Attributes of God Flashcards
what is descartes’ omnipotence?
- Descartes believed we had no idea of God so cannot lay down limitations on his absolute omnipotence – God created the laws of logic/ existed prior to them; to conform to human laws would limit his power
- Matthew 19 – “with man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”
what is mackie + cs lewis view on omnipotence?
• Mackie – claiming God can do logically impossible actions is “only a form of words, which fails to describe any state of affairs” It is meaningless to talk of God creating square-circles, as if he did so he would be creating his own language – however, not being able to do this is no limitation on God’s power as creating a ‘square-circle’ is a meaningless utterance. C.S Lewisagreed -“meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire a meaning because we prefix to them two other words ‘God can”
how does kant apply to omnipotence?
• Certainly, by human standards, such illogical ideas cannot be comprehended, yet God is entirely beyond human capacities or understand thus it is arguably futile to even begin to understand what he can and cannot do…
e.g. kants realms
what did kenny say on problem of evil?
Kenny - illogical to suggest an evil world was created by an omnipotent creator.
what is aquinas’ view on omnipotence?
• Aquinas argued “He can do anything that is absolutely possible” “everything that does not imply a contradiction” i.e. cannot change the past, cannot sin, cannot make square circles. “As the principles of sciences such as logic, geometry, or arithmetic are taken from the formal principles of things which are essential to their natures, it follows that God could not make things that go against these principles” (‘Summa Contra Gentiles’)
issue with a god that can do everything logically/absolutely possible?
• Still issues with this – can God ride a bike? To do so is logically possible, but God is wholly simple and timeless - doesn’t have physical attributes and so it is physically impossible for him to do so – a narrower approach is needed. God would also be able to do things which defied his nature, such as lie or commit evil act.
augustine view on omnipotence?
• Augustine – God’s omnipotence needs to be understood as meaning he can do whatever he chooses to do; he self imposes certain limitations, such as not committing evil, as this would be contrary to his very nature. He is limited by his own perfections only, does what he wills – he would not wish to will evil, so he feels no frustration at this fact – not within his interests, so therefore he is omnipotent.
Keith ward view on omnipotence?
Keith Ward – “god freely limits the exercise of his unlimited power by the creation of free beings”
freud view on omnipotence?
Freud puts it God is the phenomenal realm and we are the noumenal.
peter teach + st teresa view on omnipotence?
- Peter Geachargues that God has the capacity for power, power over everything rather than a power to do everything and he bases this on the use of the translated word almighty to describe God in the New Testament – un-actualised powers, less human like i.e. wouldn’t ride a bike
- St Teresa of Avila – “Christ has no body now on earth except yours” God exists within the form of life (Wittgenstein) of the believing community (anti-realist notion), thus to talk of God’s power is to talk of our actions of compassion and love, which triumph over adversity
what is the problem with peter beach’s omnipotence?
reduces god to human terms
aristotle on punishment?
• Furthermore, if we accept we are fallen, God cannot justly punish us as if we are ignorant then we cannot be responsible for our actions (Aristotle)
iranaeus and hick view on evil?
Iranaeus’ soul-making theodicy asserts that (unlike Augustine’s theodicy) humans have potential to reach God’s divine likeness, yet must grow and develop through suffering. Goodness is dependent on its purpose of developing us into better people.
• Hick’s develops Iranaeus soul-making theodicy, viewing evil as instrumental in our development into God’s divine likeness. Swinburne explains that such objections are like asking God to make a toy world, where there are no real consequences or actions. The world is a vale for soul making. A world without any pain would be a meaningless, empty haze, in which we drifted about aimlessly, not suffering nor caring – “we have to learn in the face of life’s sorrows, in order to become better people” (Keats) With free choice must come real consequences, and from these we develop virtues of courage, charity, empathy “vale of soul making”
dz phillips view on evil?
• D.Z. Philips ‘The Problem of Evil and The Problem of God’ – justifying evil for the benefit of others is a sign of a corrupt mind. The suffering of the victims at Auschwitz arguably serves no instrumental good for those who died. “Our moral growth is presented by Swinburne as the justification of those sufferings which he treats as a means of achieving it”, callousness towards the suffering of others
jl mackie on evil?
J L Mackie, in his article ‘Evil and Omnipotence’ argues why an omnipotent God could not create humans with characters which meant they would freely choose to do good?
