tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post4311579064235288392..comments2023-08-19T23:23:19.849+10:00Comments on Sentire cum Ecclesia: "What God ordains is always good":Theodicy, Pietism, Dawkins, and Lutheran HymnsSchützhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05026181010471282505noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-42129649787467388472007-09-04T09:07:00.000+10:002007-09-04T09:07:00.000+10:00You've nailed me there, Pastor Weedon! Its hymnody...You've nailed me there, Pastor Weedon! Its hymnody is the best thing Lutheranism has going for it, I reckon. (Also--good blogs from you lately too--I intend to comment on these soon).<BR/><BR/>Athanasius, excellent observation about theism being necessary before one can even posit the idea of cosmic justice. Curious though, ain't it, that belief in good God gives rise to a sense of the need for universal justice, which need in turn raises questions about the existence of a good God? <BR/><BR/>In my ruminations, I was thinking that the hymnwriters understood that it is easier to come to terms with personal suffering through faith in a good God than it is to come to terms with cosmic suffering or suffering in others.Schützhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05026181010471282505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-19936465527962939452007-09-03T23:43:00.000+10:002007-09-03T23:43:00.000+10:00You can take the lad out of Lutheranism, but you c...You can take the lad out of Lutheranism, but you can't take the Lutheranism out of the lad...at least when it comes to hymnody! Thank you for the thoughts on the MUST of the "I" vs. "we" here. Illuminating!William Weedonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01383850332591975790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-56557529322388960352007-09-03T11:43:00.000+10:002007-09-03T11:43:00.000+10:00Hi DavidI read the Sacramone article as well, and ...Hi David<BR/><BR/>I read the Sacramone article as well, and had a similar reaction. Anyone who really thinks we have 'solved' the problem of theodicy simply hasn't suffered enough to know better.<BR/><BR/>But I don't think this amounts to an argument that a loving omnipotent God is illogical. In fact, Alvin Plantinga wrote a very good book demonstrating that you can't logically justify this result.<BR/><BR/>So you're right, the problem isn't at the level of logic. Something in our gut cries out against suffering. When one child is saved while others die, we simply <I>feel</I> this is unjust. And the atheist is making an appeal to this sense of cosmic unjustice.<BR/><BR/>But we are wrong to say we <I>know</I> this, because we can't see the full ledger. Dawkins would draw the line at death, and say that the arbitrariness of suffering in this life proves there is no justice. But that arbitrariness is a consequence of the arbitrariness of the line he draws. He can't prove death is the end, and until he can, his argument is not compelling.<BR/><BR/>The upshot is that neither side can offer a compelling account of suffering. The problem of theodicy cuts both ways.<BR/><BR/>But I think that theism provides a much better and more coherent account of our <I>gut reaction</I> than atheism ever could. It's very hard to see where an atheist can get the idea of cosmic justice in the first place, so their appeal to the idea of unjust suffering is incoherent, and our gut reaction is inexplicable to them.<BR/><BR/>But to a Christian our gut reaction is a predictable and appropriate reaction to our natural hunger for justice. We'll never explain suffering, but the fact that we think this argument is important is testimony to the image of the just God that we all bear. Even Richard Dawkins.Athanasiushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04376282404358594418noreply@blogger.com