O presente trabalho visa compreender a relação entre a ordem do mundo e o homem nas obras de Voltaire, ou seja, elucidar a posição e condição do homem num mundo ordenado por leis e a compreensão desse mundo do ponto de vista humano. Para tanto se enfrentou os temas que tal relação oferecia ao autor: a liberdade e a necessidade, o destino, a providência e o mal. Estes tópicos, como se sabe, constituem os assuntos tradicionais da teodicéia, de sorte que o presente trabalho é concebido também como a elucidação da leitura crítica de Voltaire do otimismo filosófico. / The present work tries to understand the rapports between the order of the world and man in Voltaires works, that is, it aims at shedding some light on man as part of an ordered world and on the understanding of that ordered world from a human standpoint. In order to do that it focused the subjects which the comprehension of that relation required: liberty and necessity, destiny, providence and evil. Those topics, as one knows, constituted the traditional themes of the theodicy, so that the present work can also be considered as an account of Voltaires critique of the philosophical optimism.

Trata-se de mostrar que Rousseau formula, ao longo de seus escritos, em especial no conjunto de seus Discursos, no Contrato Social e no Emílio, uma filosofia da história onde figura um movimento dialético e a ideia de um sentido último para o desenrolar dos eventos humanos. A sucessão de eventos que liga a natureza humana intocada pelos males sociais a seu destino - a qual Rousseau quer chamar de história - traria em seu bojo a possibilidade do progresso moral, consubstanciada na volta ao ordenamento natural. Assim como, frente ao espetáculo e as aparências de seu tempo, Rousseau retrocede ao homem natural, constrói a expectativa de que os tempos vindouros tragam a reconciliação do homem consigo mesmo e com a natureza, tendo o Estado, nos termos em que é proposto pelo Contrato Social, um papel fundamental para esse acontecimento. Por fim, pretende-se desenvolver a ideia de que, a partir de uma noção de história como marcha da natureza, que engendra os meios para emancipação humana, Rousseau aproxima-se do pensamento religioso, produzindo, a partir de sua filosofia da história, uma teodicéia. / This essay aims to show that Rousseau formulates, through his writings, specially in his Discourses, Social Contract and Emile, a Philosophy of History, depicting a dialectic movement and the idea of an ultimate goal or sense for the unraveling of humanity\'s events. The succession of all the events that binds an untouched by social iniquities human nature to its destiny - that Rousseau wants to name history - would bring in its bowels the possibility of moral progress, con-substantiated on the return of a natural order. As in which, facing the spectacle and appearances of his time, Rousseau leans back to this natural man; he also builds an expectation for a reconciliation for man with itself and with nature, playing the State, in the terms laid by the Social Contract, a fundamental role for this to happen. Finally, it is intended to develop the idea that, from a notion of history as a march of nature, engendering the means for human emancipation, Rousseau leans towards the religious thinking, producing in his philosophy of history, a theodicy.

Submitted by Renata Lopes (renatasil82@gmail.com) on 2016-09-28T20:22:20Z No. of bitstreams: 1 rafaelcesarpitt.pdf: 614374 bytes, checksum: 1b9f6879969fed4b545f9fb3e86f37c7 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Diamantino Mayra (mayra.diamantino@ufjf.edu.br) on 2016-09-30T13:52:07Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 rafaelcesarpitt.pdf: 614374 bytes, checksum: 1b9f6879969fed4b545f9fb3e86f37c7 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-09-30T13:52:07Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 rafaelcesarpitt.pdf: 614374 bytes, checksum: 1b9f6879969fed4b545f9fb3e86f37c7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-08-23 / CAPES - Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / A teodiceia é o conceito utilizado na modernidade filosófica para designar uma defesa ou justificativa da perfeição divina diante do problema do mal. O objetivo deste trabalho é mostrar que o livro de Schelling de 1809, a Freiheitsschrift, dispensa a elaboração de uma teodiceia ao oferecer um sistema da razão no qual o problema do mal é devidamente compreendido dentro da esfera da liberdade humana. Esse feito permite a Schelling demonstrar os atributos divinos da vida e da personalidade, ao mesmo tempo em que aponta para a ausência de relação entre Deus e o mal. Esse vazio entre o criador e o mal é possível, por um lado, pela concepção de criação, enquanto desdobramento do ser divino e, por outro lado, pela possibilidade do mal fundada exclusivamente na liberdade humana. O resultado desse vazio é a consequente dispensabilidade da defesa de Deus diante do problema do mal. / Theodicy is the concept used in modernt philosophy to describe a defense or justification of divine perfection before the problem of evil. The objective of this work is to show that the book of Schelling of 1809, the Freiheitsschrift, dispenses the preparation of a theodicy while offering a system of the reason in which the problem of the evil is properly understood inside the sphere of the human freedom. This achievement allows Schelling demonstrate the divine attributes of life and personality, while pointing to the absence of relationship between God and evil. This emptiness between the creator and evil is possible, firstly, through the conception of creation as an unfolding of the divine being and, secondly, through the possibility of evil founded exclusively on human freedom. The result of this emptiness is the dispensability of the subsequent defense of God before the problem of evil.

The main question of this thesis is how clinical depression can and should be understood from the perspective of a Christian world view. The method is a contextual idea analysis and the main material for the analysis is five books about depression or psychological disorders from a Christian and theological viewpoint. On the basis of the material, six theological models for depression are found. The first three models are natural depression, in which the condition is viewed as structural to creation, depression as spiritual illness, in which it is viewed as based on sin and weak faith, and depression as spiritual growth, which links the condition to the dark night-tradition of sanctification. The final three are depression in a trinitarian model, which is a combinational model consisting of the above-mentioned models, depression as potentially transformative, in which the condition is viewed as a potential birthplace for personal growth, and depression as a Hagaric wilderness experience, which views the condition as meaningless suffering even though God is present. These models are then evaluated on two grounds. The primary ground is how well the models can be integrated with a cruciform theology. A cruciform theology stems from the belief that Jesus on the cross fully reveals the character of God as self-giving non-coercive love. The secondary ground is the pragmatic consequences the models may have for the person suffering from depression. Are the consequences of these theological models healing or destructive? Based on these two grounds, depression as potentially transformative, combined with a cruciform theology which entails some kind of free will theodicy and a view of God as passibleand suffering with the person struggling with depression, is proposed as the preferabletheological model for depression.

Psalms using the language of enmity present a challenge for Christians who wish to use these psalms as prayer. This study investigates the language of enmity in Psalms 110, 119, 129, 137, 139 and 149 as Christian prayer and beyond the normal form category of lament or complaint of the individual. An argument is proposed to understand Book V of the Psalter as an integral unit, which editors have arranged to represent the post-exilic early restoration period. The study begins with an exegesis of each psalm and seeks to determine the perceived suffering of the psalmist(s) at the hands of enemies and the meaning of the responses to these adversaries. It then moves to a limited historical survey of how commentators through Church history have perceived the suffering and responses in these psalms which use language of enmity. This historical survey is used to correct or clarify the findings in the exegesis. In the third movement of this thesis, the results of the individual exegesis and historical survey of Psalms 110, 119, 129, 137, 139 and 149 are compared in order to elucidate the meaning of the language of enmity. The findings suggest that the language of enmity represents images of judgment on a recalcitrant adversary. The psalms are also investigated as prayers and as normative scripture. The use of the language of enmity in these psalms suggests a use of language that differs from normal use. In this regard the rhetorical device of synecdoche is most helpful in explaining how the texts function. The basis for the language of enmity seems to be the unchanging nature of moral evil. The study then investigates the psalms as canonical, normative prayer in order to move towards developing a theology of God’s just dealing with people and his people in particular. In this regard the psalms are approached as prayer, regardless of the voice in which they were composed. It is suggested that the text as normative prayer allows the psalmist, God, and the pray-er to inhabit and celebrate the same sacred time and space. Of particular concern is how each psalm speaks to the issue of how God engages with moral evil and the question of what can be known about moral evil. The findings suggest that these psalms are an invaluable spiritual resource for the church and should remain unaltered in their use as Christian private and public prayer. / PhD (Old Testament), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus in cooperation with Greenwich School of Theology, 2015

Psalms using the language of enmity present a challenge for Christians who wish to use these psalms as prayer. This study investigates the language of enmity in Psalms 110, 119, 129, 137, 139 and 149 as Christian prayer and beyond the normal form category of lament or complaint of the individual. An argument is proposed to understand Book V of the Psalter as an integral unit, which editors have arranged to represent the post-exilic early restoration period. The study begins with an exegesis of each psalm and seeks to determine the perceived suffering of the psalmist(s) at the hands of enemies and the meaning of the responses to these adversaries. It then moves to a limited historical survey of how commentators through Church history have perceived the suffering and responses in these psalms which use language of enmity. This historical survey is used to correct or clarify the findings in the exegesis. In the third movement of this thesis, the results of the individual exegesis and historical survey of Psalms 110, 119, 129, 137, 139 and 149 are compared in order to elucidate the meaning of the language of enmity. The findings suggest that the language of enmity represents images of judgment on a recalcitrant adversary. The psalms are also investigated as prayers and as normative scripture. The use of the language of enmity in these psalms suggests a use of language that differs from normal use. In this regard the rhetorical device of synecdoche is most helpful in explaining how the texts function. The basis for the language of enmity seems to be the unchanging nature of moral evil. The study then investigates the psalms as canonical, normative prayer in order to move towards developing a theology of God’s just dealing with people and his people in particular. In this regard the psalms are approached as prayer, regardless of the voice in which they were composed. It is suggested that the text as normative prayer allows the psalmist, God, and the pray-er to inhabit and celebrate the same sacred time and space. Of particular concern is how each psalm speaks to the issue of how God engages with moral evil and the question of what can be known about moral evil. The findings suggest that these psalms are an invaluable spiritual resource for the church and should remain unaltered in their use as Christian private and public prayer. / PhD (Old Testament), North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus in cooperation with Greenwich School of Theology, 2015

This dissertation argues for the hope that is found in G. C. Berkouwer’s doctrines of providence and bodily resurrection in relation to the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001, and the rising pervasiveness of the doctrine of hyperpreterism among American Reformed circles. In Part I of the dissertation, Berkouwer’s doctrine of providence is explained and then evaluated and applied. By way of explanation and exposition, Berkouwer’s knowledge of providence is examined, along with his theology of providence in sustenance and government, in relation to miracles, and the dilemma of the existence of God and evil. Following that is an evaluation and application of the doctrine to the 9/11 terrorist attack on America. In Part II, a theological/doctrinal study is undertaken concerning the doctrine of resurrection. Hyper-preterism is examined, along with its leading proponents, and placed into interaction with Berkouwer’s views of the doctrine of the physical resurrection of the body at the eschaton. / Theology / M.Th. (Philosophy & Systematic Theology)

Horrendous evils pose distinctive challenges for belief in an ethically perfect God. To home in on these challenges, I construct an ethical framework for theodicy by sketching four cases of human action where horrors are either caused, permitted, or risked, either for pure benefit (i.e., a benefit that does not avert a still greater harm) or for harm avoidance. I then bring the framework and the moral valuations confirmed by this casuistry to bear on the project of theodicy. I construct four analogous structures – one for each case – and identify examples of each structure in theodicies in contemporary philosophy of religion. I summarize each theodicy and evaluate whether it is structurally promising with respect to horrendous evils. That is, if the proposed interconnected set of facts and reasons were true, would God be ethically in the clear? My initial conclusions impugn the dominant structural approach of depicting God as causing or permitting horrors in individual lives for the sake of some merely pure benefit. This approach is insensitive to relevant asymmetries in the justificatory demands made by horrendous and non-horrendous evil and in the justificatory work done by averting harm and bestowing pure benefit. I next argue that the structurally promising theodicies I have identified are implausible due to their overestimation of the extent to which finite human agents can bear primary responsibility for horrendous evils and their underestimation of the importance for theodicy of being consonant with a broadly Darwinian approach to evolutionary theory. The project of theodicy is in trouble. The second half of my thesis develops an approach to theodicy that falls outside my proffered taxonomy. Following a suggestion of Leibniz, Robert Adams has argued that theodicy can be aided by the insight that almost all of the evil of the actual world is metaphysically necessary for the community of actual world inhabitants to be comprised of the specific individuals who comprise it. Beginning with this insight, I develop (what I term) Non-Identity Theodicy. It suggests that God allows the evil he does in order to create and love the specific individuals comprising the community of inhabitants of the actual world. This approach to theodicy is unique because the justifying good recommended is neither harm-aversion nor pure benefit. It is not a good that betters the lives of individual human persons (for they wouldn’t exist otherwise), but it is the individual human persons themselves. In order to aim successfully at the creation of particular individuals, however, God would need a control of history so complete that it might be argued to be inconsistent with beliefs about human free will that are important to some theologies. I construct a second version of Non-Identity Theodicy designed to avoid this problem by considering whether God’s justifying motivation for allowing the evil of this world could be his aiming for beings of our type, even if it could not be his aiming for particular individuals. I suggest that God would be interested in loving those he creates under various descriptions (e.g., biological, psychological, and narrative descriptions), and argue that a horror-prone environment is necessary for us to be the type of being we are under each of the descriptions. I assess the structural promise and plausibility of Non-Identity Theodicy. In order to do so, I engage with Derek Parfit’s non-identity problem and with some influential assumptions in the ethics of procreation literature. I end by recapping what I take to be the key areas of overemphasis and under-emphasis in contemporary theodicy.

This paper attempts to explore the creation of Satan as an embodiment of evil in Early Christian theodicy. I use Greco-Roman myth and the Old Testament Book of Job to explore "duality," a system in which good and evil are encapsulated in gods or God. I attempt to trace the trajectory of a shift from this duality to a system of Christian cosmic "dualism," in which good and evil are separated as opposing forces. This shift is explored through the intertestamental Pseudepigrapha of 1 Enoch and Jubilees, towards the New Testament story of the Temptation of Christ in Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Finally, exploring post-New Testament Christian ideas with Origen's seminal work On First Principles and the martyr text of Perpetua to investigate the Early Christian community's ideas of good, God, evil, and Satan.

In this thesis I compare the views of Joseph de Maistre and Fyodor Dostoyevsky with regard to the relation between modernity and the theologico-political problem. I integrate this comparison within the general context of the reflection concerning modernity and the theologico-political problem, as well as within the context of two Christian theological traditions, Catholic and Orthodox, on the basis of which the two authors develop their religious and political thought. In particular, I analyze the views of the two authors with regard to the origins and the defining traits of modernity. Likewise, I present their opinions concerning the consequences which are inherent in the modern project. Viewing modernity first and foremost as an attempt to build a secular world that would define itself by its opposition to what both authors regard as authentic Christianity, Maistre and Dostoyevsky emphasize the fact that, having theological origins that mark the totality of its becoming, modernity should be understood on the basis of a theologico-political reflection. Associating the modern ambition to build a secular world with the fate of the biblical Tower of Babel, both authors adopt a prophetic posture, announcing the collapse of the modern project as well as the ultimate eschatological resolution of the modern crisis. Yet, the two authors are differentiated by their interpretations of the relation between modernity and the theologico-political problem, identifying differently the theological origins of the modern crisis. In this sense, while according to Maistre modernity originates in the Protestant Reformation, for Dostoyevsky, modernity’s origins must be located in the transformations of Western Christianity that have finally lead to the latter’s separation from Eastern Orthodoxy. These differences of interpretation lead to the articulation of two different responses to the modern crisis, which are rooted in two different Christian theological traditions. Consequently, if in reaction to the modern crisis Maistre affirms the Catholic principle of authority, whose highest expression is the concept of papal infallibility, Dostoyevsky opposes to this crisis the Orthodox principle of brotherhood in Christ. The critique of modernity culminates in the thought of the two authors with an approach of the complex and troubling problem of theodicy, which, Maistre and Dostoyevsky believe, stands at the origin of the modern opposition to Christianity and its traditional institutions.