Nature And Attributes Of God Flashcards
“Critically assess the traditional Christian concept of God being eternal” essay
A: Boethius, God exists in a continuous present. Sees everything simultaneously. Simple and conditional necessities. God must not exist in the same timeframe as humans. Aquinas - if God were to exists in the same time frame he would be susceptible to change. But he is not as revealed in scripture
CA: God outside time imply an uninterested God. More like the God of philosophy than theGod of faith. God portrayed in the bible seems to be more immanent
E: Just because we cannot make sense of something does not mean that is wrong. We lack mental capacity on how God interacts with humans. Descartes - God can do what is logically possible so why not this: voluntarism
A: Anselm - 4 dimensional approach. Time in within God. “God is free from the bondage of temporality.” - Wolterstorff Free will is also preserved as God is alongside us at the moment. God himself is eternity so each moment actually is God.
CA: Swinburne & Plantinga- everlasting view, wouldn’t be able to answer prayers. Everlasting view better as God is in time with no beginning or end. In the bible he responds to prayers
E: This would mean an arbitrary God as he responds to individuals. Difficult to worship a God who changes his mind. Aquinas - prayers should not be for requests.
Omnipotence scholars & arguments
Descartes: Can do the logically impossible.
- C.S Lewis: simply adding ‘God can’ to the beginning of the sentence does not change the meaning. “With God all things are possible” - Mark.
- William of Ockham - suggested that God’s power was absolute. It was only after tee creation if the world that God’s power was limited.
- Aquinas: cant do the logically impossible. Self-imposed limitations to give humans free will.
- _Alvin Plantinga _- God chooses to limit his power ro preserve free will.
- J.McQuarrie: claims that the view fits with the Christian belief
HOWEVER: does not fit with the biblical God - how is it possible for a transcendent.
- A.Kenny: Can do what is logically possible within his attributes.
- William of Ockham - since God has created the world, he only has ordained power. Cannot uncreate the world or change the past.
“God is not omnipotent” paragraph
A: Descartes - God is omnipotent, he can do anything, even what is logically impossible. He can make 2+2=5. Voluntarism. God is beyond out understanding, just cause we cannot imagine does not mean that Gd is unable to do it. “With God, all things er possible” - Mark
CA: God is not omnipotent as he cannot do everything. He cannot sin, cannot change the past. Therefore not all powerful
E: Kenny changes the definition of omnipotence : can do all logically possible for God to do. P.Geach amends it further and takes the Latin and translates it to ‘almighty’. Power over everything rather than a power to do everything
Omniscience eternity scholars & arguments
Anselm: God is timeless. Four-dimensional approach. Neither special or temporal. Concepts of time have no meaning to him. With the issue of free will Anselm responds with preceding and following necessity. He is alongside everyone as they make their choices. He believes that God has self-imposed limitation
- protects free will as God is along side us
For
- if God interacts with individuals, the view that God is timeless makes sense as God cannot intervene with the world
- Emphasises the inaccessibility of human perceptions if the divine nature of God himself
Against:
- Contradictory to the revealed theology as outside of time
Boethius: God is also not subject to time he is ‘simultaneously present’. His knowledge is providential (how God every sees the world and our free choices). With the issue of free will Boethius says that God is not the cause of the future events. Uses simple and conditional necessity instead.
For:
- free will maintained
-God is more immanent than Boethius’ view
Against:
- if all moments are equally present to God, can God know what day it is today and therefore is there any point in praying
“Can God be omnibenevolent?” Essay
A: Calvin - God demonstrates his justice through his selection of certain people for salvation. Also send down Jesus to allow sinful humans to achieve salvation. He is just as he rewards people in the church with the possibility for salvation (Extra ecclesiam nulla salus). Pope Francis “We are all forgiven, we all have the possibility of receiving his pardon”
CA: Hick - however, is it truly omnibenevolent to send his creation to eternal suffering? Some argue that God must practice goodness to be truly good.
E: Brian Davies - God’s omnibenevolence is different from the humans idea of what good is. God is always consistent with his nature. This is demonstrated in his respect for human freedom.
A: Some may argue that God has foreknowledge, which would mean that he is not a just God. Cannot judge us fairly when sending us to heaven or Hell. However Boethius argues that God sees past, present, future simultaneously (eternal view). Solves his with simple and conditional necessities… Therefore still omnibenevolence
CA: J.L Mackie problem of evil. Inconsistent triad. If God was omnibenevolent why is there suffering
E: Swinburne - goodness is still evident in his creation. There is an abundance of good. Aquinas - God demonstrates distributive justice. Justice is also demonstrated in goodness of creation
Omnibenevolent scholars and arguments
Brain Davies: God’s omnibenevolence is different from the humans idea of what is good. God’s actions are always consistent with his nature. His omnibenevolence is demonstrated in his respect for human freedom
M.B. Wilkinson: good is understood as part of his creative action. God values humans auto only
Aquinas: God demonstrates distributive justice i.e. a ruler gives out to each person the rank they deserve. God is not answerable. Justice is demonstrated in goodness of his creation. Hell is a separation from God not a real place will fire. Not Cummtative
Swinburne: God does not know what our choices will be. We are responsible for our own decisions and are judged based on them. God is just
William Frankena:concept of justice does not mean treating everyone in the same way.
Calvin: God denies the existence of free will as he is the only truly free and supreme being. He demonstrates his omnibenevolence through the election of certain people. Extra ecclesiam nulla salus (HOWEVER is this truly merciful??)
Pope Francis: “We are all forgiven, we all have the possibility of receiving his pardon”
The Euthyphro dilemma (Plato): Socrates asks Euthyphro “Do the God’s love something because it is pious is is something pious because the God’s love it”
- First horn: issues with omnipotence as there must be an external moral standard beyond God’s power
- Second horn: Has God arbitrarily chosen what is good? Could change his mind
- Makes omnibenevolence incoherent with his attributes
- Aquinas argues that God is like two sides of the same coin. Like how H20 and water is the same thing. Since God’s nature is goodness, God an only command out of his nature.
