu- al human beings or other creatures cannot avoid being part of evil or be- coming victims of evil. In short, evil seems to be an inevitable part of hu- man life and the Creation. This article dissertation studies this kind of inev- itability of evil from various perspectives. In order to provide a multiple perspective on the inevitability of evil in Luther’s works, this dissertation studies the following themes in these works: the terminological definition of the inevitability of evil; the manifold phenomenon of fascinare; the serpent (Gen. 3) possessed by the Devil; did the first human choose evil? (Gen. 3); was God the origin of evil?; how was God involved in evil?; the problem of evil. Various methods have been used: systematic argumentation and concept analysis, contextu- alizing Luther in the history of doctrines and ideas, using reception criti- cism or the Wirkungsgeschichte of Biblical texts, and source criticism. Us- ing these methodological approaches to Luther, this dissertation offers new insights on Lutheranism and the various traditions preceding it. It intro- duces the ancient tradition which dominated early, medieval and early modern Christianity, but is not recognized in modern exegesis: the idea that the serpent of Genesis chapter three was possessed by the Devil. The main results of this dissertation can be summarized as fol- lows: Luther considered evil in its various forms as an inevitable part of human life and the Creation. Luther avoided giving the impression that God was the causal, ontological or active origin of evil. However, Luther thought that God had permitted evil to slither into the world. The active origin of evil in the fall of angels and the first human was the Devil. How- ever, after these two falls, God has been involved more actively in evil: He uses and is even present in evil so that He can execute His good plans for the salvation of humankind and for His own glory. Luther also suggested that (an omnipotent) God allowed the Fall to occur, because through Christ’s salvific sacrifice humankind could truly comprehend how much God cared for humans. In other words, Luther deemed that God permitted evil for executing His good aims. On the other hand, Luther thought that liberation from various forms of (inevitable) evil, including sin, possession, and bewitchment, was only possible through pastoral care or spiritual heal- ing orchestrated by the Holy Spirit. 6 Acknowledgements Writing a dissertation is hard work. At least for me it has been a process of continuous learning to do serious research. One obvious difficulty in Lu- ther studies has been the challenge to do original research. Luther, name- ly, is one of the most studied persons in the world. The amount of research on Luther probably exceeds the expectations of any person who is interest- ed in studying him or his ideas. Some people have asked me, whether it is possible to find anything new in Luther, or hinted that Luther studies are (too) demanding an area of research. It is indeed difficult to find anything new from Luther and it is a demanding area of research in many respects: linguistically (incl. Latin, German, Finnish, Swedish, Hebrew, Greek etc.), the amount of both research and source material is extensive, and so forth. In spite of all these difficulties, I still consider this journey worthwhile. I have found ideas from Luther that I did not expect to find, and experienced the joy of finding something new. Although Luther has been an object of extensive interest and research, he has attained this status for good reasons: even now his thoughts and ideas are provocative, fresh, and in most parts profound, spiritual, and rational at the same time. The study has therefore enriched me in various ways, as I have also learned to do independent study and learned to appreciate even more what scholars of other disciplines have to offer. I truly believe in the possibilities which science and its experts can offer to us. I am very grateful to the various institutions and people who have helped me to get through this study. First of all I would like to thank my alma mater, the University of Helsinki, which has given me the possi- bility to learn theology with access to all its resources (e.g. great teachers and impressive facilities) in order to become a researcher. In addition to these possibilities and resources, this institution has also funded my re- search through its Tiedesäätiön nuoren tutkijan apuraha (The Science Foundation’s Research Fund for Young Scholars), a project called Kol- mivuotinen tutkimusmääräraha (The University of Helsinki’s Three-year Scholarship Fund) led by professor Risto Saarinen, and väitöskirjan lop- puunsaattamisapuraha (The University of Helsinki’s Scholarship for Com- pleting the Dissertation). In addition to the University of Helsinki, many other institutes have also funded my research: Kirkon tutkimuskeskus, Suomen kulttuurirahasto, Emil Aaltosen Säätiö, and Tieteen ja taiteen kris- tillinen tukisäätiö. In addition, I would like to thank the Finnish Graduate School of Theology, where I was a fully funded member and which grant- ed me travel support for conferences, offered possibilities to give presenta- 7 tions, gave important information regarding postgraduate studies, etc. I am also grateful to the Chancellor of the University of Helsinki who granted me travel support for conferences. To all these institutions, I am sincerely grateful. There are also many professionals to whom I owe my sincere thanks. First of all, I would like to thank the supervisor of my dissertation, Professor Risto Saarinen who, over the years, has provided insightful ad- vice and support in numerous ways. From him I have learned what serious and academic theology should be. I can only admire his dedication to aca- demic theology. I would also like to give my sincere thanks to Lecturer and Docent Pekka Kärkkäinen, who has helped me in numerous ways in my research. He has taken the time to read my studies patiently and given me feedback on them. He has, for example, also taught me to read abridged Medieval Latin texts and has suggested important studies for me to read. He is one of the most unselfish and most intelligent people I have ever known. The third important person for this study has been Professor Antti Raunio, who has offered his advice regarding Luther Studies over the years. His dedication to Luther Studies has really inspired me. I am also very grateful to the memory of Army Chaplain Aarne Moström † who in- troduced Luther and his works to me, when I was doing my service as a conscript pastor. There are, of course, many other people who have helped me, from whom I have learned, and with whom I have had interesting discus- sions, or shared a passion for doing research. You are Mika Vähäkangas, Janne Nikkinen, Tuukka Kauhanen, Jari Jolkkonen, Martti Nissinen, Eeva Nyrövaara, Hilkka Ranki, Timo Koistinen, Niko Huttunen, Matti Mylly- koski, Timo Eskola, Christian Seppänen, Ilse Paakkinen, Ville Päivänsalo, Karoliina Nikula, Kirsi Valkama, Ari Ojell, Juha Sihvola, Juha Virta, Miik- ka Ruokanen, Miikka Anttila, Sammeli Juntunen, Leo Näreaho, Ismo Dunderberg, Ilmari Karimies, Mari Stenlund, Jaakko Rusama, Ritva Palmén, Timo Åvist, Olli Kakriainen, Timo Nisula, Harri Meronen, Simo Knuuttila, Sanna Lehtinen, Mira-Irana Helimäki, Olli-Pekka Vainio, just to name a few.