3 postscript - natural disasters
3.10 Having shown in Part 1 of this essay that Creator God exists and in Part 2 of this essay that God is both purposeful and benevolent and that the philosophical 'problem of evil' is in my opinion (as far as it relates to the existence of evil in humanity) a red herring, I will now examine the other humanist objection couched in the so called problem of evil, viz., the problem of natural disasters. It is said that a cosmos designed with these possibilities (and the human suffering that results) does not show a creator who is inclined to do good. This claim is not a sustainable argument as I shall now endeavour to prove.
3.11 It is evident that the natural cosmos is founded on risk. It is evident that the natural cosmos is temporal, viz., is subject to time and inclined to ‘run down’ with the passage of time. Therefore since creator God purposed the natural cosmos, it is evident that God deliberately created it with risk and decay and therefore humankind is created to exist in time subject to both risk and decay. The properties of ‘risk’ and ‘decay’ are not in themselves an indication of ‘ill-will’ on the part of God unless God has no intention of ever ‘redeeming’ mankind from the natural risk prone cosmos ( i.e., to deliver them from temporality).
3.12 I have already argued the evidence and reasonableness of God’s redemptive purpose and so natural disasters in themselves can’t be evidence of any lack of benevolence on the part of creator God. I have argued that it is reasonable to accept that God is inclined to do good, and that evidence of natural disasters based on the nature of the universe does not overturn this supposition, therefore it is reasonable to conclude that the supernatural creator God is personal and generally benevolent (i.e. good).
3.13 For any individual to have personal proof that the supernatural creator God is benevolent to them, they would need to enter into a ‘one to one’ relationship with this benevolent God in order to be able to prove that God is willing to assist them in choosing goodness with the prospect also of escaping eternally from the temporality of the risk strewn cosmos.
3.14 I have earlier shown that supernatural creator God exists and I have provided reasonable philosophical proof that this God is both personal, omnipresent in space-time and benevolent based on logic and empirical evidence. I have indicated logically that if you want further personal proof you would need to look for a personal relationship with this creator God. As for objections to God’s goodness derived from arguments relating to natural risk (tsunamis, earthquakes disease, genetic disorders, etc) put forward by others, e.g. N Warburton (of the Open University in Philosophy, The Basics, Routledge, 2004, p25, 26), I believe I have shown that the argument of 'the problem of evil' is misjudged, since we can’t have real freewill without a universal risk based cosmos.
4 Benevolent Creator God is omniscient.
4.1 We need to consider here what is really meant by omniscience. Does it mean God knows everything that will ever happen in space-time? Although it may seem reasonable to attempt to argue that God knows all events in space-time, this can only obviously be the case for events happening in the present and in the past, but is it reasonable to claim God knows every future event? God is benevolent (see Part 2 for proof), thus God has deliberately created a risk based universe so that intelligent independent beings can genuinely act in freewill and either draw on the resource of God’s Spirit or not do so. We obviously do not know whether or not God knows the detail of all future events, however let us examine both scenarios. If God really always knows whether and when we will choose to love God's grace, then God doesn't necessarily influence our choice. However it could be the case that God deliberately applies self-limitation in respect of foreknowledge: in this scenario God is not less than omnipotent, deliberately unknowing of the detail future, but nevertheless knowing its final outcome and meets God's total objective in creation. Thus either way God may also be described as omniscient.
4.2 Which ever is true God is no less almighty or no less perfect. God may warn us what will happen if we don’t mend our ways, and may be limited in knowing what we will actually choose to do, much as a master chess player may know all the combinations that may fall from the current position, but has no power to over-rule his opponent’s actual choice of each move.
4.3 Thus religious claims should not insist on divine unlimited omniscience, but claim rather the positive omniscience of knowing the direction in which all creation (inclusive of the history of mankind) is headed. It is reasonable to believe that God does not yet know the individual fate of autonomous beings because it may be that genuine autonomy for sentient beings to share in God’s eternal purposes, requires this. The theological need for God's unlimited omniscience may be related more to the static concept that God is external to space-time, but a different world view such as for example God living in the ever present of space-time while space-time events pass through God's Mind, would allow independent space-time beings the freedom of choice to love God without the precise status of God's omniscience impinging in any way on God's almightiness, etc.
4.2 So I conclude that the supernatural personal benevolent omnipresent creator God is eternally omniscient, but is self-limited within space-time by virtue of the purpose in the creation of autonomous beings to freely share eternity with God.
5 Benevolent Creator God is Almighty
5.1 Here I will argue that this God is almighty both in the natural and supernatural realms. However first we need to agree a qualification of what is meant by almighty. Does it just mean all powerful? Can it include a situation where God limits God’s own power in practice? So could it be that God is almighty in the supernatural realm, but self-limiting in the natural cosmos? It is I believe quite reasonable to use the term almighty for a supernatural being who is creator even if that being is deliberately self-limiting in choosing to create a risk based creation inclusive of autonomous beings capable of choosing to be eternally independent of their creator God. Thus I feel no further need of proof in this respect that God is in fact almighty.
6 Conclusion
I have shown proofs by means of logic and reasonable empirical evidence that the omniscient omnipresent personal benevolent creator God exists and is almighty and that the so called problem of evil is misjudged and an unsustainable argument.
0 comments:
Post a Comment