Recap – Match the terms: Key Characteristics: Omnipotent A. God is supremely good. 2. Omniscient B. Has existed forever and will exist forever within time. 3. Omnibenevolent C. God is all knowing. 4. Eternal D. God is unchanging. 5. Immanent E. God exists outside of time. 6. Immutable F. God is outside of his creation and our reality. 7. Transcendent G. God is part of the world and his creation and suffers with us. 8. Everlasting H. God is all powerful.

Recap – Match the terms: Key Characteristics: Omnipotent H. God is all powerful. 2. Omniscient C. God is all knowing. 3. Omnibenevolent A. God is supremely good. 4. Eternal E. God exists outside of time. 5. Immanent G. God is part of the world and his creation and suffers with us. 6. Immutable D. God is unchanging. 7. Transcendent F. God is outside of his creation and our reality. 8. Everlasting B. Has existed forever and will exist forever within time.

Recap – Match the terms: Omnipotent God is all powerful. Omniscient God is all knowing. Omnibenevolent God is supremely good. Eternal God exists outside of time. Immanent God is part of the world and his creation and suffers with us. Immutable God is unchanging. Transcendent God is outside of his creation and our reality. Everlasting Has existed forever and will exist forever within time. Does it make sense for a being to have all these properties?

Looking a little closer - Omnipotence What does it mean to say God is omnipotent? Brainstorm some possible ideas / issues on your whiteboard.

Does this mean there is a limit on God’s power? Omnipotence – Version 1 God can do anything This would seem to be the obvious definition of “all- powerful” but it creates some issues, could God (if he was all powerful) do the following?: Create a 4 sided triangle. Force you to make a decision freely. Make a married bachelor. Create something totally black and totally white. Alter what has already happened? Does this mean there is a limit on God’s power?

Omnipotence – Version 1 God can do anything Religious philosophers such as Aquinas grappled with this issue of omnipotence hundreds of years ago, and they found it difficult to articulate. When Aquinas asks “Is God omnipotent?” he finds an immediate difficulty in a list of things God obviously can’t do as they are self-contradictory in some way. (For example: If God is immutable then he cannot change) This led philosophers to refine the definition of omnipotence to something less problematic.

God can do anything that is logically possible Omnipotence – Version 2 God can do anything that is logically possible For God to be able to do anything logically possible means God can do anything that does not involve a contradiction i.e. something that is possible, even if it is not currently true. So God would not be able to: Create a married bachelor Create something totally black and totally white. Create a 4 sided triangle But we could still say he is omnipotent as all 3 of these things involve a contradiction and are therefore logically impossible.

God can do anything that is logically possible Omnipotence – Version 2 God can do anything that is logically possible However, Aquinas highlights an issue here as well, he notes that there are some things that God cannot do, even though they are logically possible: “Could God create evil?” “No, God cannot sin.” Sinning is not logically impossible but theologians would support the idea that this is something God cannot do it goes against what we know of God. Nor can he act in any way that goes against his fundamental nature or which contradicts the other aspects of his perfection (e.g. He can’t walk – a perfect being wouldn’t need to walk. But this doesn’t affect his omnipotence.)

OMNIPOTENCE Omnipotence – Version 3 God can do anything that is logically possible and doesn’t go against his nature. It is still possible to say that God is omnipotent, despite the fact he cannot do the logically impossible (because it is impossible – no one could do it) and cannot go against his own nature (because it is his nature). Philosophers argue this to be true as no amount of “extra” power could allow God to do these things, thus he is omnipotent – all-powerful. This definition is not without it’s criticisms though. OMNIPOTENCE

How might a theist respond to this problem? Paradox of the Stone There remains a problem with the idea of omnipotence. Could an omnipotent being use its powers to do something that would limit those powers? Originally put forward by the Islamic Philosopher Averroes (1126-1198) the Paradox of the Stone asks simply – Could God create a stone too big for himself to lift? How might a theist respond to this problem?

How might a theist respond to this problem? Paradox of the Stone More recently this problem was illustrated by George Mavrodes who clearly outlined the choices offered to the believer and the problems with them: The first choice is to say that God can create such an unliftable stone, in which case there is something he cannot do and therefore is not omnipotent. The second choice is to say that God cannot create such a stone, in which case he is still unable to do something and is therefore not omnipotent. Either way the theist is forced to accept that God is unable to do a particular task and is therefore not omnipotent. How might a theist respond to this problem?

We could rephrase the paradox to make this clear: Paradox of the Stone Mavrodes thinks he has an answer to this problem without having to admit that God is not omnipotent: He believes that the paradox itself presupposes the possibility of something logically impossible – notably the idea that an omnipotent being can’t do something - this would require him to have the quality of non-omnipotence. “A stone an omnipotent being can’t lift” is not a possible thing, as a self-contradiction it describes nothing. We could rephrase the paradox to make this clear:

Paradox of the Stone “Can a being whose power is sufficient to lift anything, create a stone which cannot be lifted by him?” Suppose we allow that God can lift any stone, but cannot create a stone too big for himself to lift. Given there is no limit on his power for lifting stones, there is also no limit on his power for creating stones. So God lacks no power in either field. “It is more appropriate to say that things cannot be done, than that God cannot do them.” - Aquinas

An Alternate Way of Looking At It… “Can God create a stone too big for himself to lift?” Wade Savage offers a similar solution to the paradox, as he believes that Mavrodes has missed the point of the problem: Savage argues that the idea of “God not being able to create a stone God cannot lift” is not a coherent idea (similar to Mavrodes). Instead we should say “If God can create a stone, then God can lift it.” Essentially God can create a stone of any size then lift that stone, there is no limitation of God’s power here.

Paradox of the Stone – Why care? It seems a fairly trivial question, something that is more annoying than a serious issue but it leads to other problems the atheist may ask that are not trivial: Can an omnipotent God create something he will later have no control over? Can an omnipotent God create a world with free will and no evil? Neither of these questions are trivial, both have far reaching consequences for God – but both stem from a similar issue as the Paradox of the Stone.

Tasks Outline two problems with the definition of Omnipotence simply being “Can do anything”. Summarise the Paradox of the Stone for your notes, put it in your own words or create a comic strip / picture to explain it. Explain why Mavrodes and Savage both believe the paradox of the stone to be self- contradictory. Do you think they are correct? Does the Paradox still hold weight?

Other Properties – Eternal / Timeless For many believers, God is eternal. This means not just that he has no beginning or end, but that he exists outside of time completely. The whole concept of time does not apply to God. For example, God in his capacity as creator of the universe must exist outside of the universe in order to create it. As the universe consists of space and time, God must exist outside of space and time. Aquinas illustrates this view: Imagine someone sitting on top of a hill, watching people travel along a road beneath them. From the point of view of someone on the road, there will be people in front and people behind. But from the view of the observer on the hill, everyone on the road can be seen simultaneously. In a similar way, all of the time is simultaneously present to a timeless God.

Eternal / Timeless - Issues One problem with timelessness is that we just can’t conceive of it. Although Aquinas’ example may help a little, because we are temporal beings, we can never really imagine what it might be like for God to be timeless. Another problem is that if God is outside of time, then he must not be able to act within time. If God is timeless then how does God act on the world, for example through miracles, or when communicating with prophets? Even the creation of things in the world must have happened within time.

Solution? - Everlasting Instead of claiming that God is outside of time, we can conceive of God as having always existed and existing infinitely into the future. He has no beginning and no end but he exists within time alongside his creation.

Everlasting - Issues If God exists within time, how could he have been before time to create it? “God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.” -Genesis 1:5