Re: [asa] The Doors of the Sea

Hmmm., well I'm not sure that would be Hart's view of providence -- at
least I didn't quite get that from the book. I think he's offering a free
will theodicy, but the "will" preexists the physical creation. I don't
think he's moving towards open theism. And, I'm not sure that's a fair
description of TE's generally -- many TE's do see God as remaining
providentially in control over every mutation and speciation event -- not
"directing" those events in the secondary sense, but "directing" them in the
primary sense of every detail being within His providential "design." How
does this heuristic work?:

               Classical Theists Open
Theists Panentheists

Creation God providentially in control in God leaves
aspects of the God is part of the unfolding creation
               a primary sense of every event future
genuinely undetermined

Evil God does not cause evil, God does
not cause evil, God cannot control all evil, but suffers
               but allows it, knowing in but
allows it, giving some along with the creation
               advance all contingencies freedom
to the creation and not
               and choices
knowing all aspects of the future,

which is ontologically unknowable
On Sun, Aug 10, 2008 at 9:06 PM, Nucacids <nucacids@wowway.com> wrote:

> Hi David,
>
> I'm not saying he is making a TE argument, but I do sense a substantial
> similarity. For example, Hart would argue that God is not directing each
> and every circumstance that humans encounter (whether natural or personal),
> just as TEs do not see God directing every mutation and speciation event.
>
> -Mike
>
>
>
> I read Hart's book and corresponded with him a bit about it. In the
> passage you quote, Mike, Hart is responding to the classical argument that
> some evil might be necessary to achieve the greatest good -- that* this *universe,
> with its evil, it known to God as the best of all possible worlds from the
> perspective of eternity. Rather, Hart argues, the universe was originally
> created *good*, and evil, including "natural evil," is a foreign invader
> into that goodness. In this, Hart is definitely not taking a line typically
> taken by TE's.
>
> I corresponded with Hart a bit about this, and he said he acknowledges that
> there was natural evil in the world long before human sin, but that his view
> of the fall is "Origenist." This I take to refer to Origen's notion of
> pre-existing souls that fell before the physical world was created. In this
> view, evil was introduced into the creation in a spiritual realm of souls;
> natural evil is in some sense a result of this spiritual rebellion. I don't
> know the extent to which Hart literally follows Origen here, but in essence,
> the universe is a duality in which "prior" events in the spiritual realm
> impact the physical.
>
> While this would solve the temporal problem of natural evil preceding the
> fall, I'm not sure many of us would be willing to commit to it --
> particularly as many TE's seem to reject ontological dualism altogether.
> Origen's views on the preexistence of souls were eventually condemned as
> heretical by the Western church. I'm not sure of their status in the
> Eastern church.
>
> In any event, Hart is a beautiful writer, and I'd recommend The Doors of
> the Sea to anyone thinking through theodicy.
>
>

-- 
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.