The Nature of God (Phil) Flashcards
What does it mean for God to be omnipotent?
God is all-powerful.
What does it mean for God to be omniscient?
God is all-knowing, wise, and sees everything.
What does omni-benevolent mean?
God is all-good and all-loving.
What does it mean for God to be eternal?
God exists forever without end.
What is free will?
The ability to act at one’s own discretion and make choices using reason.
What is divine foreknowledge?
A technical term for omniscience, meaning God has knowledge of everything.
What is the Four-Dimensionalist Approach?
Anselm’s view that time is all equally present to God.
What does it mean for God to be ‘eternally timeless’?
God exists outside of time.
What does it mean for God to be ‘eternally everlasting’?
God has no beginning or end, but time passes for God.
What does it mean for God to be transcendent?
God exists above and beyond the universe.
What does it mean for God to be immanent?
God exists within the universe.
What is divine action?
The belief that God directly intervenes in the world.
What is the difference between a philosopher’s and a religious believer’s approach to God?
Religious believers use language to express their experience of God, while philosophers aim to logically analyze what is meant by “God.”
What do the earliest Christian creeds say about God’s power?
The Apostles’ Creed and Nicene Creed affirm that God is almighty, the creator of all things, and the source of all power.
What is the key debate about omnipotence?
Does omnipotence mean the power to do literally anything, including the logically impossible?
What is René Descartes’ view on omnipotence?
Descartes believes God can do literally anything, even what is logically impossible (e.g., making 1+1=5 or creating a round square).
What analogy explains Descartes’ view on omnipotence?
God is like a video game designer who can change the rules of reality at will.
What is Richard Swinburne’s view on omnipotence?
Swinburne argues that God is limited to the logically possible, meaning God cannot do things like making a round square.
How does Aquinas explain Swinburne’s view on omnipotence?
Instead of saying “God cannot do something,” Aquinas says, “Some things cannot be done” because they are meaningless.
What issue arises when discussing God’s ability to sin?
If God can sin, then God would not be supremely good—which contradicts another divine attribute.
How do some theists resolve the problem of God and sin?
Some argue that God could sin but chooses not to because of His supreme goodness.
According to Descartes, how does God have the ability to change the fundamental laws of nature?
Descartes believes God is truly omnipotent, meaning He can even alter logic and mathematical truths—God could make 1+1=5 if He wished.
What problems arise if we accept that God can do anything, including the logically impossible?
It leads to contradictions, such as God making a round square or both existing and not existing simultaneously, making the concept of God incoherent.
Why do Swinburne and other theists insist on ‘limiting’ God’s power?
They argue that God can do anything logically possible—not meaningless contradictions.
What does Aquinas mean by ‘It is better to say that some things cannot be done, rather than God cannot do them’?
Some tasks (e.g., making a square circle) are nonsensical rather than actual limits on God’s power.
What are the two theological answers to whether God can perform evil actions?
- Yes, but He never will, as He is morally perfect. 2. No, because sin is an error, and a perfect being cannot err (Aquinas’ view).
What is Divine Self-Limitation?
The idea that God chooses to limit His power, especially in creation and by becoming Jesus (kenosis).
How does Charles Hartshorne explain God’s self-limitation?
After creation, other beings have their own power, so God shares power rather than holding it all.
Why would Aquinas disagree with Hartshorne’s belief on God’s self-limitation?
Aquinas argues that God’s power remains unchanged—He gives creation its own secondary causes but still remains the primary cause of everything.
What is the difference between primary and secondary causation? (Divine Self-Limitation)
- Primary cause (God): The ultimate source of all power and existence. - Secondary cause (Creation): Things have their own powers, but only because God sustains them.
What analogy does Aquinas use for primary and secondary causes? (Divine Self-Limitation)
A person sawing wood: The person (primary cause) cuts the wood, but the saw (secondary cause) also plays a role.
How does Aquinas’ causation theory challenge the idea of Divine Self-Limitation?
If God is always the primary cause, then He does not give up power when He creates—He simply allows things to act through secondary causes.
What does omniscience mean in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam?
It means that God is all-knowing, aware of everything that happens in the universe, past, present, and future.
What are the two types of omniscience discussed?
- Unlimited omniscience: God knows all, past, present, and future. God exists outside time and space. 2. Limited omniscience: God limits His knowledge to what is logically possible or allows human free will.
How does Psalm 139 describe God’s knowledge of individuals? (Omniscience)
God knows every detail about people, even before they are born, understanding their thoughts and actions completely. (Psalm 139:1-4)
What does the verse from Jeremiah 1:5 highlight about God’s omniscience?
God knows individuals before they are born, indicating His eternal knowledge of people and events.
What is the philosophical concept behind Boethius’ view on God’s omniscience and free will?
Boethius argues that God’s knowledge of the future does not fix the future. God’s knowledge is timeless and simultaneous, seeing all time at once without limiting human freedom.
What problem does Boethius address regarding divine foreknowledge? (Omniscience)
The problem is that if God knows what will happen, the future seems fixed, eliminating free will.
How does Boethius solve the problem of divine foreknowledge? (Omniscience)
Boethius explains that God’s knowledge is not like ours—He sees all time simultaneously. God knows what will happen without making it inevitable.
What is the analogy Boethius uses to explain the nature of God’s knowledge? (Omniscience)
Just as witnessing an action (e.g., someone lying) does not make it inevitable, God’s timeless knowledge does not make the future fixed.
What is the difference between unlimited and limited omniscience?
- Unlimited omniscience: God knows everything outside time. - Limited omniscience: God may limit His knowledge or let human free will determine events, meaning knowledge changes over time.
What is the view on divine foreknowledge and free will? (Omniscience)
Boethius argues that divine foreknowledge does not eliminate free will since God sees all actions simultaneously and infallibly without fixing them.
What issue arises with the concept of limited omniscience?
Limited omniscience suggests that God’s knowledge evolves, but it could conflict with the idea of God as eternally perfect and unchanging.
What is Richard Swinburne’s view on God’s omniscience?
Swinburne supports the idea that God is everlasting, not timeless. He argues that God’s knowledge develops over time as events occur, meaning God’s omniscience is limited to what is logically possible to know.
How does Swinburne reject Boethius’ view of God’s timelessness?
Swinburne argues that the idea of God knowing all events simultaneously doesn’t make sense. He believes God must exist within time and react to events as they unfold.
Why does Swinburne prefer the idea of God being everlasting? (Omniscience)
Swinburne believes that for God to know events like those of 1995, He must have existed in 1995 and experienced those events as they happened, rather than knowing them in an abstract, timeless way.
How does Swinburne’s view align with the Bible? (Omniscience)
Swinburne argues that the Bible suggests God acts in time and reacts to human actions, implying that God is not timeless but exists and interacts within time.
What does Swinburne say about God’s knowledge of the future? (Omniscience)
Swinburne believes God cannot know future events until they happen. This is essential for human free will—if God knew future events, humans wouldn’t have the ability to make real choices.
Why does Swinburne argue that knowledge of the future would damage free will? (Omniscience)
Swinburne compares it to an over-protective parent who doesn’t let their child make real choices. If God knew the future, humans would not be truly free to choose and grow.
What is Nicholas Wolterstorff’s view of God’s omniscience?
Like Swinburne, Wolterstorff believes God exists in time and interacts with events as they unfold. He emphasizes that God’s actions in the Bible show free will in humans.
What is the core idea of limited omniscience according to Swinburne and Wolterstorff?
Limited omniscience means God knows everything that is logically possible to know, but does not know future events until they occur, thus preserving human free will.
How does limited omniscience preserve human freedom?
By not knowing future events, God allows humans to make real choices and be responsible for their actions, thus maintaining human freedom and moral development.
What does the classical view of theism say about God’s nature? (Benevolence)
The classical theistic view, starting with Plato, holds that God is purely good and cannot do evil, meaning God is perfectly good in all ways, at all times, and towards all beings.
What question arises from the idea of God being all-loving and just? (Benevolence)
The question is whether an all-loving God can also be just in judging and punishing human beings. Is judgment and punishment consistent with God’s loving nature?
How does Richard Swinburne reconcile God’s love with judgment? (Benevolence)
Swinburne argues that God’s judgment is just because He gives humans clear guidance, free will, and the ability to choose good or bad actions. If humans misuse free will, God’s judgment and punishment are fair and loving.
Why does Swinburne compare God’s judgment to a parent’s?(Benevolence)
Swinburne compares God to a good parent who punishes their child to help them learn from mistakes. If a parent ignored a child’s bad actions in the name of love, their love would be questioned, just as we might question God’s actions if He did not judge or punish.
How does Boethius explain God’s benevolence and justice?(Benevolence)
Boethius argues that just because God knows what choices humans will make, it doesn’t mean God directs those choices. God is outside of time and knows all things in a single act without influencing human free will. Therefore, God’s judgment is just.
What does Boethius mean by God knowing all things in a “single act”?(Benevolence)
Boethius claims that God knows everything—the choices of all humans—from the beginning to the end of time, but He knows them as a whole, not in a temporal sequence. This means God doesn’t interfere with human choices, ensuring divine justice.
What does Boethius’ view imply about free will?(Benevolence)
Boethius believes that God’s foreknowledge doesn’t negate human free will. Even though God knows all actions, humans still have the freedom to choose their paths. Therefore, God’s judgment is fair since He doesn’t control human choices.
How does Boethius differentiate God’s knowledge from human knowledge?(Benevolence)
Boethius argues that God’s knowledge is not progressive like humans’—God knows everything simultaneously, whereas humans experience events one after another. This difference allows for human free will while maintaining divine justice.
What are the two senses of God’s eternity in Judaeo-Christian philosophy?
The two senses of God’s eternity are:
- Divine Eternity (timelessness) – God exists outside time and space, as a transcendent being.
- Divine Action in Time (everlasting) – God has no beginning or end, but time passes for God, as an immanent being.
What does it mean for God to be a transcendent being?
A transcendent being means God exists above and beyond the physical world, outside of time and space.
What does it mean for God to be an immanent being?
An immanent being means that God exists within the universe and is a part of time, with no beginning or end.
What is the concept of “God as Simple”?
God as Simple means that God is unchangeable and does not have parts or characteristics. God’s nature and existence are inseparable, making God a perfect being.
What does St. Augustine say about God’s simplicity?
St. Augustine argued that God is unchangeable, meaning God cannot lose or gain characteristics, and remains perfect.
How does St. Thomas Aquinas describe God as simple?
Aquinas argues that God’s nature (what God is) and existence (that God exists) are the same. He also claims that being/existence signifies God, meaning God just is.
What is the Ontological argument, and how does it relate to God’s simplicity?
The Ontological argument, proposed by Anselm, argues that existence is a predicate of God, meaning existence is a part of God’s nature. Anselm claims God must exist, as the greatest conceivable being would not be the greatest if it did not exist.
Why is God considered immutable (unchanging)?
God is immutable because change would imply a movement from one state to another, and since God is perfect, God lacks nothing and cannot change. Change would reduce God’s perfection.
Why do Christian philosophers argue that only an unchanging being can create the world?
Philosophers like Brian Davies argue that changeable beings could not have created a world where change exists, as anything that changes would be part of the world and unable to explain it. God, being unchanging, is distinct from the world and the cause of its existence.
What does it mean for God to be immaterial?
To be immaterial means that God does not have a body or physical characteristics. God just is, existing without parts or physical form.
How does Aquinas link immateriality to God’s necessary existence?
Aquinas argues that God is a necessary being—a being that exists independently and does not rely on anything else for existence. As an immaterial being, God is separate from the physical world.
How does Anselm’s view of Divine Eternity compare to Boethius’?
Anselm’s view is similar to Boethius’ in that both argue that God sees all events in time, but Anselm emphasizes a four-dimensional perspective. Anselm’s understanding integrates the idea that time is a block, where all moments (past, present, future) are equally real and simultaneously present to God.
What is the concept of four-dimensionalism?
Four-dimensionalism is the idea that time and space are combined into space-time, and that all of time (past, present, and future) exists equally, like a block universe. In this model, time is a dimension just like length, breadth, and height.
What does Anselm mean when he says God is “in all of place and time” but not confined to it? (4D)
Anselm means that God is present in every time and place but also transcends them. God is not limited by space and time, as He exists outside them, yet He is still intimately connected with them.
How does Anselm describe God’s eternal perspective on time?
Anselm argues that God’s eternity gives Him a unique simultaneity, in which He sees all events (past, present, and future) at once, from His timeless viewpoint. God sees the entire block of time as a whole, unlike human perception of events unfolding in sequence.
How does Anselm address the problem of human freedom in relation to God’s knowledge of the future?
Anselm agrees with Boethius that God’s knowledge of the future doesn’t threaten human freedom. Anselm suggests that God’s knowledge of future events is not causal—God sees what happens from His eternal, timeless perspective, which doesn’t interfere with our free will.
What is the solution Anselm proposes to the problem of freedom and divine foreknowledge?
Anselm argues that God’s foreknowledge of our free actions is not a threat to freedom because God sees what we will choose, but He sees it as part of the four-dimensional block. Our free actions determine what God knows, not the other way around. God sees what we freely decide to do.
Why does Anselm argue that God’s knowledge of our choices doesn’t undermine freedom?
Anselm believes that God’s timeless knowledge of our choices doesn’t cause or dictate those choices. Our free will allows us to choose, and God sees the consequences of our actions within the four-dimensional block, where all times are equally present.
What is meant by the “block universe” understanding of time?
The block universe concept is the idea that all of time (past, present, and future) exists equally and simultaneously as a block. This view sees time as a dimension, where all events exist together in one unified reality.
How does Anselm’s view differ from a traditional linear view of time?
Anselm’s view is non-linear, unlike traditional views where time is seen as a progression from past to present to future. In Anselm’s view, all moments of time exist simultaneously within the four-dimensional block.
How does Anselm’s view of time help resolve the tension between divine foreknowledge and human free will?
Anselm resolves the tension by proposing that God’s knowledge of future events is not causal. Our free choices cause God to know what will happen, not the other way around. God’s timeless perspective doesn’t interfere with our ability to choose freely.
How does Boethius define eternity?
Boethius defines eternity as “the whole, simultaneous and perfect possession of unending life,” meaning that God’s existence is limitless, changeless, and not experienced as a series of events.
What does Boethius mean when he says God possesses the whole of His life eternally?
Boethius argues that God’s life is not subject to time as humans experience it. There is no past, present, or future for God—all time is present to Him simultaneously.
How does Boethius describe God’s knowledge of time?
Boethius states that God sees all of time simultaneously. Rather than viewing time sequentially, God “sees” all events as if they were enacted in the present. This means God perceives all of time at once, without the progression of events.
What analogy does Boethius use to describe God’s timeless view of time?
Boethius compares God’s knowledge of time to a film that He views all at once. While humans watch the film from start to finish, God takes in the whole film in one glance, seeing the entire narrative from beginning to end simultaneously.
Why does Boethius believe that God is eternal?
Boethius believes God is eternal because He is simple and unchanging. God does not experience time or learn new things—His knowledge of the world is not based on future events but on His timeless, eternal simplicity.
What is Boethius’ solution to the issue of human freedom and divine foreknowledge?
Boethius asserts that even though God knows the future, human freedom is preserved. Free will is essential to rational nature, and our choices remain free, even though God knows them.
How does Boethius explain the relationship between God’s knowledge and human free will?
Boethius argues that God’s knowledge of what will happen in the future does not cause those events. Instead, God knows all choices and actions, but this knowledge is not a limitation on human freedom. Humans freely make decisions, and God knows the outcome.
What is Richard Swinburne’s view on God’s omniscience and human freedom?
Swinburne argues that God limits His omniscience by creating beings with genuine free will. This means God cannot foreknow free actions because free actions are not predictable.
Why does Swinburne believe that free actions cannot be foreknown?
Swinburne argues that genuine free actions cannot be necessary or determined by the laws of physics. If an action is predictable or determined, it would not be truly free—like a reflex action.
What examples does Swinburne use to explain non-free actions?
Swinburne uses examples like nervous ticks, reflex actions, or physically necessary actions (e.g., blinking when dust enters the eye) to show actions that are not free because they are physically determined.
How does Swinburne argue that God’s omniscience is limited by free will?
Swinburne argues that if God creates beings with free will, He intentionally limits His omniscience because these creatures cannot be predicted by the laws of nature. Their free choices are beyond God’s complete foreknowledge.
Why does Swinburne think that free will requires unpredictability?
Swinburne claims that free will requires unpredictability—if an action can be predicted with certainty, then it is not free. For genuine freedom, there must be the possibility of doing otherwise.
What does Swinburne believe about God’s knowledge of future events?
Swinburne believes that God can know events that are determined by the laws of nature, but He cannot know future free actions with certainty because those actions are unpredictable and do not follow physical laws.
Why does Swinburne reject the idea that God is outside of time?
Swinburne rejects the idea that God is outside of time because he believes it does not make sense for God to see all of time simultaneously. He thinks that God is in time like humans, but unlike us, God never began to exist and never will cease to exist.
How does Swinburne define God’s relationship to time?
Swinburne believes that God is everlasting, meaning He exists within time but has no beginning or end. He lasts for all of time without being created or destroyed.
How does Swinburne view God’s knowledge of future events?
Since God is in time, Swinburne believes that the future is not real for God or anyone else until it occurs. God can predict events that follow physical laws, but He cannot know genuinely free actions ahead of time because they do not exist yet.
Why can’t Swinburne say that God knows the future infallibly?
Swinburne argues that genuinely free actions are not necessary and do not exist until they happen. Therefore, God cannot know what free beings will do tomorrow with absolute certainty because their choices have not yet occurred.
What does Swinburne say about God’s omniscience and free will?
Swinburne believes that God has limited omniscience because He has created beings with free will. He respects their freedom and limits His control over future events, only knowing what will happen as it becomes real.
What does Swinburne believe the Bible reveals about God’s relationship to time?
Swinburne believes the Bible reveals a God who is in time, interacting with creation. This supports his view that God is not outside of time, but rather actively engages with the unfolding of events in time.
What is Swinburne’s view of the future and God’s knowledge of it?
Swinburne asserts that the future does not exist yet. God must wait for future events to become real before He knows them, especially when they involve free choices.
How does Swinburne’s view differ from Anselm and Boethius regarding God’s knowledge of time?
Unlike Anselm and Boethius, Swinburne believes God is in time, not outside of it. Therefore, He cannot see all of time at once and must wait for the future to become real before knowing it.
How does Swinburne’s view impact the concept of God’s omniscience?
Swinburne’s belief that God is in time leads him to argue that God has limited omniscience, especially regarding free will. God cannot infallibly know future free actions because they have not yet happened.
What is Swinburne’s stance on the nature of time for God?
Swinburne maintains that God is everlasting, not timelessly eternal. A timelessly eternal God would see all of time at once, which Swinburne believes makes no sense and is incompatible with the idea of God interacting with creation.
Why does Swinburne believe God’s knowledge of the future is limited?
Swinburne believes that God’s knowledge of future free actions is limited because free actions are not necessary and do not exist until they happen. Therefore, God must wait for them to unfold.
What are the two main philosophical views regarding the relationship between God and time?
The two main views are: 1) God is eternal timeless – God exists outside of time and space. 2) God is eternal everlasting – God exists within time, and time passes for Him.
What is the eternal timeless view of God’s relationship to time?
The eternal timeless view suggests that God has always existed and will always exist, but time does not pass for God. God is separate from all time and space.
What is the eternal everlasting view of God’s relationship to time?
The eternal everlasting view suggests that God always exists and will always exist, but time passes for God, meaning He experiences time as we do.
Which philosophers are associated with the eternal timeless view?
The eternal timeless view is associated with philosophers like Anselm, Boethius, and Aquinas.
Which philosophers are associated with the eternal everlasting view?
The eternal everlasting view is associated with philosophers like Richard Swinburne and Nicholas Wolterstorff.
What is the argument for the eternal everlasting view in relation to the Bible?
Swinburne and Wolterstorff argue that the Bible presents God as reactive and responsive, suggesting God is involved in time and responds to human actions.
What does Wolterstorff argue about worship if God is timeless?
Wolterstorff argues that if God were timeless, prayers and worship would be pointless, as God would not interact with us or respond to our needs.
What is Swinburne’s view on the timelessness idea presented by Anselm and Boethius?
Swinburne argues that the idea of God viewing all of time simultaneously is difficult to understand and not how humans experience time. He believes God is in time.
What is Anselm’s view on God’s perfection in relation to time?
Anselm argues that God, being perfect, must exist outside of time and space because perfection involves being immutable and simple.
How do Boethius and Aquinas support the timelessness view?
Boethius and Aquinas support the idea that God is transcendent, existing outside of time. This enables God to view all of time simultaneously or in one glance.
What do Anselm, Boethius, and Aquinas argue about God’s knowledge of time and human freedom?
They argue that God knowing all events (because He exists outside of time) does not impact human freedom or God’s benevolence. God’s knowledge of our actions doesn’t mean He influences them.
What is Swinburne’s argument for why God must be everlasting rather than timeless?
Swinburne believes the timelessness view is difficult to accept, especially the idea that God views all time at once, which does not align with our human experience of time.
What is the argument for why God should be seen as involved in time according to Wolterstorff?
Wolterstorff argues that God’s ability to interact with humans in time (such as through miracles) requires God to be in time, rather than timeless.
What is the opposition’s view on God’s simplicity and timelessness?
Anselm, Boethius, and Aquinas argue that in order for God to be perfect, immutable, and simple, He must exist outside of time.
How do Anselm, Boethius, and Aquinas view God’s knowledge of time?
Anselm, Boethius, and Aquinas argue that God knows all of time because He exists outside of it, and this knowledge does not affect human freedom or God’s benevolence.
What argument do Swinburne and Wolterstorff give about human interaction with God?
Swinburne and Wolterstorff argue that if God were timeless, human prayers and worship would be meaningless because God would not interact with them.
What is the impact of God being eternal and everlasting for Swinburne’s view on God’s omniscience?
For Swinburne, God is everlasting, meaning that He experiences time and does not know future free actions in advance. The future is not real for God until it happens.
What does René Descartes argue about resolving conflicts between divine attributes?
Descartes argues that conflicts between divine attributes can be resolved because God’s power allows Him to do anything, even logically impossible things. God, as the creator of the universe, also creates the laws of logic and mathematics.
How does Descartes’ view of God’s power compare to a game designer?
Descartes compares God’s power to a game designer, who can change the rules of the game because the rules do not apply to him. In the same way, God can alter the laws of logic and nature since He created them.
What view do Boethius and Anselm take on the conflict between omniscience and human freedom?
Boethius and Anselm argue that God’s omniscience does not conflict with human freedom. God is eternal, and His knowledge is not bound by time, meaning He knows all history in a single glance.
What is Boethius’ view of God’s knowledge of time and human freedom?
Boethius believes that God knows everything true, but since God is eternal, He does not experience time sequentially. God’s knowledge is eternal, not bound to a specific moment in time.
How does Augustine support Boethius’ view of divine omniscience?
Augustine agrees with Boethius, stating that God knows our choices (as described in “De Libero Arbitrio”) but does not know them in a particular temporal order. God knows them eternally.
What is the alternative to Boethius’ eternal view of God’s knowledge?
An alternative is the view that God is everlasting rather than timeless. This suggests that time passes for God, and He learns about the future as it unfolds.
What is Richard Swinburne’s view on God’s knowledge of time and human free will?
Swinburne argues that the future is open and not determined. God knows the past, which is fixed, but the future is not yet real, and its events depend on choices made in the present.
How does Luis de Molina’s view of omniscience resolve the conflict with free will?
Luis de Molina suggests that God’s omniscience includes all possibilities for the future, so there is no conflict with human free will since God knows all potential outcomes.
What is Søren Kierkegaard’s position on resolving conflicts between divine attributes?
Kierkegaard believes that paradoxes and conflicts in divine attributes are not only inevitable but evidence for God’s existence, as they reflect the mystery of theism.
What does Kierkegaard’s favorite quote, “Credo quia absurdum” (“I believe because it is absurd”) mean?
Kierkegaard embraces absurdity in faith, suggesting that belief in God inherently involves paradoxes and mysteries that cannot be fully understood.
What is the problem of evil and suffering in relation to God’s attributes?
The problem of evil questions how a God who is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent can allow evil and suffering to exist in the world. It challenges the consistency of these attributes.
What is the logical problem of evil as presented by David Hume?
David Hume argues that if God is omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent, the existence of evil suggests that God is either not all-powerful, not all-knowing, not all-good, or does not exist at all.
What is the conflict between God’s omniscience and human free will?
The conflict is that if God is omniscient, He knows everything, including future decisions. This raises the question of whether we can have genuine freedom if God already knows what we will do.
How does Boethius describe God’s knowledge of time and human freedom?
Boethius argues that God sees all of history in a single glance, which means God knows our decisions before we make them. This raises the question of whether human freedom can exist under such omniscience.
What is the challenge in reconciling omniscience with human free will?
The challenge is that if God already knows every future action, it seems we cannot have genuine freedom since our actions would already be determined by God’s knowledge.
What does Descartes’ view of omnipotence entail?
Descartes defines omnipotence as God being able to do anything, even the logically impossible. This means God creates the world and the laws of logic and mathematics.
What are the advantages of Descartes’ idea of omnipotence?
Descartes’ view makes God more powerful, as He can do anything, even beyond human understanding. God’s will is the basis of everything, and He has the power to control the universe completely.
What are the disadvantages of Descartes’ definition of omnipotence?
The idea of logically impossible tasks (like making a square circle) is meaningless and beyond God’s scope. Descartes’ view makes God incomprehensible, making it hard for humans to understand or relate to God. Most theists reject this view.
What does the definition of omnipotence as “God can sin” imply?
It means that God can sin, but He won’t. This view suggests that God has the potential for sin, but His perfection keeps Him from doing so.
What are the advantages of saying God can sin but won’t?
This view is logically consistent, as it suggests God can do anything that is logically possible. It also portrays God as praiseworthy for consistently choosing not to sin, reinforcing His moral perfection.
What are the disadvantages of saying God can sin but won’t?
The idea that God can sin makes Him appear vulnerable to temptation, which could undermine His omnipotence. Sin is seen as a weakness, so allowing that God could sin challenges His nature as all-powerful.
What does the definition of omnipotence as “God can’t sin” imply?
This view argues that God cannot sin because sin is a form of error or weakness, and God cannot be weak or wrong.
What are the advantages of saying God cannot sin?
This view asserts that God has no weaknesses, making Him completely reliable. It reassures that God is perfect and trustworthy, as He will never fail.
What are the disadvantages of saying God cannot sin?
The problem is that if God cannot sin, it raises the question of why we should praise Him for being good when He has no choice. It makes God’s goodness seem automatic rather than a conscious choice.
Why do some theists reject Descartes’ view of omnipotence?
Many theists reject Descartes’ view because it makes God incomprehensible and beyond rational understanding. It seems that God becomes so abstract that humans cannot relate to or understand Him.
What is the challenge in the debate over whether God can sin or not?
The challenge is whether limiting God’s actions (such as God not being able to sin) limits His omnipotence or whether it enhances His reliability and perfection.
What is Aquinas’ view on whether God limits Himself in creation?
Aquinas argues that God’s omnipotence remains unchanged before and after creation. God is the primary cause of everything, but created beings (like trees) also have real causal powers.
What is the advantage of Aquinas’ view on God’s relationship with creation?
God’s omnipotence remains unchanged and He remains the primary cause of everything, ensuring that creation is dependent on God but also has real causal power.
What is the disadvantage of Aquinas’ view on God’s relationship with creation?
If God is the primary cause of everything, it raises questions about free will: how can humans have free will if God is the ultimate cause? Additionally, if God causes everything, does He also cause evil?
What is Hartshorne’s view on whether God limits Himself in creation?
Hartshorne suggests that God leaves room for creatures to be independent of God, implying that humans can be primary causers of their actions (i.e., have free will).
What is the advantage of Hartshorne’s view on creation and free will?
Hartshorne allows for independence in creatures, preserving human free will as primary causers of their actions. This makes sense of human responsibility and autonomy.
What is the disadvantage of Hartshorne’s view on creation and free will?
If creatures are too independent, God’s sovereignty is diminished, and God might seem less powerful if He limits Himself too much in creation.
What is Boethius’ solution to the problem of foreknowledge, free will, and omniscience?
Boethius suggests that God sees all of history at once, timelessly, and is present to all of time. This allows God to know future actions while respecting free will.
What are the advantages of Boethius’ solution?
God’s omniscience is preserved since He can know future actions by being timelessly present to them. This solution maintains both divine knowledge and human freedom.
What are the disadvantages of Boethius’ solution?
The idea of a timeless God is difficult to comprehend, and it raises questions about how a God outside of time can interact with the world (e.g., as the Bible suggests). Additionally, seeing all of history at once may not make sense conceptually.
What is Anselm’s solution to the problem of foreknowledge, free will, and omniscience?
Anselm proposes a timeless God who sees all of history at once, similar to Boethius’ solution. Anselm’s four-dimensional view of time fits with modern physics, which describes time as a four-dimensional block.
What are the advantages of Anselm’s solution?
Anselm’s view preserves God’s omniscience while also aligning with modern physics. He sees all of history timelessly, ensuring no past moment is lost.
What are the disadvantages of Anselm’s solution?
Like Boethius, Anselm’s idea of a timeless God raises questions about how God can interact with the world in a personal, relational way. The concept of seeing all of history at once is difficult to grasp.
What is Swinburne’s solution to the problem of foreknowledge, free will, and omniscience?
Swinburne believes that God is in time and that His limited omniscience allows for genuine human freedom. God cannot know the future infallibly because He limits His knowledge in respect to free will.
What are the advantages of Swinburne’s solution?
Swinburne’s view makes God seem closer and more relatable because He is in time. It also allows for genuine free will since God does not know our future choices infallibly.
What are the disadvantages of Swinburne’s solution?
If God’s omniscience is limited, it may appear that He is ignorant of future free actions, which seems to compromise His omniscience. Moreover, creation involves uncertainty and risk, which could undermine God’s sovereignty.
Do all Christians agree that people have free will?
Yes, all Christians accept that people have free will, meaning humans can choose actions freely without God controlling every decision.
Could God have created beings with no free will?
Yes, God could have created beings with complete control over their actions, but instead, He chose to create beings with independent free will.
What is the primary and secondary cause distinction in theology?
A primary cause is the ultimate source of an action (e.g., God), while a secondary cause is something that participates in causing an event but depends on the primary cause (e.g., human actions).
Do process theologians agree with the primary and secondary cause distinction?
No, process theologians reject the primary and secondary cause distinction, especially when it comes to human free will. They argue that free will involves independent causality, not secondary causality.
What is the analogy used by process theologians to explain free will?
The analogy of a saw being powered by a woodman is used, where the saw cannot act on its own and must rely on the woodman. However, if the saw had free will, it could not be fully controlled by the woodman (God).
What is the main idea behind process theology’s view of free will?
Process theologians argue that when God gives free will, humans become the primary causes of their actions, making them fully responsible for their choices, independent of God’s influence.
How is the shooting analogy used to explain free will?
In the analogy, John pulls the trigger of the gun, and he is responsible for the killing, not the gun or the bullet. This illustrates the idea that humans are the primary causes of their actions, not secondary causes.
What is the conclusion of process theologians regarding free will and God’s power?
Process theologians conclude that by giving humans free will, God limits Himself because He allows humans to act independently without divine control, even if they go against God’s will.
How does the story of Adam and Eve illustrate God’s self-limitation?
God could have interfered in Adam and Eve’s decision to eat the forbidden fruit, but He chooses not to in order to respect their free will. This shows that God limits Himself by allowing human freedom to operate.
What do process theologians believe about God’s role in human actions?
Process theologians argue that humans are the primary causes of their actions, and God’s role is more about being the primary cause of everything except human free will.
What does free will mean in process theology?
In process theology, free will means the ability to be the first cause of one’s own actions, not secondary to any other cause, including God’s will.
How do process theologians believe God limits Himself in creation?
By giving humans genuine free will, God limits Himself, allowing humans to act independently, even when those actions go against God’s desires or will.
How can the concept of God’s eternity be understood?
The concept of God’s eternity can be understood in two ways: everlasting (God exists through all of time) or timeless (God exists outside of time, unconstrained by cause and effect).
What does it mean for God to be “timeless”?
A timeless God exists outside of time, experiencing all of time simultaneously, without being affected by the passage of time or the sequence of events.
What does Boethius argue about God’s eternity?
Boethius argues that God’s eternity is the simultaneous possession of an unending life, meaning God’s life is not bound by time. God sees all of time as present at once, without a past, present, or future.
How does Boethius describe God’s view of time?
Boethius compares God’s view of time to watching a film all at once—instead of seeing time as a sequence, God sees all moments simultaneously in one eternal glance.
How does Boethius’ view of God’s eternity relate to God’s simplicity?
Boethius believes that God’s eternal comprehension is possible because God is simple—God does not learn or change, and therefore time does not pass for Him.
How does the timeless view of God relate to omniscience and free will?
A timeless God can know all events simultaneously, including the future, without affecting our free will because God observes all of history from outside time.
What analogy did Thomas Aquinas use to explain God’s timeless view of history?
Aquinas compared a timeless God to someone who can see the entire road at once from a height, observing all events (past, present, and future) simultaneously.
What is the Greek philosophical basis for God being timeless?
Greek philosophy, especially Neoplatonism, argues that perfection requires immutability—God cannot change or be affected by time, so God must be timeless to be perfect.
How does the idea of an everlasting God differ from a timeless God?
An everlasting God exists within time, with no beginning or end, and acts within history, while a timeless God exists beyond time, outside the constraints of events or change.
Why might the concept of a timeless God conflict with the idea of God acting in history?
A timeless God is outside of time and might be seen as disconnected from history, while an everlasting God acts within time and is more relatable to human experience and scripture.
What is a possible issue with an everlasting God?
An everlasting God might struggle with knowing the future without affecting free will, since the future has not yet happened and cannot be known in advance without interfering with human freedom.
Why is the idea of a timeless God harder to comprehend?
The idea of a timeless God is harder to understand because it requires imagining a being that is completely beyond time and free from the experience of change, which contrasts with human experience.
What is a flaw in the concept of God being timeless?
The flaw lies in assuming perfection requires a being beyond human comprehension and experience, which questions whether perfection must exclude human-like qualities that make life meaningful.
What challenges does the idea of a timeless God present to understanding God’s nature?
A timeless God is often viewed as so far beyond human understanding that it becomes difficult to recognize or relate to such a being, potentially making the concept of God less meaningful for believers.
Why is the idea of an everlasting God more relatable?
An everlasting God is more relatable because such a God is part of history, acts within time, and can interact with the world in a way that is familiar and comprehensible to human experience.
How does the idea of a timeless God relate to Neoplatonic philosophy?
In Neoplatonism, the most real being is changeless and perfect, which leads to the view that a timeless God is the highest form of perfection, beyond the change and imperfection of the material world.
