The main purpose of this blog is to add to - as opposed to detract from - how we think of God. I say this explicitly because the majority of it attempts to explore the limitations of God. The reason for doing so is because if we place no limits on God and just say "God knows everything, can do everything and will always do the best thing" then our position is, quite frankly, laughable. I believe it is in the interests of every Christian to explore the nature of God in this way. He is, after all, big enough to handle it.
Consider the following logical argument:
(1) It is raining.
(2) There is water on the ground.
Now suppose I check the ground and realise that it is dry; no water. There are no logical flaws in the argument (okay, I admit there are plenty if you look hard enough, but I could have avoided this by using a strictly mathematical example) so what has gone wrong?
The answer, which I hope is clear, is that the initial assumption must be incorrect. "It is raining" implies "there is water on the ground". Therefore "there is no water on the ground" implies "it is not raining".
This is called the contrapositive in formal logic and it is simultaneously very simple and quite mind boggling. In general we say: If A implies B, then (not B) implies (not A). If we can start with a statement and logically deduce a statement we know to be false, we have successfully proven the original statement false.
What relevance does this have to God and His properties? It means that the properties must be wrongly attributed if we can begin with them as assumptions and deduce something that is plainly nonsensical. This is quite a fun way to falsify a statement; assume it is true and see if we can conjure up some ridiculous necessary consequence.
Let us first examine omnipotence; the apparent absolute power that God possesses. We all agree that, if God exists, then He must be pretty powerful. So we will aim to pin down just how much power God can have such that no contradictions can be construed.
Here is a problem with claiming that God is "all powerful":
(1) God is all powerful: He can do everything
(2) God can create a rock which He can not lift
(3) God can not lift the rock, so He can not do everything
If you view this as a silly hypothetical that proves nothing (which it really isn't) allow me to show you what else you have to believe, as a consequence of believing that God can do anything:
He can destroy Himself and is therefore not necessarily timeless.
He can create a being greater than Himself, and is therefore not the greatest conceivable being.
He can prove true statements to be false, and therefore can break logic.
All three of these conclusions are simultaneously ridiculous and a direct logical consequence of God being able to do absolutely anything. The last one, in particular, really is a killer. Even if we claim that God can not prove a true statement false (or a false statement true) but simply say that He can decide whether every statement is true or false we run into problems!
Consider the statement: "This statement can not be proven true or false"; if God is all powerful He can certainly either prove that the statement is true or that it is false. But either way this is a contradiction as it can not, by definition, be proven true or false. Take a few minutes to brood over this until you convince yourself that there is no loophole.
A being possessing total omnipotence runs into immediate and devastating contradictions. Such a being simply can not exist. A lot of people will at this point want it pointed that I have only shown that such a being can not exist logically. Maybe, they will think, God does transcend logic. You may be right, but at this point I can hardly hope to argue with you any further. Most atheists will, however, see this as a rather childish "triumph" and I struggle to disagree.
To ensure that we don't define God to be something that results in immediate contradictions, we should define God as "possessing all logically possible power". This feels like we are in some way limiting God by our flimsy rules, but in reality this definition encapsulates far more glory than the previous defintion, as it is actually logically coherent! A truly omnipotent being could not exist, so this revised definition is better; God possesses a property of power greater than that of an omniscient being.
Further we can argue that, although God theoretically could do pretty much anything, He will not do anything that is against His character. As He is unchanging and eternal, this really means that He imposes on Himself more constraints; more things He will not, and thus can not do. He can not create something which He does not want to create. This is the deeper magic that C.S. Lewis speaks of.
On to omniscience; "God possesses all knowledge". This is, if anything, a more ridiculous claim than the previous! Does, then, God know all logically fallacious statements? Does He know that 1+1=3, that "it is raining" implies "it is not raining", and that He possesses no knowledge? These are necessarily false statements. If God knew these statements He would be seriously mentally impaired!
Perhaps it would be more apt to say "God possesses all knowledge that it is logically possible for Him to know". After all, this school of thought seemed to work for omnipotence. Unfortunately we run into problems when we consider non-propositional knowledge; Does God know that He was born in Norwich? Of course not! If He did know this He would, again, be mentally deficient. But this knowledge is logically coherent; in fact I know that I was born in Norwich. Yes, God also knows that I was born in Norwich. But I, unlike He, can truthfully say "I was born in Norwich" and know it to be true.
Third time lucky. How about "God knows, and only knows, whether any given statement is true or false"? Not quite. We have ventured too far; by this definition God would not know that He is God, or indeed anything else about His own character; the statement "I am God" has no inherent truth value as it is entirely subjective, but God certainly should be able to say it and know it to be true.
Further, if God is sovereign then He chose our reality over all others, knowing exactly how each possible version of reality would play out. In other words God not only knows that "Obama is president" is true (though perhaps not for long) but also should know whether the statement would be true or false in all possible universes and time-frames. We need to loosen our definition to allow for this knowledge, for without it God could not be sure of being all-good when making decisions.
A concise definition escapes me, but something along the lines of "God knows, and only knows, the truth value of all statements - with respect to every logically possible set of circumstances and subjects when non-propositional" should do for now. As before, we have now arrived at a logically coherent definition of Gods knowledge, without restricting how we think of Gods knowledge; this definition increases the glory we assign to God. He is greater than an omniscient being could possibly be, as He exists!
The topic of benevolence and the problem of evil is one for another time, so we shall wrap up. What have we achieved? With these more precise definitions of Gods properties, the God we describe might actually exist. This might not seem like much of an accomplishment to a resolute Christian, but if you ever want to convince anyone that God does exist, and that further He loves them and sent His son to die for them, it makes sense to have a definition of God that doesn't result in immediate absurdity.
Whether you agree with me or not I hope you've enjoyed the post and can, with me, enjoy marvelling at the mystery of a sovereign God, who has every particle in the Universe in His complete control and yet cares intimately about every one of us!
No comments:
Post a Comment