Saturday, October 25, 2025

F.W. J. Schelling (1775-1854) (PhD Edit): Satire Und Theology Version

Annecy, France-trekearth

F.W. J. Schelling (1775-1854) (PhD Edit) 

Preface

A section of my PhD, with a slight reformat on Blogger for an entry on academia.edu, 202510125.

Saturday, September 19, 2020 PhD Full Version PDF: Theodicy and Practical Theology 2010, Wales TSD

Panentheism 

German philosopher, F.W. J. Schelling [1]  (1845)(1936) reasons: ‘As there is nothing before or outside of God, he must contain within himself the ground of his existence.’[2]  He reasons God’s nature is inseparable from God and yet can be distinguished.[3]  Panentheism can reasonably be understood as an overarching view within many process theism approaches[4] which I have contrasted with my own views.[5]  Schelling, although not noted as a Christian theologian, within  Of Human Freedom states that all earthly creatures are dependent on God.[6]  If God ‘withdrew his power for an instant, man would cease to be.’[7]  There exists ‘nothing before or outside of God.’[8]  Shedd explains that God’s work of providence demonstrates he is the ‘most holy,’ ‘wise’ and ‘powerful’ as he governs his creatures and their actions.[9]  God works in the material universe with its nature and laws.[10]  Phillips explains that a Reformed view is that God has the freedom to act as he wants.[11]  This would be God’s sovereign providence, but Hume is skeptical of this concept.[12]  People throughout the world view certain evils, which may be rectified in other regions of the world or in the future, and understand these good events as being connected to general laws and the existence of a good deity.[13]  Hume suggests that these are superstitions,[14] and questions whether in many cases a ‘cause can be known but from its known effects?’[15]  The idea is then presented that if God is benevolent his providence should lead to a world without suffering and wickedness.[16] 

Predestination 

Schelling also presents a view on predestination[17] that human beings act today as they have always acted since ‘eternity’ and at the beginning of creation.[18]  Persons continue to act wickedly because in eternity human beings took a stand in ‘egotism and selfishness.’[19]  Within this view, passion and desire which can at times go wrong, represent freedom in the nature of human beings.[20]  All persons are born with a ‘dark principle of evil attached to them.’[21] Persons can be good, even with this darkness through ‘divine transmutation.’[22]  This non-traditional perspective would view human beings as predestined to commit evil[23] but allows for God to still work good within persons.[24] 


[1] Schelling lived (1775-1854).  Blackburn (1996: 341).

[2] Schelling (1845)(1936: 32). 

[3] Schelling (1845)(1936: 32). Schelling sought to deflect criticisms that he was a pantheist.  ‘Unity is of essence, but so is diversity.’  Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxxi). However, his comments make it possible that he had views which were perhaps panentheistic. Material things are dependent on God and yet independent. 

[4] Including that of Whitehead.  Nikkel (2003: 2-3). 

[5] My views are Reformed but not strictly within a certain camp such as Presbyterian or Baptist. I have primarily come to my Reformed views through MPhil and PhD research.

[6] Schelling (1845)(1936: 11).

[7] Schelling (1845)(1936: 11). Schelling is noted within the ‘Introduction’ to believe in a divine personality and denied that God’s personality was incomprehensible. Schelling did reason wisdom could be found in God. Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxv).

[8] Schelling (1845)(1936: 32).

[9] Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 527 Volume 1).  Frame (2002: 274).

[10] Shedd (1874-1890)(1980: 528 Volume 1).

[11] Phillips (2005: 22).

[12] Hume (1779)(2004: 50).

[13] Hume (1779)(2004: 50).

[14] Hume (1779)(2004: 50).

[15] Hume (1779)(2004: 50).

[16] Hume (1779)(2004: 50).

[17] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[18] Schelling  (1845)(1936: 66). Creation is not passive and is dynamic and in constant activity.  Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxiii).  This non-passive activity included rebellion within Schelling’s view.

[19] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[20] Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxv).

[21] Gutmann (1845)(1936: xxv).

[22] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[23] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).

[24] Schelling (1845)(1936: 66).. Blackburn (1996: 341).

BLACKBURN, SIMON (1996)  Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy,  Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

FRAME, JOHN M. (1999) ‘The Bible on the Problem of Evil: Insights from Romans 3:1-8,21-26; 5:1-5; 8:28-39’, IIIM Magazine Online, Volume 1, Number 33, October 11 to October 17, Fern Park, Florida, Third Millennium. 

FRAME, JOHN M. (2002) The Doctrine of God, P and R Publishing, Phillipsburg, New Jersey. 

GUTMANN, JAMES (1845)(1936) ‘Introduction’ in SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago. 

HUME, DAVID (1739-1740)(1973) ‘A Treatise of Human Nature’, in Paul Edwards and Arthur Pap (eds.), A Modern Introduction To Philosophy, New York, The Free Press. 

HUME, DAVID (1779)(2004) Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, Digireads.com/Neeland Media LLC, Lawrence, Kansas. 

NICKEL, DAVID H. (2006) The Varieties of Mystical Experience: Paul Tillich and William James, Philadelphia, Metanexus Institute. 

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (1981) Encountering Evil, Stephen T. Davis (ed.),  Atlanta, John Knox Press. 

PHILLIPS, D.Z. (2005)  The Problem of Evil and the Problem of God, Fortress Press, Minneapolis. 

SCHELLING, F.W.J. (1845)(1936) Schelling, Of Human Freedom, Translated by James Gutmann, The Open Court Publishing Company, Chicago. 

WHITEHEAD, ALFRED NORTH (1926) Religion in the Making, New York, The MacMillan Company.  

WHITEHEAD, ALFRED NORTH (1927-1929)(1957)  Process and Reality, New York, The Free Press/MacMillan Publishing Company, Incorporated. 

WHITEHEAD, ALFRED NORTH (1967)(1986) ‘Adventures of Ideas’, in Forest Wood JR., Whiteheadian Thought as a Basis for a Philosophy of Religion, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, University Press of America, Inc. 

Note 20251025: His distinction between the infinite and finite was not clear enough, from my reading. A biblical view is that the finite is dependent on the infinite, never the reverse.


Henri Blocher And Carl Henry On Christ as Remedy (PhD Edit): Satire Und Theology Version

Henri Blocher And Carl Henry On Christ as Remedy (PhD Edit)

Preface

Image is Red Cardinal Oil: by Caron Smed, Lake Country, British Columbia. Thank you, Caron!

A section of my PhD, with a slight reformat on Blogger for an entry on academia.edu, 202510125.


Henri Blocher And Carl Henry On Christ as Remedy (PhD Edit)

Henri Blocher (1994) notes theodicy are failures in themselves and must have ideas within that square with Biblical revelation in order to be true and beneficial.[1]  I do not agree that all theodicy are failures in themselves,[2] but can grant a Christian theodicy needs the support of Scripture,[3] which connects the reader to the salvific work of Christ.[4]  As mentioned in Chapter One in my Doctorate, he explains that philosophical explanations have failed in dealing with the problem of evil.[5]  Although I somewhat disagree with this comment,[6] I can acknowledge philosophical theodicy does not take the place of effective practical theology that can assist a sufferer in having a true Christian religious experience. Carl Henry (1983), also noted in Chapter One, reasons that theistic arguments do not in themselves vindicate God,[7] and God’s revelation is required.[8]  In other words, through the study of Scripture and personal experience with God through revelation, the creator can be better understood,[9] even though he willingly allows evil.[10]  

July 10, 2013 

The understanding can be taken from the works of Blocher and Henry that even reasonable, logical successful theodicies and defences, and I favour a Reformed sovereignty approach, within the disciplines of Philosophy and Theology, still basically primarily deal with the theoretical. 

When I passed my Wales, Bangor MPhil thesis only degree it was determined by academic reviewers that I had reasonably and logically dealt with the problem of evil, primarily. When I had passed my Wales, Trinity Saint David, PhD thesis only degree it was determined by academic reviewers that I had reasonably and logically dealt with theodicy and problems of evil, primarily. In both cases I had adequately dealt with complex theories as well as practical and empirical theologies. 

In the non-academic, real world massive problems of logical evils, gratuitous evils, and what I deem subtle evils, as well as related sufferings, still exist on personal and corporate levels throughout the world, quite obviously, even if my theodicy is reasonable and for the most part, at least, sound. 

But it is the remedy, the atoning work of Christ and the resurrection from Scripture that Blocher and Henry are referring to. Yes, these are definitely and definitively mentioned throughout my two theses, and so in that regard I am in agreement with Blocher and Henry, my works although done via secular Universities in Wales were Biblically rooted. The remedy to the problem of evil is ultimately not in a correct theological or philosophical answer, but in the culminated work of Christ. The academic can however, assist to explain the remedy and related issues. 


[1] Blocher (1994: 84).

[2] Blocher (1994: 84).

[3] Henry (1983: 282). 

[4] Rowan Williams suggests Scripture becomes the Word in fidelity to Christ, as preaching becomes the Word in fidelity to Scripture, and Christ is himself the divine act as such. ‘God reveals himself through himself.’  Williams  (2007: 108-109). I agree, God reveals himself through the Holy Spirit inspiring Scripture and presenting Christ.

[5] Blocher (1994: 84).

[6] Blocher (1994: 84).

[7] Henry (1983: 282).

[8] Henry (1983: 282).

[9] Henry (1983: 282).

[10] Henry (1983: 282).


BLOCHER, HENRI. (1994) Evil and the Cross, Translated by David G. Preston, Leicester, InterVarsity Press. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1986) Predestination and Free Will, in David Basinger and Randall Basinger (eds.), Downers Grove, Illinois, InterVarsity Press. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (1994) The Many Faces of Evil, Grand Rapids, Zondervan Publishing House. 

FEINBERG, JOHN.S. (2001) No One Like Him, John S. Feinberg (gen.ed.), Wheaton, Illinois, Crossway Books. 

HENRY, CARL (1983) God, Revelation and Authority: Volume 6: God Who Stands and Stays, Waco, Word Books. 

HENRY, CARL (1996) ‘Image of God’, in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books. 

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1982) The Nature of Necessity, Oxford, Clarendon Press.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (2000) Warranted Christian Belief, Oxford, Oxford University Press. 

WILLIAMS, ROWAN (2000) On Christian Theology, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. 

WILLIAMS, ROWAN (2007) Wrestling with Angels, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids.