omnipotence Flashcards
1
Q
main issues
A
- if illogical possibilities are possible for God, makes our world meaningless
- not all powerful = Biblical accounts impossible
- application of God’s omnipotence has to be defined
2
Q
scholars
A
- Descartes
- Aquinas
- Vardy
- Hartshorne
3
Q
what separates the scholars understanding of omnipotence?
A
- the varying definitions of omnipotence
4
Q
Descartes
A
5
Q
Descartes definition of omnipotence
A
- total omnipotence means God can do absolutely anything even things which seem logically impossible or self-contradictory to us
- we must accept that God defines all human understating
- ‘god must be that than which nothing greater could be conceived’
6
Q
support for totally omnipotence understanding
A
- term God means - possess all perfections to their absolute maximum
- supported by scripture: miracles and Jesus incarnation
- if God is limited, he is not God: ‘God is totally omnipotent’ is an a-priori statement its true because it has to be
- total omnipotence is necessary for human salvation: Jesus’ resurrection logically impossible and essential for salvation
- logical contradictions: due to humans lack of understanding not Gods lack of ability
7
Q
why is total omnipotence so important
A
- denying God has total power, same as denying the very nature of what God is
- rules of mathematics, laws of nature etc are laws that exist in our world and don’t apply to God = God can do the logically impossible
8
Q
examples of logically impossible things
A
- circle square
- 2 + 2 = 7
- Virgin Mother
- miracles
9
Q
why God’s ability to have total omnipotence coherent
A
- God is transcendent, supreme perfection = no limitations
- God is source of logic therefore can suspend or alter logic
10
Q
criticisms of total omnipotence
A
- logical contradictions are not ‘things’
- humans would be unable to have a relationship with a totally omnipotent God
- undermines Christian theodicies and reenforces the problem of evil
- not supported by the Bible
11
Q
logical contradiction are not ‘things’ - Descartes
A
- not about logical inconsistencies or God’s lack of power
- logical contradictions simply are not ‘things’
ex - more than 100% or square circle
12
Q
why would humans not be able to have a relationship with a totally omnipotent God?
A
- by God’s ability to do logically impossible things changes the attributes of God, makes him unpredictable, arbitrary and tyrannical
- with total omnipotence God is comparable to doing evil and be unforgiving
- total omnipotence makes it difficult for humans to related to/ form a relationship
13
Q
how does total omnipotence undermine Christian theodicies and reinforces the problem of evil?
A
- undermines Irenaean: why did God create a world where suffering wasn’t necessary for human development
- undermines Augustine: God allows free will which results in evil - why didn’t he create humans who were free but more able to resist temptation
14
Q
which pieces of scripture don’t support total omnipotence
A
Numbers 23:19 and Hebrews 6:18 show what God is incapable of doing - cannot lie
15
Q
Thomas Aquinas’ definition of omnipotence
A
- omnipotence means that God can do anything that is within his own nature and anything that is logically possible
16
Q
aquinas’ ideas on omnipotence
A
- he can do all that doesn’t provide contradiction
- logical inconsistencies are just that
- God cannot do what’s inconsistent with his nature: God is incorporeal therefore has no human capabilities. Ex - swim, breathe
- God is perfectly good therefore cannot deceive or do evil
17
Q
support for aquinas
A
Swinburne:
- means God can do everything but everything has to be understood
- God can do and create all ‘things’ but nit self contradictory things as they don’t exist
- not a challenge to God’s omnipotence and overcomes the omnipotence paradox
18
Q
challenges to aquinas’ and Swinburne’s idea of omnipotence
A
- diminishes God’s power
- religion is based on illogical inconsistencies: miracles, Jesus
- no physical presence = unable to affect the physical world - their ideas reilies upon fitting God into our laws = constrained by our logic
- makes Christian definition of omnipotence meaningless - if being able to do all that’s within your nature makes all people can be omnipotent
- all within nature should mean no evil - God creates or allows evil
- incoherent with scripture that states: ‘is there nothing the lord cannot do?’
19
Q
Peter Vardy’s definition of omnipotence
A
- omnipotence means that God’s limitations are self-imposed and God limits his own power in order to allow us a rational universe
20
Q
Vardy’s ideas on omnipotence
A
- radically reconsider what we mean God is omnipotent
- it is wrong to suggest that everything happened due to Gods will
- God created the universe and purposely limits his ability/ power
- if God altered logic then things wouldn’t be able to exist in the way they do
- self-imposed limitation = still omnipotence as nothing limits his power except himself
21
Q
support for Vardy
A
John Macquarrie:
- choses to limit his own power out of love for us
- self-emptying - removing all divine attributes to incarnate as Jesus to make encounter with humanity possible
22
Q
challenges to Vardy’s ideas
A
- limited view of God power, limited God isn’t Christian God
- why would God create a world and the laws to ensure function that means he has to limit himself
- Anthony Flew - God had ‘died a death of a thousand qualifications’ meaning that Christians modify their view of God continually every time they’re faced with a problem
23
Q
Charles Hartshores definition of omnipotence
A
- omnipotence means that God is surpassingly great rather than powerful
24
Q
Hartshore’s view on omnipotence
A
- can do things to the greatest possibility
- God’s power cannot be surpassed by any other being
- God has total power
