Abstract
After a personal experience of prolonged suffering ending in death in my family, existential questions suddenly came to the fore – something I had not anticipated in the preceding months during the fight against disease. I also became more aware of the pain and suffering around me and struggled to make sense of it all. Of course, it is not unusual to ask questions like “Where is God?”, “Why does God not prevent this?”, “What is God’s plan in all of this?” during difficult times. This is the type of question with which scholars of theodicy concern themselves.
Theodicy is a branch of theology in which theologians and philosophers aim to defend God’s goodness in a world plagued by pain, suffering and evil. In their research they most often provide a framework that argues God’s existence as probable, given all the evil in the world.
In a quest to make sense of these evils personally, I adopted an interpretivist approach which suited this investigation perfectly as it strives to understand and describe a lived reality through the lens of the researcher – it is all about the subjective insights of the researcher and how this contributes to his or her understanding of the lived experience.
This world with its suffering by innocents, with pain and through evil must be hell. In other words, this lived reality is hell – we are living in hell. The fact that scholars could never reach any consensus regarding the exact description of hell counts in favour of this view. Many writers, such as Sartre, Corian and Steiner, have already alluded to aspects of a lived hell. But it was a popular television series, Buffy the vampire slayer, that finally convinced me to consider the possibility of human beings living in a hell on earth. In the sixth season Buffy is brought back from the dead by her witch friend. Buffy realises that she was in fact in heaven and torn out of there by her friend. She comes to the conclusion that this life on earth is hell. The motivation for writing this articles was the question whether Buffy’s realisation could be researched in a scientific manner.
In order to achieve these goals a literature review of prominent scholars on theodicy was undertaken. This review ultimately led to examining the doctrine of hell, which was consequently researched in the same way. These readings led to a possible interpretation of the pain, suffering and evil encountered in everyday life as constituting life in hell. Throughout the article visual rhetoric (in the form of photographs) is used to strengthen the argument of life on earth as being in hell.
When one investigates the early church’s stance on the so-called problem of evil, it is clear that most theologians of that time regarded evil as a product of humankind’s free will. Humans ultimately make bad decisions that have an impact on nature and fellow human beings. Irenaeus (2nd century) even suggested that evil forces humans closer to God; in other words, it can act in the best interest of humans. Augustine (5th century) formulated the doctrine of original sin, where humans for all eternity will be held accountable for the sins of the first man, Adam.
Recent scholars of theodicy tend to disregard these doctrines. Some even reject the notion of original sin as being the cause of suffering on the grounds of biology and evolution. Kushner and Phillips are of the opinion that the consolation that suffering and pain is part of a “greater good” or “bigger pictures” trivialises suffering of the innocent and more often than not alienates the sufferer from God. Some philosophers hold that there will never be a clear explanation of the problem of evil and that it is up to the individual to make sense of his or her surroundings and existence in this life.
By doing the latter, I came to the conclusion that I find myself in hell. All the innocent suffering, pain and evil are inherently part of human existence in this hell and do not have to be explained or even understood. This is simply hell.
After researching the doctrine of hell, the following possibilities were encountered:
Firstly, humans are in hell, forever, mainly as punishment for transgressions or sins, according to the traditionalist doctrine of hell. Secondly, according to the universalists, this hell might be a temporary existence until the human being is reunited with God. Thirdly, according to the reconciliatory view, humans are permanently assigned to this hell as punishment for their transgressions and they have to accept their fate and God’s sovereignty. A fourth possibility is that of annihilationism in which sinners will cease to exist and therefore this article’s hell scenario will not be possible.
Possibility one and three are pessimistic outlooks and present no escape from this hell. However, the second possibility creates hope and explains people’s longing towards God – despite life in this hell on earth. This hope within a universalist viewpoint is described by Moltmann in several of his writings. Reference is also made to Leibniz’s best possible world argument. It is not a far stretch from this to seeing this world’s reality as being in hell as the best possible way to be united with God.
Ultimately pain, suffering and evil are part of existence in this hell. However, this is not necessarily a pessimistic outlook on life. Humans have hope to be redeemed from this hell and live in the hope of transformation. When people create beauty for their fellow human beings and all creation, they are transcending the boundaries of this hell in the hope of eternal communion with God.
Keywords: annihilationism; evil; hell; reconciliatory view; suffering; theodicy; traditionalism; universalism
The post An interpretivist perspective on theodicy and hell appeared first on LitNet.