Omnipotence

Test yourself

The Nature of God: Omnipotence

Omnipotence means ‘all-powerful’.

God's omnipotence in the Bible

God’s omnipotent nature is outlined in the Bible.
- God creates the world ex nihilo (from nothing).
- God speaks things into existence in Genesis 1: ‘let there be light’.

The paradox of the stone

There are some issues with the idea of omnipotence.
- One issue is known as the paradox of the stone.
The paradox of the stone poses a question ‘can God make a stone that is too heavy for Him to lift?’
- If the answer is no, then there is something God cannot do.
- If He can create the stone, but can’t lift it, then there’s also something He can’t do.

The paradox of the squared circle

God cannot be all-powerful if there is something he cannot do.
Another known paradox is known as the squared circle.
- If God cannot square a circle then there is something else He cannot do.

Philosophical Explanations for Omnipotence

Because there are paradoxes that suggest that God is not omnipotent, philosophers have tried to explain exactly what it means for God to be omnipotent.

Aquinas' definition

Aquinas thought that omnipotence meant that God could do anything that was logically possible. The squared circle question - according to Aquinas - is an absurd question because the concept of a squared circle makes no sense; it is not a thing.
According to the rules of logic, it is a contradiction in terms – it is a meaningless question and results in nonsense words. God’s inability not to square a circle doesn’t reduce His omnipotence.

Descartes' definition

Descartes thought that God could do absolutely anything – possible and impossible, logical and illogical. This is because God is a ‘supremely perfect being’.
He argued that God’s existence is prior to the laws of logic (God is eternal – begotten not made), so God is not bound by those laws. God could square a circle.

Vardy & Macquarrie

Vardy & Macquarrie thought that God created the universe, but limited His power to interfere with it. This is a self-imposed limitation, done out of His love for the world.
Nothing limits God’s power but Himself. Macquarrie refers to the idea of ‘Kenosis’, meaning ‘self-emptying’ to explain that God empties out some of his powers to allow humans greater free will.
- Why would God square a circle? This would make his actions arbitrary and we couldn’t trust God.

Hartshorne

Hartshorne argues that it is better to describe God as ‘unsurpassably great’ rather than totally powerful.
He argues that absolute omnipotence as described by Descartes would not actually be a perfect quality. God’s power is not surpassed by anything in His creation, things can put up a resistance to God, but God will always be more powerful.
If nothing could put up a resistance to God, it would be like praising someone for getting first prize in a race with no competitors.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Definitions of Omnipotence

Here are the strengths and weaknesses of Thomas Aquinas', Descartes' and Vardy and Macquarrie's definitions of omnipotence.

Aquinas - strengths & weaknesses

Strengths:
- It makes no sense to accuse God of being less than omnipotent because he cannot do the logically impossible. God made the laws of logic, geometry and arithmetic of nature, so He would not make things that go against these principles (like a squared circle).
Weaknesses:
- Arguably, I can conceive of a greater being than one that can only do the logically possible: one that can do the logically impossible too. As such, it doesn’t match up with Anselm’s definition of God.

Descartes - strengths

This theory might protect God’s omnipotence best because God can square a circle, ride a bike, and do evil.
- Surely a God who can do the logically impossible is greater than a God that can only do the logically possible?
Therefore, this theory meets Anselm’s definition of God which was ‘a being than which nothing greater can be conceived’.

Descartes - weaknesses

This approach might lead to God being seen as arbitrary (random) and tyrannical (abusing His power).
If God can do absolutely anything, then He can allow us to have free will without the consequence of evil.

Vardy & Macquarrie - strengths

Their theory fits in with the idea of the incarnation of God in the form of Jesus. God became flesh out of love for His creation and He emptied himself of some of his powers to come to earth.
The theory prevents God from being a tyrant – does anything He wishes just because He can.
The theory fits in with Hick’s Vale of Soul Making theodicy (humans are imperfect; they must grow into the "likeness" of God).

Vardy & Macquarrie - weaknesses

Arguably, I can conceive of a greater being – remember Anselm defined God as ‘a being than which nothing greater can be conceived’ – than a God with self-imposed limitations.
If we are suggesting that God limited his power to allow humans to achieve the Vale of Soul Making, then why is evil so extreme? Could God not have controlled the extent of evil and still allow for soul-making?

1Philosophy of Religion

1.1Ancient Philosophical Influences: Plato

1.1.1Plato's Understanding of Reality

1.1.2Plato's Theory of Forms

1.1.3Plato's Analogy of the Cave

1.1.4The Purpose of Plato's Analogy of the Cave

1.1.5Evaluation of Plato's Theories

1.2Ancient Philosophical Influences: Aristotle

1.2.1Aristotle's Understanding of Reality

1.2.2Aristotle's Four Causes

1.2.3Aristotle's Prime Mover

1.3Ancient Philosophical Influences: Soul, Mind, Body

1.3.1Plato & Aristotle's Views of the Soul

1.3.2Metaphysics of Consciousness

1.3.3Materialism - Ryle’s Philosophical Behaviourism

1.3.4Materialism - Identity Theory

1.4The Existence of God - Arguments from Observation

1.4.1The Teleological Argument - Aquinas' Fifth Way

1.4.2The Teleological Argument - Paley & Evolution

1.4.3The Cosmological Argument

1.4.4Hume's Criticisms: Teleological & Cosmological

1.5The Existence of God - Arguments from Reason

1.5.1The Ontological Argument

1.5.2Criticisms of the Ontological Argument

1.6Religious Experience

1.6.1Introduction to Religious Experience

1.6.2Mystical Experience

1.6.3Conversion Experience

1.6.4Understanding Religious Experience

1.6.5Issues Relating to Religious Experience - Validity

1.6.6Issues Relating to Religious Experiences - People

1.7The Problem of Evil

1.7.1Presentations of the Problems of Evil

1.7.2Discussion Points -

1.8The Nature & Attributes of God

1.8.1Omnipotence

1.8.2Omniscience

1.8.3Boethius - Divine Knowledge, Free Will & Eternity

1.8.4(Omni)benevolence

1.8.5Eternity & Free Will

1.9Religious Language: Negative, Analogical, Symbolic

1.9.1Apophatic & Cataphatic Way

1.9.2Symbol

1.9.3Discussion Points: Religious Language

1.10Religious Language: 20th Century Perspective

1.10.1Logical Positivism & Verification Principle

1.10.2Wittgenstein

1.10.3Falsification Symposium: Flew & Hare

1.10.4Falsification Symposium: Mitchell

1.10.5Discussion Points: Verification & Falsification

1.10.6Discussion Points: Aquinas vs Wittgenstein

2Religion & Ethics

2.1Natural Law

2.1.1St Thomas Aquinas - Telos & Four Tiers of Law

2.1.2St Thomas Aquinas - Precepts

2.1.3St Thomas Aquinas - Real & Apparent Goods

2.1.4Discussion Points - Natural Law & Doing Good

2.1.5Discussion Points - Telos & Double Effect Doctrine

2.2Situation Ethics

2.2.1Fletcher's Situation Ethics

2.2.2Fletcher's Concept of Conscience

2.2.3Discussion Points: Moral Decision-Making

2.2.4Discussion Points - Agape

2.3Kantian Ethics

2.3.1Introduction to Kantian Ethics & Duty

2.3.2Hypothetical & Categorical Imperative

2.3.3Summum Bonum & Three Postulates

2.3.4Discussion Points: Kantian Ethics

2.4Utilitarianism

2.4.1The Utility Principle

2.4.2Act & Rule Utilitarianism

2.4.3Discussion Points: Utilitarianism

2.5Euthanasia

2.5.1Key Concepts for Euthanasia Debates

2.5.2Discussion Points: Natural Law & Situation Ethics

2.5.3Discussion Points: Sanctity of Life

2.5.4Discussion Points: Autonomy & Medical Intervention

2.6Business Ethics

2.6.1Corporate Social Responsibility & Whistle-Blowing

2.6.2Good Ethics & Globalisation

2.6.3Discussion Points: Utilitarianism & Kantian Ethics

2.6.4Discussion Points: CSR, Globalisation & Capitalism

3Developments in Christian Thought

3.1Saint Augustine's Teachings

3.1.1Human Nature

3.1.2Original Sin & God's Grace

3.2Death & the Afterlife

3.2.1Heaven, Hell, & Purgatory

3.2.2Different Interpretations of the Afterlife

3.2.3Election

3.2.4The Final Judgement

3.2.5Discussion Points: Heaven, Hell & Purgatory

3.3Knowledge of God's Existence

3.3.1Natural Knowledge

3.3.2Revealed Knowledge in Faith, Grace, & Jesus Christ

3.3.3Revealed Knowledge in the Bible & Church

3.3.4Discussion Points: Reason & Belief in God

3.3.5Discussion Points: The Fall & Trust in God

3.4The Person of Jesus Christ

3.4.1Jesus Christ’s Authority as the Son of God

3.4.2Jesus Christ’s Authority as a Teacher of Wisdom

3.4.3Jesus Christ’s Authority as a Liberator

3.5Christian Moral Principles

3.5.1The Bible & Love

3.5.2Bible, Church & Reason

3.5.3Discussion Points: Christian Ethics

3.5.4Discussion Points: Love & the Bible

3.6Christian Moral Action

3.6.1Dietrich Bonhoeffer & the Confessing Church

3.6.2Bonhoeffer & Civil Disobedience

3.6.3Bonhoeffer's Teaching on Ethics as Action

3.6.4Discussion Points: Civil Disobedience & Bonhoeffer

3.7Development - Pluralism & Theology

3.7.1Pluralism & Theology: Exclusivism & Inclusivism

3.7.2Pluralism & Theology: Pluralism

3.7.3Discussion Points: Salvation

3.7.4Discussion Points: Pluralism Undermining Beliefs

3.8Development - Pluralism & Society

3.8.1Development of Multi-Faith Societies

3.8.2Responses to Inter-Faith Dialogue

3.8.3The Scriptural Reasoning Movement

3.8.4Discussion Points: Social Cohesion & Scripture

3.8.5Discussion Points: Conversion

3.9Gender & Society

3.9.1Waves of Feminism

3.9.2Traditional Christian Views on Gender Roles

3.9.3Christian Views on Gender Roles & Family

3.9.4Discussion Points: Secular Views of Gender

3.9.5Discussion Points: Motherhood & Family

3.10Gender & Theology

3.10.1Rosemary Radford Ruether

3.10.2Mary Daly

3.10.3Discussion Points: Ruether & Daly

3.10.4Discussion Points: Male Saviour & Female God

3.11Challenges

3.11.1Secularism - Sigmund Freud

3.11.2Secularism - Richard Dawkins

3.11.3Christianity & Public Life

3.11.4Discussion Points: Spiritual Values

3.11.5Discussion Points: Social Values & Opportunities

3.11.6Karl Marx

3.11.7Liberation Theology

Jump to other topics