concept and nature of god Flashcards
what are the 3 problems with God’s omniscience
- immutability
- free will
- the logically impossible
what is the problem of immutability
- god is perfect
- if he is perfect then he cannot change (and has no reason to)
- what is true and what we can know is always changing
- so in order to know everything he would have to constantly change to know more
summarise the problem immutability causes for god’s omniscience in one sentence
complete knowledge seems to require change on the part of the knower whenever there is change on the part of that which is known.
can god know the logically impossible
- can know all things without knowing what is not
- while it may appear that he should be able to, as he created these laws of logic and thus should not be bound by them, god cannot know the logically impossible as then it would become possible
how does gods omniscience conflict with our free will
- if god is to know everything than surely he should know what the next thing i do is
- if god knows this then i did not choose what to do, i never choose as god already knows
what is the paradox of the rock
- can an all powerful god create a rock that he cannot move
-is not a possible thing – it’s a contradiction. And, as discussed in omnipotence, it’s not necessarily a limitation on God’s power to say He can’t do what’s logically impossible.
if god is all powerful surely this means he has the power to sin ?
- god can sin, yet he wont as it contradicts his nature
- to sin is an imperfection, it is to fall short of a perfect action
- to sin is to lack god
- yet god in his nature in perfect and therefore god will not sin
what are the two views to gods relationship with time
- everlasting and eternal
what is the difference between god being eternal and everlasting
eternal= external to time
everlasting= within time (internal)
what does temporal mean
within time
what is the view that god is ever lasting called
semitemporal
what does god being everlasting stress
the relation of god to humans rather than this conceptual idea of him
explain the view that god is eternal
- non-teemporaal being
- experiences all points in time in the universe simultaneously
what part of gods nature supports the idea that god is eternal
- the fact that he is perfect
- a perfect god does not change
- a god that exists outside of ime does not change with time
what is the modern idea of god being eternal
- some find it incomprehensible that god can experience the dinosaurss and us at the same time
- Te simultaniuety
what ET- simultaneous
- einstien discouvrered that simultaneity is actually relative
- depends on the observers frame of reference
-gods frame of reference is from a an atemporal eternal present - all events to god are ET simultaneous
- god experiences every moment in time togerther and the wholde of gods existence is simultaneous with each moment in time
what is the euthyphro dilemma
looks at whether morality is created by god or independent of god
why does morality being independent of god cause a problem
- it challenges his omnipotence
- as his power becomes limited by morality as he does not have the power to change ith
why does god creating morality raise issues
- threatens his omnibenevolence
- good and bad become arbitrary
possible response to the euthyyphro dilemma
- god chooses the rules of morality based on his other attributes
- like love
- therefore good and bad are not arbitrary rather grounded in some justification 9e.g. gods love for humanity etc. )
How could the response to the euthyphro dilemma be refuted
- whilst yes perhaps god feels as though his attributes justify morlaity
- this justification is not available to us
- causing an epistemologial problem
how does mavrodes refute the paradox
- says the task is self-contradictory
what does savage say about mavrodes response
- it contains a false choice fallacy, the paradox does not require we assume god is or isnt omnipotent
- it assumes the task is self-contradictory
- mavrodes is question begging as he tried to rpove that god is omnipoten by assuming the premise that he is
what is the main criticism to mavrodes solution
- that he fails to address the real problem raised by the paradox
-he is just defenidng the notion that god is omnipotent - that is what allows him to cocnlude that the task is self-contradicoty
what problem is the paraddox of the stone really getting at
- not that god is not omnipotent, rather that omnipotence itself is contradictory
what is the weakness within the paradox of the stone
- the conditional statemnet in p2 and p3 do not follow
- so necessarily there is at least one task which x cannot perform
what is wade savages response to the paradox of the stine
- the wording of it is misleading
- should see it as two seperate beings
- one that can make a stone of any weight
- one that can lift a stone of any weight
- both of them being abel to do that does not limit the other
what does wade conclude about the paradox of the stone
- the power to create and lift are both facets of omnipotence thus they do not limit eachother
- therefore the paradox does not show that omnipotence is incoherent
how could the notion that god is eternal help solve the conflict between omniscience and free will
- because he is outside of time he knows all things at once
- therefore our actions are not pre-deteremined as for godd there is no before or after
how does god being everlasting solve the conflict between free-will and omnisceince
- means that our future is his future
- knwoledge that lies in our future is impossible for god as well as us
- and gods omniscience does not require him to do the impossible
- therefore lack of future knowledge places no limitations on his omniscience.
what is the divine self-limitation response to the paradox of the stone
- god ia ble to limit his own choices
- he is not limited by anything outside of himself
– so if good choices to create stone so heavy that he cannot lift it he hasnt been limited as he made the stone (god is only limited by himself)
formally outline the euthyphora dilemma
p1: either god wills something because it is good or it is good because god wills it
p2: if god wills it because it is good, then there is a standrad of authority of what makes something good, independent oof god. meaning that god is not in control of everything
p3: if it is good because god wills it, then moral goodness is arbitrary
c: therefore either there is something outside of gods control or moral goodness is arbitrary
formally outline the omniscience and human freedom argument
p1- god is omnisceint, he knows our future decisions
p2- if god knows our future decisions we are not free to makek the opposite directions
c- therefore if god is omniscient humans cannt be free
