Omnipotence

Omnipotence and debate

Idea that God is strong enough to do anything
DEBATE:

1. God can do anything, including the logically impossible

2. God can do anything, excluding the impossible

3. God has a self-imposed limit to his own omnipotence/works within the bounds of the universe

ROCK PARADOX: Can God make a rock so big and heavy that he cannot lift it?
Notions mean that theoretically he can make square circles, or make 2+2=5
All logic comes from God, god can change knowledge/suspend it for a time: ie miracles.

Descartes

Approach that omnipotence doesn’t mean that God can do absolutely anything: how could he perform miracles/save the world through Jesus? We don’t know due to our limited reasoning: GOD DOESNT HAVE TO MAKE SENSE
He gives the example that God could have made it false that 4+4=8.

• The argument is that surely God created everything, including logic. Nothing can exist which does not depend on God, because of God’s “immensity”.
  Logical impossibility may be beyond our imagination or understanding, but Descartes argues we should not assume that our imagination reaches as far as God’s power.

• Logical impossibility is a limitation for humans, the universe and reality in general, but not for God. God cannot be limited or bound by logic, since they depend on God. 

• So although a four-sided triangle is logically impossible, God could create one.

Weakness of Descartes

• Descartes’ theory is unpopular in theology. The most common objection is that if God can do the logically impossible, that makes it possible. So it’s not impossible.

• It makes no sense to say that God ‘could do’ the logically impossible – that statement is self-defeating. The statement undermines the concept it is making a claim about.

• Furthermore, Descartes’ theory undermines defence of God against the logical problem of evil.

• All defences of God against evil rely on omnipotence involving the power to do the logically possible only. 

• They argue that God is unable to remove evil without removing our free will, deserved punishment or opportunities for soul-making.

• However if God could do the impossible, God could remove evil without removing those greater goods.

• So, Descartes’ view of omnipotence makes Mackie’s logical problem of evil undefeatable, which aims to show that an omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscient God is logically incompatible with evil.

Anselm

Omnipotence has unlimited power, so he could lie. But he wont, because of his omnibenevolence he is incapable of lying. Having this power is not easy.

Against Anselm

• View might make God into an arbitrary being who becomes unpredictable

• Might make someone question why God does not change the laws so that we do no evil

• Bible suggest God cannot lie

Aquinas

God can only do the logically possible and which does not lead to a contradiction and thus cannot create a square circle
View that logical possibility means that God can only do what a perfect God can do: say that God could sin, not apart of his logical nature. Aquinas argue he cannot change the past
Aquinas gives the example that God cannot create something which both exists and does not exist.

• That would be to encompass a contradiction within himself, since that would contradict his perfect nature.

• Another example is that God cannot destroy himself, since that would contradict his perfection of necessary existence.

• Aquinas insists God being unable to do these things cannot be thought of as due to any ‘defect’ in the concept of God. It is because logically impossible things, like a four-sided triangle or a destroyed necessary being “have not the nature of a feasible or possible thing.”

• Omnipotence, or the greatest amount of power possible, has to be understood as the power held by a perfect being. It therefore cannot bring about anything contrary to its perfection as a perfect being cannot be imperfect.

• Aquinas concludes:

• “it is better to say that such things cannot be done, than that God cannot do them.”

Counter Aquinas

• Paradox of the stone (Mackie’s omnipotence paradox). 

• Can God create a stone so heavy that God cannot lift it?

• If he can create the stone, he can’t lift it – if he can’t create it – he can’t create it. 

• Either way, whatever answer we give, it looks like there is at least one thing that God cannot do.

• A really heavy stone does not appear to be a logically impossible thing – so there is at least one possible thing God cannot do – which seems to show that Aquinas’ definition of omnipotence to be false.

• Descartes does not have this issue – because he says God can do the logically impossible – so God can make the stone, and then lift it! 

Evaluating Aquinas

• Mavrodes defends Aquinas. The stone actually is an impossible object.

• It’s not just a really heavy stone – it’s a stone too heavy for God to lift.

• The issue is – God could lift any stone. There cannot be such a thing as a stone too heavy for God to lift. It is impossible for a stone to be too heavy for God to lift.

• So Aquinas can respond that God cannot create the stone, just like God cannot create a square circle..

• This defence of Aquinas is successful because it shows that although the stone is not as obviously impossible as a four-sided triangle, it still is impossible.

• This means Aquinas’ definition of omnipotence – the power to do any logically possible thing – is not undermined by God’s not being able to create such a stone.

Swinburne

Agrees with AQUINAS, claims that God is unable to do everything has to be understood in context.
A square circle is not a thing, so God cannot create one. So to say that God can do everything doesn’t limit him - refer to only logically possible powers,

Vardy’s self limitation

Gods self-imposed limitation, suggested that God creating a limited universe hence he decided he would only operate within the natural laws he created, self-imposing a limitation of his power. If the universe is carefully fine-tuend, then any divine interference from God could upset the balance of the universe

For Christians, it makes sense hwy God limits himself by becoming a human through Jesus. Ties in with Biblical preservation of God’s power to do the logically possible

Against self limitation

Idea God can just ‘self limit’ perceived as illogical. If God’s power is unlimited, then even God himself should be able to limit it - since that would make his power no longer unlimited and no longer omnipotent

An unlimited being cannot limit itself, since then it would be limited, yet an unlimited being cannot cease being unlimited

Just say its logically impossible for God to destroy itself

C.S Lewis stance on God being able to achieve the impossible

C.S. Lewis (1898-1963) agreed observing that:”…meaningless combinations of words do not suddenly acquire a meaning because we prefix to them two other words: 'God can'” - God CANNOT do the impossible

Hebrews 6:18

It is impossible for God to lie

Mavrodes solution to the rock paradox

If God, by definition, is a being of unlimited power, this would make the idea of a stone he cannot lift a logically impossible task. Similarly, a square circle is logically impossible and thus not subject to God’s omnipotence.

Anthony Kenny’s view on omnipotence

•God can do all things that it is logically possible for a being such as God to do. Although this may solve the paradoxes, a weakness of this view might be the feeling that it doesn't really say anything. We are effectively saying that God can do all things that God can do!

Plantinga on definition of omnipotence

Argued God may choose to limit his powers in certain circumstances in order to preserve human free will.  

Peter Geach definition of omnipotence

Notes that the word omnipotence comes from the Latin ‘Omnipotens’ However, the New Testament was written in Greek and the word 'Pantokrator', which translates as 'Almighty', was used to describe God. Geach argues that “Almighty” is best understood as a capacity for power, power over everything rather than a power to do everything.