The Nature Of God

Question 1

What is omnipotence?

Answer 1

Omnipotence is the idea that God can do anything.

Question 2

What is the argument that God can do anything, including the impossible?

Answer 2

-The idea that God can do the logically impossible means that God can make a square circle or make 2+2=5. As all logic comes from God, God can change logic or suspend it for a time.
-Scholars such as Descartes take this approach: if omnipotence does not mean that God can do absolutely anything, how could he perform miracles or save the world through Jesus?
-We may not understand how God could be like this, but we have limited reason.
-Anselm’s view was that omnipotence means that God has unlimited power and so God could even have the power to lie- but he won’t because of his benevolence; having this power is not easy for God

Question 3

What is the conclusion of the view that God can do anything, including the impossible?

Answer 3

-This view might make God into an an arbitrary figure who becomes unpredictable
-This might make someone question why God does not change the laws so that we do not do evil
-The Bible says that God cannot lie

Question 4

What is the argument that God can only do the logically possible?

Answer 4

-Aquinas argued that God can only do what is possible and which does not lead to a contradiction and thus cannot create a square circle because a square circle cannot exist
-His view was that logical possibility means that God can only what a perfect God can do- that is, he cannot sin
-It cannot be right to say God could sin because that is not a part of his logical nature. Aquinas also argues that God cannot change the past
-Swinburne agree and argues that God being able to do everything has to be understood in context. A square circle is not ‘a thing’ and so God cannot create one; so, to say God. An so every ‘thing’ does not limit him because it only refers to logically possible powers

Question 5

What is the argument of self imposed limitation?

Answer 5

-It has been suggested that perhaps, in creating a limited universe, God decided that he would only operate within the natural laws he created, thus self imposing a limitation on his power
-If the universe is carefully fine tuned then any undue interference from God would upset the balance of the universe.
-For Christian’s, this would make sense of God limiting himself by becoming a human in Jesus Christ. It would also tie in with the Biblical presentation of God’s power as far as surpassing human understanding without being unlimited: the emphasis is more on God’s power over the universe rather than the power to do anything
-Some thinkers use the word ‘almighty’ instead of all powerful to describe God in this context
-In this approach, is God still worthy of worship if he has specifically chosen to allow the extent of suffering that there is in the world, or if he has chosen to allow some but not all potential miracles

Question 6

What does eternal mean?

Answer 6

Separate to time; timeless

Question 7

What does everlasting mean?

Answer 7

Within the timeline; from beginning to end

Question 8

Who are the 2 scholars who argue God is eternal?

Answer 8

Boethius and Anselm

Question 9

What is Boethius’ argument for God’s eternity?

Answer 9

-To understand knowledge, Boethius says that we have to understand the nature of the knower
-What does it mean, therefore, to consider God as eternal? This will help us to understand his nature
-Eternity is the ‘simultaneous possession of boundless life’- God possesses all at the same time all of existence
-This is ‘made clearer by comparison with temporal things’- it is better understood when we compare Gods nature with our natures
-We do not have boundless life and so we live from moment to moment- from past to present to future. We do not ‘embrace the infinity of life all at once’
-However, God does and so God cannot have lost the past and doesn’t have the future to look forward to. God is always infinitely present to himself
-Eternity, for Boethius, is something that God holds all in one go. Time has no meaning for God- everything is the present for God. This means that for God, ‘now’ is the creation of the world, the coming of Jesus, the Battle of Hastings, and your great grandchildren being born; all of this is the present, at the same time

Question 10

What was Anselm’s argument for God’s eternity?

Answer 10

-He had a four dimensionalist approach
-From God’s perspective, he rejects the idea that the only aspect of time that exists is the present (the past has gone; the future has not yet happened): this is how humans live. We are within space and within time.
-God, however, is separate to time in the same way that he is separate to space
-The past, present and future all exist as terms that are relative to each other, just like we relate to each other in terms of space (using phrases such as ‘in front of me’)
-Time is a dimension, just like length, breadth and height are the three dimensions of space
-We might be limited by both space and time, but God is not limited by either
-In the same as that God is present everywhere. God is present every when.
-Anselm develops Boethius’ idea of the simultaneous present by stating that the ‘eternal present’ is different to our idea of the present and eternity becomes a non temporal word- it becomes a word to do with the fourth dimension, alongside the dimensions of space

Question 11

What is the argument of God as everlasting?

Answer 11

-Swinburne’s starting point is that the God of the Bible seems to be within time: God takes part on the battlefields with the Israelites, he changes his mind and he is constantly interacting with people through the New Testament
-He rejects the idea of the ‘simultaneous present’ because he does not think it is coherent for God to view two events at different times at one timeless moment and he argues that it is difficult for a timeless God to be said to be doing a miracle at a specific time or to say that God became a human at a particular point in history
-A common example is that of Hezekiah in the Old Testament. Hezekiah is told that God intends for him to die but he prays to God and God hears his prayer and sees that he is upset to die and God decides that he will extend Hezekiah’s life
-For Swinburne, the eternal, unchanging God needs to be rejected because this is not a God that can have relationships with humans and relationships are at the centre of human existence and the way the world has been ordered
-A God who is eternal cannot love his creation in the way that a God who is everlasting can

Question 12

How would you analyse the idea that God is eternal?

Answer 12

It creates questions for the religious believer such as:
-How can a God who is so separate to the world have a relationship with those in it- or indeed intervene in it? Is there any point in praying for things?
-If God is eternal and knows the future, are we free to choose what our futures will look like?
-If God knows the future, surely he is responsible for the problem of evil?
-If God is both eternal and knows the future can we be held morally responsible for our actions? Are we truly free?
-Is it a play on words to say that things work differently for God?
-If God is eternal, can God choose between one course of action and another? Does God need to?

Question 13

What are the questions that arise from the idea of God being everlasting?

Answer 13

-Has God been limited too much? Can God be omniscient od omnipotent if he is within time?
-If God does not know what choices we will make, is he still worthy of our worship?
-Should we trust the Bible’s account of God when the Bible might simply be a human text?
-Did God exist before time? If not, has time always existed and is it logical that time existed before the universe?
-If God is everlasting, God changes with time. Can a perfect God change?

Question 14

What is divine knowledge and it’s interaction with the temporal existence?

Answer 14

-A key question is whether God can know the future, because if God does know the future, why does he not prevent future bad things from happening?
-Equally, if God chooses not to prevent these things from happening, are we really responsible morally for our wrong actions
-In many ways, omniscience can fall into similar categories to omnipotence. If God can know absolutely everything then the idea of middle knowledge might be explored. This is the view that God knows not only everything that happens in the past, present or future, but God also knows everything that might have happened if other choices had been made
-This seems vast, but it is only as vast as anything to do with the infinity of God
-Many have questioned whether it is necessary even to discuss the issue, but others suggest that in order for God to know the future, he must know the process of thoughts and decisions that lead to it

Question 15

What is a timeless God portrayed as?

Answer 15

-Timeless God is often portrayed as being like a man standing on a mountain, looking at a road and seeing all the points on that road at once
-This illustrates how God can know the past, present and future, but also raises the question of how God can intervene in time

Question 16

With God’s omniscience in what other ways can he be seen?

Answer 16

-God could be seen as being like a chess grand master playing against a novice (as suggested by Peter Geach). The novice is free to make moves according to his or her own skill level, but ultimately the grand master is in control
-In the same way, God could ne seem to be in control and, whatever choices we make according to our own natures (skill level), God’s plan can still win through
-The idea of God having a plan and guiding people along it is, of course, very much in line with the Biblical view of God

Question 17

What did Schleiermacher say about God’s omniscience?

Answer 17

-Scheliermacher said that God’s knowledge of us is like the knowledge of a very close friend. As God knows us incredibly well, he can accurately predict what we will do, although we still remain free to choose to do otherwise
-This brings us back to the central issue in this topic about free will. Can we say that we are free if God knows the future?

Question 18

How did Boethius continue his argument to explore fully the natur of God’s knowledge and how it relates to our knowledge amd how we can still claim to be free beings?

Answer 18

-As God exists with time as a simultaneous present, God’s knowledge of what we call the past, present and future is seen in one single vision- as if things were occurring in a single instant
-Therefore, God does not know the future, but knows the simultaneous, unchanging present
-The fact that God knows something in advance does not mean that God changes the nature of this thing: God simply sees things that are future for us as present for him
-Boethius distinguishes between ‘simple’ and ‘conditional’ necessity:
-Something is classed as ‘simple necessity’ if it is ‘just is’- ‘humans are necessarily mortal’
-Something has ‘conditional necessity’ if it has a condition added to it- ‘as long as someone is walking then his feet are moving him forward’
-Therfore, when God sees something in our future, he is seeing it as necessary, but ‘conditionally necessary’ because God sees it under the condition that it has been freely chosen by a human
-Boethius concludes that we remain entirely free because we are completely separate from God’s foreknowledge

Question 19

How does Anselm’s four dimensionalist approach expand on Boethius’s approach and what does it conclude about free will?

Answer 19

-As God is separate from time and space and as God experiences eternity as a dimension, rather than in terms of time, our free will is preserved
-God can see us in our past, present and future and he can see us making free decisions
-As the future for God is not a matter of time, but it is a matter of time for us, the future is unchanging for God, but changing for us

Question 20

How would we analyse Boethius and Anselm’s approaches?

Answer 20

-It is difficult to understand how God can act within this understanding of time and knowledge- and if God cannot intervene in the world, miracles are rejected, as is the divine nature of Jesus Christ. Anselm’s approach perhaps improves this problem as it changes the understanding of eternity, but still leaves God very separate from the world. It is possible to argue that God, being unique should not be considered in human terms
-A number of scholars reject as incoherent Boethius’ idea of God being simultaneously present because it makes no sense to talk of the past, present and future all being in the present; again, Anselm’s approach might begin to overcome this. However, it also helps to consider the fact that if God is timeless, he must be separate to his creation

Question 21

What does benevolent mean?

Answer 21

Disposed towards kindliness; of God, used of love and compassion

Question 22

What is a covenant?

Answer 22

A legal type agreement with consequences for being obeyed or disobeyed; in the Bible, the general idea that God will look after his people if they will follow him appropriately

Question 23

What is a key quote about God’s (omni)benevolence?

Answer 23

“It is impossible for God to will anything but what (that which) his own wisdom understands as good”- Aquinas, Summa theologica

Question 24

What is meant by God’s (omni)benevolence?

Answer 24

-God’s benevolence suggests that God’s entire attitude is one of compassion, love, and fairness- like a constant and active force. It is not just about the human word ‘love’. God’s Omnibenevolence is relational, total, linked to justice and judgement- it is fair, holy, and expected to be found in his followers
-In the Bible, the words used are the Hebrew word hesed (Old Testament) and the Greek word agape (NT) and both words are about a total disposition in a person towards kindness, compassion and fairness to others, reflected in how God ‘feels’ about the world
-Jesus’ focus on agape leads Christian’s to understand it in the context of loving even enemies, as well as the central idea of forgiveness
-Christian’s believe Gods benevolence has been showed to the world through: creation; interventions: miracles and especially the incarnation of Jesus; answered prayers; and the guidance given to the world, especially the commandments and the covenant
-Aquinas argued that justice is about God doing the right thing, even if punishment is involved.
-Certainly many, Christian’s have had no issue in arguing that God condemns some to hell and even predestines some to hell before they are born

Question 25

What are the issues arising with God’s (omni)benevolence?

Answer 25

-Linking benevolence with the other attributes led Boethius and Anselm to conclude that God’s foreknowledge is separate to human freedom and regards punishments are therefore just and fair
-Boethius concludes his argument about foreknowledge in the consolation of philosophy with ‘God sees us from above and knows all things in his eternal present and judges our future, free actions, justly distributing rewards and punishments’

Question 26

What other core issues does omnibenevolence raise?

Answer 26

-Do evil and suffering contradict a benevolent God? Some would argue that it does because God wojld not allow his people to suffer. Others would argue that justice, fairness and free will mean that God might have to allo suffering
-Can our language explain fully God’s benevolence? Is it presumptuous to claim that we can understand God’s nature?
-Is hell the ultimate sign that God does give up on some people or is hell a place, as the Roman Catholic Church argues, that people send themselves to?
-What does it mean to call God ‘good’? The euthyphro dilemma is an ancient philosophical conundrum that suggests that either God defines goodness (and so it becomes arbitrary) or God is subject to an independent standard of goodness (and so isn’t the highest being)- either way Vid is not worthy of worship. The dilemma is often felt to be solved by Aquinas’ approach that God can only command out of his goodness, so, by definition, no commands could be arbitrary
-For Christian’s, Faith has the final word. God journeys alongside his people and even if we do not fully understand how the world works, God’s revelation assures Christian’s that somehow God’s attributes do work together

Question 27

What are the conflicts between divine attributes? (Omnipotence)

Answer 27

-Omnipotence could be argued to conflict with benevolence because of the problem of evil. If God is eternal then why does an omnipotent God not stop bad things happening, or why does the God of the Bible seem surprised by events? If God is everlasting, can God still be seen to be omnipotent, or does the understanding of omnipotence need to change?

Question 28

What are the conflicts between divine attributes? (Omniscience)

Answer 28

If God cannot know the future, what does that suggest about God’s omnipotence? The biggest conflict is between omniscience and omnibenevolence because it questions what God chooses to do with the knowledge he has

Question 29

What are the conflicts between divine attributes? (Omni benevolence)

Answer 29

Omnibenevolence is perhaps the fundamental description of God. Understanding this attribute may lead someone to be able to understand the other core attributes of God and thus resolve any perceived conflicts

Question 30

What is a popular analogy for conflicts between divine attributes?

Answer 30

-A popular analogy is that God is like a diamond- just like a diamond has many faces, each of which gives a different understanding, so too God can be examined from different directions
-Islam lists 99 names of Allah, each of which gives a different perspective on God
-However, modern atheist thinkers would reject belief in God in its entirety, challenging the approach of theists:
-As wishful thinking
-As projecting a fear of death or of loneliness
-As being examples of lazy thinking, being prepared to believe in something for which there is insufficient evidence

Question 31

What are the limits to the attributes?

Answer 31

Whereas Descartes’ approach was to say that God can do anything including the impossible, and therefore not remain consistent, many philosophers place limits on God
-Logical possibility. Aquinas argued that God cannot do the illogical or impossible. Does it matter that God cannot do the impossible or not to change his mind and change a law of nature? Many believers would say not
-Self limitation. Has God in some way limited his power, either by deciding to conform to the laws of nature and logic when he created the universe, or by creating an epistemic distance. Many religious believers suggest that this distance needs to be overcome if we are to have a full relationship with God and that the quest for a human is to be be able to do this; others question why God would make humans just for this purpose. Perhaps God is eternal, but in creating space and time he has placed himself on the timeline until the universe ends.
-Some wojld accuse the idea of self limitation as being a play on words and ideas to try to make an idea that doesn’t work (ie the attributes) fit together

Question 32

What are the key areas to consider when comparing Boethius and Anselm?

Answer 32

-Anselm develops Boethius’s views and tries to overcome the possibility that Boethius does not seem to have space for a God who intervenes. He does this by focusing on the idea of time for God being different to time for ourselves; eternity is not a time word, but a dimension. However, Anselm is still left with God sitting very separately to the universe and this raises questions about how God can interact with it

Question 33

What are some key areas to consider when bringing Swinburne’s view and comparing it to Boethius and Anselm?

Answer 33

-Swinburne takes a different approach and argues that his view of God and time is more in line with the Biblical view. However, this assumes the accuracy of the Biblical view. If the Bible is simply a human account of God’s relationship with the world, then it is a human perspective on God, which js already limiting God because human understanding is limited. This might explain why Swinburne seems to limit God to being everlasting rather than eternal
-Swinburne’s approach does not seem to help with issues such as prayer. If it is logical to say that an eternal God is separate to the world, does God know what the date today is? It might not matter, but it does matter to me if I have an operation on a particular date and I want God to be with me. However, it could be argues that God might not know what the date is to him but he does know what the date is to me, just like I understand that it is 11am to me now, but 12 noon to someone in Paris now

Question 34

How else would we compare Boethius, Anselm and Swinburne?

Answer 34

-Equally, however, God might not be able to act if he is eternal because doing a miracle for me now will change the past for someone in the year 2500, which, as science fiction shows us so clearly, would create real issues in logic
-Boethius’s starting point is important: we need to understand that God sees things differently to us
-This can even help with understanding how Swinburne would approach the issue of free will and omniscience. Although for Swinburne, God is everlasting, he is able to know all that it is logically possible for God to know. God might know everything about us as individuals and because God cannot be wrong, God will successfully predict how we will respond in any situation. It could be argues that saying God is everlasting does not necessarily limit him that much
-Our free will might also be affected by genes, upbringing, psychological factors, our conditioning and so on; we may not even be free ourselves