knowledge of God Flashcards
Natural theology through reasoning of the natural world
Gods revelation is present in his creation and human reason has the ability to discover it. PSALM 19:1 “The heavens declare the glory of God, And the sky above proclaims his handiwork.”
Aquinas’ natural theology
Aquinas accepted that human reason can never grasp gods infinite divinity, “the finite has no capacity for the infinite”
but we can gain lesser knowledge of god, including: his existence, moral law, and nature through analogy (of attribution and proportion)
attribution: when we say a person is good, we can attribute a certain level of goodness to them. In the case of god, goodness is attributed to him in an infinitely higher and more perfect manner
proportion: the affects we see in the universe can be proportionate to their cause, God. if we see intelligence and order in the universe, we can infer a similar intelligence and order as rhe cause (god)
Paleys proportion watchmaker analogy
Paley explains how the
intricacy and complexity of a watch implies the existence of an intelligent Creator.It also makes sense to assume that this Creator must be good because they are creating something with intention and purpose. Paley goes on to suggest since the universe has an even greater complexity and order than a watch, therefore it must have been created by a designer with an even greater intelligence.
Imago dei as proof of natural theology through analogy of proportion
Imago dei, the idea the universe was made in the image of god and therefore we can gain knowledge of him through observations of the natural world. In Genesis 1:26-7 this is suggested, ‘let us make mankind in our image”
NATURAL THEOLOGY ANTHROPOMORPHISES GOD
However, Paleys analogy fails as it irrationally anthropomorphises god. it assumes a paralell in a watchmaker and God, which is too dissimilar to warrant the comparison.
The incomprehensiblity of God does not allow is to look to nature for knowledge of him. it falls short in capturing the full essence of him
Isaiah 55:8-9: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD”
calvin’s sensus divinitatus
John Calvin believed that all humans have an innate sense of the divine. Calvin believed there was no rational way to be an atheist because of this sense; even ‘backward peoples’ and those ‘remote from civilisation’ have a belief that there is a god.
Backed up by anthropological study: The commonality of organised religion found in remote tribal people indicates there is an innate inclination to worship.
Plantinga also argues that sin has a noetic quality, which could hinder some from having sensus divinitatus.
….But why would God obstruct us from the path to salvation?
why calvin’s sensus divinitatus fails
if we were to assume sensus divinitatus, then it would not bring us to the God of classical theism. Instead, freud explains humanly instinct to worship by positing wish-fulfilment: that humans crave protection, comfort and security, and we create gods to fulfil this.
also plantigas supposition that sun is a noetic quality is inconsistent. it does not describe why atheists, those who are good people, do not have a sense of the divine.
Romans 1.20 and barths interpretation
“Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his external power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse” Paul here seems to suggest that God’s qualities can be understood from what he has made, i.e. the natural world.
Barth argues the passage does allow for the knowledge of god to be apparent in the world, but it does not indicate human capability to find it.
Humans are too sinful to manage that.
Barth claims natural theology leads to idolatry – the worshiping of fake idols where, due to overlooking or misunderstanding the ‘qualitative distinction’ between humans and God, we lead to the worship of worldly things
Barth Brunner debate: The debate centers around how we can gain knowledge of god and achieve gods grace if humans are intrinsically sinful, unless there is general revelation through nature.
barth- revealed theology
Brunner- natural theology
barth- POINT OF CONTACT IS SCRIPTURE.
Barth argues that the point of contact between humans and god is ultimately from
revelation. This is mirrored in
john 14:6 when jesus states.
one comes to the father except through me,
—— DEFENDED BY EPISTEMIC DISTANCE
brunner: human beings alreadv have intrinsic Knowledge on
the nature of god, and revelation simply enhances this knowledge. This is also mirrored in
John 14:4, ‘and you know the way to the place where i am going’
GOD IS OMNIBENEVOLENT AND WOULD NOT LEAVE US STRANDED
barth v brunner- who wins?
Barth, suggests if natural theology is sufficient, then the fall, and this postlapsarian state of humanity would not make sense.
also, the point of contact is inherently blasphemous, it indicates god requires help to be known
