• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Examine and consider the significance of modern teaching about a suffering God.

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

CONOR MCGLOIN EXAMINE AND CONSIDER THE SIGNIFICANCE OF MODERN TEACHING ABOUT A SUFFERING GOD. (12 marks) Before tackling the question, it is important to have an understanding of what 'modern' teaching regarding a suffering God entails, and similarly what 'traditional' teaching entails. Up until the twentieth century, Christian theology in general stated that God was not capable of suffering. The twentieth century, however, saw a huge change in theologian's views regarding the nature of a suffering God - indeed, there was a complete reversal of previous opinions. For centuries, the orthodox view of God was that he could not suffer. There were (and still are) compelling reasons to hold this belief. The idea of God suffering has certain negative connotations. In order to suffer, there must be a cause for suffering, and if God can be affected, and hurt (for the idea of suffering certainly entails the idea of hurt) by some other being or event, surely he is not all powerful. The idea of suffering also raises the question of whether it means God changes, and how that fits with the Christian belief that God is perfect. In traditional Christian thinking, God is considered the perfect being, or entity. Now, if a perfect being changes in someway, surely this indicates a change away from perfection. ...read more.

Middle

This argument also raised questions concerning the empathetic nature of God. In order to be empathetic, God must share our suffering with us. This a major change in theological thinking, but there are problems regarding the nature of such a change. It could be said that the Church was simply changing its doctrine in order to accommodate a changing world. The Church must be careful not to change for the wrong reasons, as it would undermine its influence, and the respect it has. In the twentieth century, theologians also undertook the restudying of the Old Testament. New conclusions were drawn regarding the nature of God. He was seen, in the Old Testament, as a 'passionate' God, who understood the needs of his people and responded accordingly. He is seen to be angry at times, and is capable of punishing those who anger him. These are all seemingly emotional capabilities, and seem to indicate that God is able to relate to his people because he actually feels what they feel. This meant the Church had to reassess how they looked upon the nature of a suffering God, especially in relation to the study of the bible. Another significant problem raised during the twentieth century is that of religious plagiarism. ...read more.

Conclusion

The question of whether the Church was just finally succumbing to pressure from its followers has to be asked, though. This is, after all, a massive change in the belief system of the Church. It is also important to examine the argument concerning the nature of, and connection, between emotions. Christians often talk about God loving his people. The human perception of love is of an extremely strong emotion, and one that invariably involves suffering as well. If God is not capable of suffering with us, modern theologians said, surely God cannot be capable of experiencing love for us. Love will always involve suffering, and God must understand this emotion in order to love. The change in theologian thinking appears to have made God's love for us seem more certain than before. There is one more counter-argument to the modern teaching regarding God's impassibility. Christians believe God to be perfect, but if God is perfect, yet still suffers, is there any hope of a life free from suffering? Perhaps this new teaching could be considered as damning humans to a life of suffering, rather than giving them the opportunity to believe in a life free from pain. The change in the Church's teaching regarding a suffering God has undoubtedly seen a huge change in theology. It has shown itself to be a constantly changing and evolving thing, and has seemingly shown God to still be relevant in a modern world. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Existence of God section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Existence of God essays

  1. What is meant by the problem of suffering?

    So the conclusion for moral evil is simple as it is humans fault and error however the fact of natural evil by which disease, earthquakes and volcanoes we cannot control and cannot comprehend why we have them. The first theodicy by St Augustine is usually understood to mean that humans have a spiritual as well as a physical nature.

  2. Holocaust Theology

    For Fackenheim, the enormity of the Holocaust puts it beyond the reach of traditional explanations of suffering and evil and calls into question nothing less than god himself. My views on the Holocaust is that God can not exist.

  1. Explain the Christian idea of God. How is this idea of God reflected in ...

    Jesus is now part of God and helps create the triune of God. Jesus was the human form of God the following is an extraction of one of Jesus' last speech's explaining his form. "...I am of flesh and bones..."

  2. The God Question

    not exist, therefore its existence is contingent because it is possible for it not be non-existent, however God's existence is necessary because there are no events prior to his existence which could be disturbed and prevent his existence therefore it is necessary that he exists because he is not contingent.

  1. Is God really there? If he is, does he care? And if he does, ...

    He does, however, support God's morals in that he believes that free will could not (and would not) exist without the perseverance of evil, as many evil occurrences are a result of people acting through their own free will and without.

  2. Compare and contrast two of the following and evaluate their significance for understanding religious ...

    For example Sallie McFague in 'Models of God in Religious Language' claims that religious symbols are anachronistic because of their patriarchal roots. She suggested that symbols such as Father and Son should be adapted to Mother and Friend. Paul Tillich himself addressed this point and wrote: "It is necessary to

  1. Arguments about god.

    Christians regard their Christian friends as their family, their church as their second home. They share such friendly love for their family and true Christians go to church for fun, meetings and a little miracle that happens when they enter the church; a rush of love for God, and the friendship (fellowship)

  2. The Nature of God.

    Therefore it must have had an even smaller chance of evolving by chance. That means that a great creator must have created humans, this creator Christians believe to be God. There are other things in the world that imply that they were designed.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work