Graduate studies at Western
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 64 (1):35 - 50 (2008)
|Abstract||I argue that Open Theism leads to a retreat from ascribing to God ‘complete omniscience’. Having surrendered this ground, the Open Theist cannot but retreat from ascribing to God complete omnipotence; the Open Theist must admit that God might perform actions which He reasonably expected would meet certain descriptions but which nevertheless do not do so. This then makes whatever goodness (in the sense of beneficence, not just benevolence) God has a matter of luck. Open Theism is committed to a partially ignorant God, one who is subject to the vagaries of luck for the efficacy of at least some of His actions and for His goodness.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Nicholas Everitt (2010). The Divine Attributes. Philosophy Compass 5 (1):78-90.
Alan Rhoda (2007). The Philosophical Case for Open Theism. Philosophia 35 (3-4):301-311.
Susan Peppers-Bates (2008). Divine Simplicity and Divine Command Ethics. International Philosophical Quarterly 48 (3):361-369.
Richard Swinburne (1988). Could There Be More Than One God? Faith and Philosophy 5 (3):225 - 241.
William Lane Craig (2000). Omniscience, Tensed Facts and Divine Eternity. Faith and Philosophy 17 (2):227--228.
Kevin Timpe (2007). Truth-Making and Divine Eternity. Religious Studies 43 (3):299 - 315.
Thomas V. Morris (ed.) (1987). The Concept of God. Oxford University Press.
David M. Woodruff (2007). Being and Doing in the Concept of God. Philosophia 35 (3-4):313-320.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #68,333 of 740,000 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,680 of 740,000 )
How can I increase my downloads?