Omnipotence

In: Religion Topics

Submitted By leons
Words 608
Pages 3
The omnipotent God and evil
Mackie in his article criticized the current theological doctrine. I only disagree with one of his perspective. He focused his criticism on the three important parts of most theological positions; omnipotent, wholly good and evil. According to him If God is omnipotent and wholly good then evil should not exist. He challenged theological explanation of occurrence of evil. He based his arguments on adequate and fallacious solutions but with a strong emphasis on the latter. The fallacious solutions considered are evil is necessary as a counterpart to good, evil is a necessary means to good, the universe is better with some evil in it than it could be if there were no evil and evil is due to Human free will (Mackie 1995)
First of all, if something is wholly good and all powerful then there should be no aspect of negativity in it. Presence of a flaw is a clear indication that it is not completely accurate so as its power. The unclear explanations are even made stronger by the Pope that there is disorder in harmony (Mackie 1995)
Second, the belief that good is evil’s necessary counterpart limits God power, in that creation of good must always be in concurrent with evil. God created logic and that is how he chooses to think, how can then this God have the power to perform that is not logically possible. This shows that there is a lot of inconsistence in these beliefs and therefore not reliable for making a correct conclusion.
Third, the explanation that evil is a necessity for good thing to happen create a condition that has to be fulfilled. In other ways, Evil has to occur, hence create an impression of restriction and consequently the omnipotence is greatly compromised. This means that God has to always ascribe himself and be answerable to certain set of laws.
Fourth, if there was no evil in the world, then everything will be perfect. How…...

Similar Documents

Divine Omnipotence & Thomas Aquinas

...Divine Omnipotence and Thomas Aquinas In the evaluation of divine omnipotence, the natural assumption that God is capable of all things must be submitted to inquiry and close consideration. Although omnipotence is technically defined as all-encompassing, unlimited power, divine omnipotence is understood by many in a paradoxical way in the view that there are certain things that God, even as an ‘all-powerful being’, cannot do. In response to the argument that God is not omnipotent because he cannot falsify a necessary truth, Thomas Aquinas would argue that God’s power does not - and rationally should not be expected to - include things that are logically impossible. Under Aquinas’ assessment of the scope of omnipotence, the necessary truth argument is unsound because the statement ‘God cannot falsify a necessary truth’ is void by the definitional contradiction in falsifying a necessary truth. Aquinas acknowledged the difficulty in defining and comprehending God’s power: “all confess that God is omnipotent…[but] it seems difficult to explain in what God’s omnipotence precisely consists” . However Aquinas eventually comes to assert that if something can be, then God can bring it about; His power extends to anything that does not involve a direct contradiction. For example, God cannot make a circle into a square. By definition, a circle is a geometric shape with no corners and a square is a geometric shape with four corners. Fundamentally, the states of being a square......

Words: 1089 - Pages: 5

Counter-Argument Towards J. L. Mackie’s Evil and Omnipotence

...Counter-Argument Towards J. L. Mackie’s Evil and Omnipotence In “Evil and Omnipotence” J. L. Mackie argues that God does not exist because of his idea of the 3-0-God which states that God has to be omniscient, omnipotent and omni-benevolent to fulfill the properties of a true God. Perhaps the strongest argument that Mackie gives is that God can only be two out of the three properties in order for evil to exist thus stating that god cannot exist because he does not fulfill all three properties. In this paper, I will argue that this argument fails because Mackie is basing his points on his own thoughts about God. Mackie starts out his argument by stating that the problem of evil proves that either no god exists or at least the god of Christianity, Judaism and Islamic does not exist since the problem of evil provokes the three properties of God. Mackie supports this claim by saying, “These additional principles are that good is opposed to evil, in such a way that a good thing always eliminates evil as far as it can, and that there are no limits to what an omnipotent thing can do.” (Abel p.91) and concludes this claim with, “…propositions that a good omnipotent thing exists, and that evil exists, are incompatible.” (Abel p.91) Adequate solutions are also what backs up his major point about the problem of evil and states that God cannot be all knowing while being all-powerful and all-good because evil exists and would mean that God is unaware of evil in the world. God can......

Words: 1136 - Pages: 5

Is the Existence of God Logically Consistent with the Existence of Evil?

...stems from the “contradiction involved in the fact of evil, on the one hand, and the belief in the omnipotence and perfection of God on the other.”3 At first glance, this contradiction is merely implicit, being made explicit through the presupposition that if God were a wholly good being, then He would desire to destroy evil insofar that “a good thing always eliminates evil as far as it can.”4 Similarly, if God were both omniscient and omnipotent then one can suppose that He is consciously aware of evil’s existence and, in his infinite power, possesses the means of destroying it. Thus, if such a being were to exist, one which longs to destroy evil and possesses the power to do so, then it would logically follow that evil should not exist. The fact that it does exist, however, makes this contradiction apparent, and is one which Mackie considers sufficient in justifying disbelief in a deity, claiming that religious beliefs “are positively irrational” due to the inconsistencies which lie at the heart of theological doctrine.5 1 B. Davies, ‘An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion’ (Oxford 2004) pp. 209 2 P. Kreefy, ‘The Problem of Evil’ (www.peterkreeft.com/topics/evil.htm) (13 Mar. 2013) 3 H.J. McCloskey, 'God and Evil' in Philosophical Quarterly, 10 (1960) pp. 97 4 J. L. Mackie, ‘Evil and Omnipotence’ in Mind, 64 (1955) pp. 201 5 J. L. Mackie, ‘Evil and Omnipotence’ pp. 200 If one were to reject the logical problem of evil, then one must deny one of two......

Words: 2152 - Pages: 9

Blade Runner

...ambition. However, the film’s 20th century context of capitalist greed and mass industrialisation shifts the criticism onto the pursuit of commercial dominance. Both texts employ techniques such as allusions and characterisation to depict similar dystopian visions ensuing from man’s dereliction of nature. Composed during the Industrial Revolution and radical scientific experimentation, Shelley typifies the Romantic Movement as she forebodes her enlightened society of playing God. Her warning permeates through the character of Victor, whose self-aggrandising diction “many excellent natures would owe their being to me” represents a society engrossed with reanimation. Shelley moreover questions the morality her microcosm’s pursuit of omnipotence through Victor’s retrospection “lost all soul or sensation but for this one pursuit”, as the juxtaposition of “all” and “one” emphasises Victor’s cavernous obsession to conquer death; akin to scientists of her time such as Erasmus Darwin. Moreover, recurring mythical allusions to Prometheus, “how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge” further portray Victor as an Aristotelian Tragic Hero; a noble character whose hamartia of blind ambition foreshadows his own downfall and dehumanisation, “swallowed up every habit of my nature”. In addition, Victor’s impulsive denunciation of his grotesque creation, leads to the Monster’s metaphysical rebellion “vowed eternal hated and vengeance to all mankind”. Here, Shelley elicits a historical......

Words: 982 - Pages: 4

Hsc English

...ambition. However, the film’s 20th century context of capitalist greed and mass industrialisation shifts the criticism onto the pursuit of commercial dominance. Both texts employ techniques such as allusions and characterisation to depict similar dystopian visions ensuing from man’s dereliction of nature. Composed during the Industrial Revolution and radical scientific experimentation, Shelley typifies the Romantic Movement as she forebodes her enlightened society of playing God. Her warning permeates through the character of Victor, whose self-aggrandising diction “many excellent natures would owe their being to me” represents a society engrossed with reanimation. Shelley moreover questions the morality her microcosm’s pursuit of omnipotence through Victor’s retrospection “lost all soul or sensation but for this one pursuit”, as the juxtaposition of “all” and “one” emphasises Victor’s cavernous obsession to conquer death; akin to scientists of her time such as Erasmus Darwin. Moreover, recurring mythical allusions to Prometheus, “how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge” further portray Victor as an Aristotelian Tragic Hero; a noble character whose hamartia of blind ambition foreshadows his own downfall and dehumanisation, “swallowed up every habit of my nature”. In addition, Victor’s impulsive denunciation of his grotesque creation, leads to the Monster’s metaphysical rebellion “vowed eternal hated and vengeance to all mankind”. Here, Shelley elicits a historical......

Words: 982 - Pages: 4

Does God Exist

...reality as one. Likewise, heat cannot be created by something that was not itself hot, or possessed of a comparable level of reality. Having decided upon that, Descartes then considers what comes to mind when he thinks of ‘god.’ His impression of God is of “a substance that is infinite, independent, supremely intelligent, supremely powerful, and which created both myself and everything else (if anything else there be) that exists.” (Baird and Kaufmann 34) Realising that any thought he has must have occurred either within him, or was put there by an outside force. According to his own logic, in order for the idea of something, for example, omnipotence, to occur from within himself, he must himself be in possession of omnipotence. Since he isn’t, he can only conclude that the thought originated from somewhere that –was- in possession of omnipotence…God. After having now concluded that God exists, Descartes ponders how it is that the idea of God came to be in his mind. He decides that since he cannot add anything to, or take anything away from the concept of a perfect being with no defects, than the idea is clearly not one that arrived to him through some sort of sensory input, instead it must be innate within him, in the way that he is created. And since the only being capable of instilling this innate knowledge of a perfect being with no defects within him is a being  possessed of perfection with no defects, only God is capable of such a creation, ergo, God must exist.......

Words: 1540 - Pages: 7

The Function of Psychotherapy in Italian Mental Health Services

...problem seems to be that of the loss, strictly connected with the emotional experience of impotence . What’s the meaning of this emotional dynamic? Impotence means to lay down arms, to fail to face a conflict. Therefore, the conflictual impotence seems to be an answer to omnipotent fantasies. Also, common emotional disorders, those common problems which are presented to the service, are the expression of experiences of impotence and loss. In this sense we aim at treating the loss not by finding a solution, rather by thinking together with the patient how he/she relates and feels with the loss. For instance, Giovanna and Antonio’s problems shape around omnipotence/impotence core, being and not being in the relationships as a sort of control and thus omnipotence. The same is the attempt to suicide, which is the peak of omnipotence since it cuts you out of the relationship. This short excursus into the demands addressed to the services defines an interesting scope of the investigation. If the problems why people go to the services are seen as a resource for its global running, they can provide the categories to map critical situations of a territory and allow to identify precautionary measures. References Carli, R. (2009). Practical training in the health facilities and mental health centers. Rivista di Psicologia Clinica , 1, 3-16. Retrieved from: //www.rivistadipsicologiaclinica.it/english. Carli, R. (2011). Psychiatrically ill individuals and the demand for......

Words: 2093 - Pages: 9

The Nature of

...happens. Everything I plan will come to pass, for I do whatever I wish.” In Genesis chapters 3-5 we see God’s first question “Where are you?" (Gen. 3:9) Adam and Eve were hiding because they “feared” the Lord. They knew that they had sinned and could not come before the Lord as they had in the past because the sin had separated them from communication with God. God knew where they were, but he wanted them to answer where they were. God still does that today in our everyday lives. Where are we? He already knows the answer, but he wants to make sure that we call sin what it is and confess it so we can repair the relationship that we have with Him. (Genesis 4:1) After seeing the omnipotence and the omnipresence of God, it is not hard to see the third character of God, Omnipotence. Omnipotence has many meanings. According to Webster’s Dictionary it means “great, sovereign, supreme, towering, transcendent; authoritative, chief, majestic, master, masterful; mighty, potent, powerful, puissant, strong.” The word omnipotent is even referenced in Revelation “The Lord God Omnipotent reigns Halleluiah.” Meaning God cannot do anything wrong. The meaning also suggests that God cannot do anything contrary to his nature (lie, deceive, etc.) Titus 1:2, 2 Timothy 2:13. If you were to do a Bible search you would find that God is referred to as “Almighty” 57 times in the Bible. We can see that this is something that God wants man to know about his nature. The Fundamentals of......

Words: 1486 - Pages: 6

Suffering and Pain in the Christian Life

...question was asked Jesus died and went to fulfill his destiny and sit at the right hand of His father. This example should be the ultimate evidence that yes suffering is a tough to endure but we can take joy knowing we will step into all God has for us when we do. C . S . Lewis’ Theological Foundation on Why God Is Good Divine Omnipotence In this book, Lewis also gives us an example of what he believes to be the problem of pain in its simplest form. He explains ‘If God were good, He would want to make sure his creatures were perfectly happy, and if God were almighty He would be able to do what he wanted. But you see the creatures are not happy. So this could mean a couple of different ideas.Either God lacks goodness, or power, both.’ Ultimately what Lewis is telling us is God is all powerful and all good but his creatures are not happy. Therefore, in order to understand the reason pain and suffering are in our lives we must discuss God’s Divine Omnipotence. Omnipotence means power to do all, or everything. We know God is the creator of the universe, but sometimes we may doubt He is that powerful when we go through trials. In other words, a certain situation may cause you to say that it is impossible that any good can come from pain. Then it hits you: “But I thought with God nothing was impossible?” This now raises a totally different question of impossibility. Normally, the......

Words: 3308 - Pages: 14

Attributes of God

... 2 II. Categories of Attributes 2 III. Incommunicable Attributes of God 5 A. Sovereignty 5 B. Aseity 7 C. Immutability 7 D. E. Eternity (Eternality) 9 F. Omnipotence 10 G. Omnipresence 11 H. Infinity 11 I. J. IV. Communicable Attributes of God 12 A. Holiness 13 B. Righteousness 14 C. Love ...

Words: 4768 - Pages: 20

Assess the Concept of God

...I believe that the concept of God is illogical. As God is the Supreme Being, he has a quantity of divine attributes such as: omniscience, omnipotence, Omni-benevolence, supreme goodness, eternal, self-sufficient, perfect, and everlasting, transcendence and immanence. In this essay, I will be looking at God's omnipotence, through the Stone Paradox, his omniscience, through the Free Will Paradox and Gods 'omniscience and immutability' and showing how they are not comprehensible. Firstly, The Paradox of the Stone tests God's omnipotence. The dilemma is that either God can create a stone which He cannot lift, or He cannot create a stone which He cannot lift. If God can create a stone which He cannot lift, then He is not omnipotent (as He cannot lift the Stone). If God cannot create a stone which He cannot lift, then He is not omnipotent (since He cannot create the stone). Consequently, either way God is not omnipotent as there is something He cannot do. The first objection to the Stone Paradox is from George Mavrodes. He argues that the paradox is logically impossible. The claim that someone, x, can make something too heavy for x to lift is not generally self-contradictory. However, it becomes self-contradictory when x is omnipotent. An omnipotent being that cannot lift a stone is logically impossible because it is self-contradictory and describes nothing. Hence, there is no possible power for an omnipotent being to create a stone they cannot lift. So if God is omnipotent,......

Words: 1284 - Pages: 6

The Discussion of Discussion

...3. Explain the meaning and significance of the omnipotence of God. Verses: - Job 11:7-9 - “Can you fathom the mysteries of God? Can you probe the limits of the Almighty? They are higher than the heavens above—what can you do? They are deeper than the depths below—what can you know? Their measure is longer than the earth and wider than the sea.” - Matthew 19:26 - “Jesus looked at them and said, ‘With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.’” - Psalm 147:5 - “Great is our Lord and mighty in power; his understanding has no limit.” Quotes: “We cannot have a right conception of God unless we think of Him as all-powerful, as well as all-wise. He who cannot do what he will and perform all his pleasure cannot be God. As God hath a will to resolve what He deems good, so has He power to execute His will.” - Arthur W. Pink “His Omnipotence means power to do all that is intrinsically possible, not to do the intrinsically impossible. You may attribute miracles to Him, but not nonsense. There is no limit to His power….It remains true that all things are possible with God: the intrinsic impossibilities are not things but nonentities. It is no more possible for God than for the weakest of His creatures to carry out both of two mutually exclusive alternatives; not because His power meets an obstacle, but because nonsense remains nonsense even when we talk it about God.” - C.S. Lewis “Clearly, the Scripture tells us that we lack the capacity to grasp God's......

Words: 975 - Pages: 4

God vs No God

...that every thing in the universe has a cause and an effect, therefore, this argument still left me tentative. Many philosophers have proposed arguments such as the previous for and against the belief in the existence of God. This creator which some may call omnipotent are simply creating paradoxes. To be omnipotent, one must have unlimited power and be able to accomplish, create, and destroy anything and everything. But, if one is able to create everything, then surely they could create a rock that they could not lift. Yet, that is a contradiction, God must be able to create anything, such as a rock it cannot lift, but it must be able to lift anything. So, it is impossible for omnipotence to exist, it is just a paradox. Empirical arguments use empirical data for their conclusions. If omnipotence is not really a paradox, then why do the problem of evil and non-belief flood the planet? God is supposedly omnipotent, so why does God, who wants people to believe in it, not simply make it so? Why does God permit evil and suffering when it should be able to do anything? Hell is also a problem according to deductive arguments. God is both apparently omnibelevolent and omnipresent. This means that God exists everywhere and God is all that is good. So, being able to exist everywhere must mean that it exists in hell too. But, God is omnibelevolent, it cannot exist in hell. This is just one contradiction you can find in all of the empirical arguments. Existence is defined as that...

Words: 1257 - Pages: 6

Philosophy of Free Will and Theology

...and say that God does exist then it would be to the exclusion of evil, which would make us look ignoramus, because we know, based on the experiences we have had, that in fact evil does exist. So our only other possibility would be to say God doesn’t exist or to diminish the deity of God, either God can’t stop evil or he doesn’t desire to stop evil, thus proving His inexistence. Though the argument above may prove intimidating because of its logical consistency and the ensnaring nature of its wording, there are some ambiguous or incorrectly defined words that I would like to shed some light on. The first would be omnipotence, which is described as “can do anything” in the Logical Argument. I do not oppose the definition completely, although I think “power to do all things” is better, rather I would like to add some helpful information to the idea of omnipotence. In the Logical Argument if I, as a theist, were to say that God and evil do exist the result would be that then God would not be able to stop evil, meaning it would be an impossibility for God to stop evil from happening. With the idea of impossibility C.S. Lewis in his book “The Problem of Pain”, sets forth the idea that with impossibility comes a “suppressed clause” which utilizes the word, unless. So for example, “I can’t tie my shoe, unless it were first untied.” The task is impossible because the “unless” hasn’t occurred. Now there are also such things called “absolute impossibilities” which Lewis describes......

Words: 2028 - Pages: 9

2 Essays

...birth in America, I think myself American. But as pure soul, I am neither Indian nor American. I am pure soul. These others are designations. American, or Indian, or German, or Englishman; cat or dog, or bee or bat, man or wife: all these are designations. In spiritual consciousness we become free from all such designations. That freedom is achieved when we are constantly in touch with the Supreme Spirit, Krishna. The International Society For Krishna Consciousness is simply intended to keep us in constant touch with Krishna. Krishna can be in constant com-· panionship with us because He is omnipotent. touch with us by His words. His Therefore, He can be fully in words anrl He are not different. That is omnipotence. Omnipotence means that everything relating to Him has the same potency. For example, here in this material world, if we are thirsty and we want water, simply repeating "Water, water, water, water, " will not satisfy our thirst, because this word has not the same potency as water itself. We require the water in substance. Then our thirst will be satisfied. But in the transcendental, Absolute World, there is no such difference­ Krishna's Name, Krishna's Quality, Krishna's Word-everything is Krishna and provides the same satisfaction. Some people argue that Arjuna was talking with Krishna because Krishna was present before him, whereas in my case, Krishna is not present. So how can I get directions? But that is not a fact.......

Words: 3613 - Pages: 15