Knowledge of God Flashcards
Support for Nat + Revealed Theo?
Scholars
- Aquinas
- Brunner
Gen Points
- Universal - Transcends language or particular faith
- Reasonable - to suggest there is evidence or able to see characteristics of God in world he created
Criticism of Nat Theology
- Can only know God in an Abstract way / prove existence
–> Couldn’t reason Christian beliefs such as Resurrection, Doctrine of the Trinity, God’s moral law, existence of Heaven and Hell etc. - Human corruption from Fall limits ability to reason God
- Reason Subjective - e.g. morality varies across cultures, suggesting not from God (use Plantegia sin block sensus to counter)
- Evolution - Order and Purpose of universe explain through other means - not God
Support for Revealed Theo
Scholars
- Augustine
- Calvin
- Plantegia
- Barth
- Roger Olson
Gen. Points
- If Pre-Fall humans thought they knew better than God and defied hims, why would post-fall, more corrupt, humans be better
Augustine on Knowledge of God
- Revealed Theo
- Humans ability to reason corrupted by OG sin
–> Undermines Nat theology as it relies on humans ability to reasoning nature
Criticism of Augustine’ view of KoG
Pelagius
- OG sin is a false doctrine, more reflective of Augustines society than HN
- People only ‘evil’ due to upbringing
Darwin
- View of Evolution + people improving over time, undermines idea of Adam + Eve, therefore the fall
Aquinas
13th Cent Catholic Monk - Mixed Nat and Revealed Theo
- Nat Theo we can reason existence of God
–> Teleological + Cosmological argument
- Need combo of Reason Faith and Revelation
–> Nat Theo and Revelation help provide support (evidence) for Faith
–> need both in harmony
- Faith is a voluntary choice, not self-evidence
–> cannot have faith and scientific knowledge of the same thing - mutually exclusive
- OG Sin damaged humans, but still possess rationality
–> Ability to sin proves rationality, wouldn’t say animal sinned
–> Reason helps inform synderesis
John Calvin on Knowledge of God
16th Cent - Protestant - Knowledge of God from Revealed sources
- Sensus Divinitatis - humans have innate sense of God –> no rational way to be an atheist
–> 3 pieces of evidence (not Calvin); Unknown God (Paul in Acts), Universal consent Argument (But Bandwagon Fallacy), Humans as religious beings (CCC) - Nat Theo impossible - Garden of Eden was God intended design
–> Fall led to corruption of Garden - Nat Theo based on corrupted world - ‘Duplex cognito Domini’ - 2 fold Knowledge of God
–> God as Creator, God Redeemer - God as Creator
–> Gain knowledge of God’s existence through world
–> Principle of Accommodation (Humans finite, God infinite) Represents himself in way humans can understand
–> Creation as mirror - mirror reflects God, not full essence only reflection - God as Redeemer
–> True knowledge of God is Salvation through Christ
–> OG sin is “religious ignorance or indifference” (CCC) ∴ God needs to use Revelation - JC is mediator for God (not telling us everything due to principles of accommodation)
Alvin Plantegia on Knowledge of God
- 20th Cent - Revealed Theo
- Revealed Theo provides more justifiable belief than Nat Theo
- Supported Sensus Divinitatis
–> Sin blocks some people’s ability to gain KoG, explanation for why some claim to not have innate knowledge
–> BUT - only reasonable if Atheists are more immoral than Christians, no evidence for this - Humans have general religious senses
–> If there was no God, there would be no claims of God - so many people claim God his existence must be ‘basic knowledge’ (things we know to be true)
–> Knowledge only available to Christians as Christ removes the sin which distorts the sensus divinitatis
Criticisms of Plantegia’s view on KoG
- God’s existence as basic Knowledge
–> Bandwagon Fallacy - just because many people believe in something doesn’t make it true
–> Doesn’t prove it’s Christian, or even Abrahamic God
–> Implies any firmly held belief, regardless of truth, is ‘basic knowledge’ e.g. Atheism, or irrational belief’s such as Child’s belief in Santa
Emil Brunner’s views on KoG
- Both Nat + Revealed Theo
- Imago dei - Fall destroyed humans in God’s image, but still have potential to reason
–> caused humans to be lower than angels, still have reason - Humans have slight ability to reason Nat Theo, should use this in combo with Revealed
–> Nat Theo alone results in distorted knowledge of God, due to sinful state
–> Need Revelation of Christ to achieve full knowledge - God communicates to humans through Nature
- Conscience + Guilt makes humans aware of God’s moral law
Brunner vs. Barth Debate
Karl Barth’s views on KoG
Revealed Theo- 20th Cent
- Dangerous to rely on human reason for KoG
–> “Finite has no capacity of infinite” - Human Reasoning God can lead to idolatry, and worship of Corrupt e.g. Nazi’s
–> Many argue Barth’s response due to rise of Nazism - Nazi’s appealed to natural order of society, lots of Christians failed to reject this - Even if reason not fully destroyed, still corrupted –> cannot rely to gain KoG
- Can perceive God in nature, but cannot use this as basis for morality or salvation - need bible
- Brunner gives to much importance to Human reason
- God Reveals himself when he chooses
–> only faith in God’s revelation leads to true KoG
Biblical links for KoG
Genesis
- Adam and Eve causing ‘the fall’ and for humans to become filled with OG sin
–> Supports idea’s of Revealed theo
- Abraham - God Revealed himself to Abraham and told him to go to the promise land, Promise Ab his wife (Sarah) would bear children as reward for his faith
Exodus
- Moses - God Revealed himself to Moses to command him to free the Israelite slaves from Egypt + Revealed his name ‘I am’
–> wouldn’t know through Nat
St Paul in Acts
- Saw Statue to an ‘Unknown God - saw this as humans innate knowledge + ‘Sensus Divinitatis’
St Paul in Romans
- “God’s eternal power and divine nature have been clearly seen … so that people are without excuse”
–> Supporting Nat. Theo - Barth would argue God can show knowledge, but humans still interpret wrong and could be unreliable
Hebrews
- Faith = “Assurance about what we do not see”
–> Faith shouldn’t require any empirical evidence - ‘leap of faith’
CCC - Catechism of the Catholic Church
- OG sin left humans “Religious ignorance or indifference”
-“Desire for God is written on the Human Heart”
- Religious Practise “So universal that one may as well call man a religious being”
Wider Scholars emphasising use of Science
John Polkinghorne
- Binocular vision
–> Science through one eye , spiritual truths through the other
–> Foolish to ignore scientific discoveries, or to refuse to engage with religion
Robert Boyle
- Science + Religion = ‘God’s two books’
–> Creates by same author, complementary, lead to deeper knowledge
Dawkins
- Criticise Faith and Revealed Theo is irrational and unscientific
- Faith relies on belief without evidence, making it harmful
–> ‘God Delusion’, “Faith is the great cop-out” excuse to evade evidence
–> Faith as harmful - normalises holding belief without scrutiny, result in dogmatism, justifying unreasonable / unethical actions (Similar to Barth belief on Nat Theo)
- Revealed Theo
–> Cannot be taken as ultimate true as dif religious have contradictory claims
Crit - Aquinas + Kierkegaard
Aquinas
- Faith and scientific knowledge mutually exclusive, cannot have both about the same thing
Kierkegaard
- Belief in God requires ‘leap of Faith prioritising God over empirical evidence
Richard Swinburne’s views on KoG
Cumulative Case
- No single argument for existence of God decisive on its own
–> Must use a cumulative case of Nat Theo, Revealed Theo, Religious expereinces, all to try prove God.
