Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
The Nature or Attributes of God - Coggle Diagram
The Nature or Attributes of God
Aquinas' view of omnipotence
Aquinas has the traditional and popular view - that omnipotence means the power to do any logically possible action
For example, God cannot make something which both exists and does not exist at the same time. Or, God cannot create a four-sided triangle
God is a perfect being. It would take away from God's perfection to create a logically impossible thing
Evaluation: paradox of the stone
Can God make a stone too heavy for him to lift? If God can create the stone - then he can't lift it. If God can't create the stone, then he can't create it
Whatever answer you give - there is one thing God cannot do
So, it seems the idea of omnipotence makes no sense. The idea of a being that can do anything is illogical
Descartes' view of omnipotence
Descartes thinks the God can do the logically impossible
So God can create a four-sided triangle etc.
Descartes has no problem with the 'paradox of the stone' because he can say God simply can create the stone, and then lift it
That seems logically impossible, but that is not a limitation for God
God is unlimited - everything depends on God, including logic
So, Descartes' view seems better than Aquinas'
Evaluation
The popular response to Descartes is that his theory makes no logical sense
If God can do the impossible, then it's no longer impossible
Descartes is just undermining the whole distinction between logically possible and impossible
Optional further evaluation
However, Descartes' still seems right. If God did the impossible, it would still be impossible in our minds
God cannot be limited by what makes logical sense to us, is Descartes point
Self-imposed limitation view of omnipotence
This view is held by philosophers like Vardy
God can do anything - but there must be some limits to God's power in order for us to have free will and a logically orderly universe
This is because it God intervened in our action we wouldn't have free will
If God created something illogical in the universe then it might fall apart
However - God
wants
us to have free will and a logical universe
So, he must limit his own power - to stop himself from destroying our free will and universe
Vardy thinks this is the way to make sense of omnipotence
Evaluation
It makes no sense for an unlimited being to have limits - then it wouldn't be an unlimited being
God cannot limit himself - just like God cannot kill/destroy himself
Boethius on omniscience vs. free will vs. omnibenevolence
Boethius is trying to solve a problem: an omniscient God would know our future actions - but that would undermine free will - and that would mean God couldn't be omnibenevolent in punishing us in the afterlife
If God knows what I'm going to do next, I can't have the free will o choose to do something else
Boethius' solution: God is outside time (eternal). God sees all the time in one moment - the 'eternal present'
So, God see all past, present and future in one moment - this means God sees our future action, but he does no determine them
God simply sees the results of our free choices
So, God knowing out future actions does not conflict with free will
Evaluation
Boethius has not really solved the problem. Even if God knowing my future actions does not
determine
my choices, the fact that God knows what I'm going to do next means I can't do otherwise
If God knows what I'm going to do next, then what I'm going to do next is inevitable, fixed, necessary. I can't do otherwise
So, we still have no free will
It makes no sense to say that God simple sees the results of our free choices. That would mean they are not free
Anselm on omniscience vs. free will vs. omnibenevolence
Anselm largely agrees with Boethius' approach but wanted to improve on it
Boethius says God is totally disconnected from time
This might address the free will issue, but it doesn't really make sense of how God is able to affect the world or time
If God is totally outside of time, how can God affect things happening in time...?
Boethius can't explain that, but Anslem tries
Anselm says that yes God is outside of time - but all of time is in God
Basically, God is much greater than time - so God is not limited to being within time - but all of time is in God - which means God has the power to affect time
He's not radically disconnected from time like Boethius suggested, even though he is still outside of time
1 more item...
Evaluation
Same as Boethius - if God knows what I'm going to do next, then I can't have the free will to choose to do otherwise
Swinburne on omniscience vs. free will vs. omnibenevolence
Swinburne's solution to the problem posed by Boethius is to simply say that God doesn't know what we are going to do next
This doesn't take away God's omniscience though
Omniscience means knowing everything that can be known
Future actions of free creatures cannot be known
Swinburne adds that God is therefore within time - the everlasting/temporal view of God
Swinburne thinks this is the only way to have a loving relationship with God - God has to be within time (also to answer prayers)
Evaluation
There are cases in the Bible where God/Jesus does seem to know what people are going to do next
Jesus knew Judas would betray him
Jesus knew Peter would deny him three times before the cockerel crowed
Optional further evaluation
Swinburne says God knows us like a parent knows their children - so God can have a decent idea of what we are going to do, just can't know for certain