IS THE CONCEPT OF GOD COHERENT? (25 marks):
(pink = out of spec content)
LOA: No, the concept of God is not coherent.
CR: The Euthyphro Dilemma shows God’s omnipotence and omnibenevolence contradict
each other.
INTRO: The concept of God slightly differs amongst people and religions, but they mostly
agree that God is maximally great and perfect with qualities like omnipotence (the power to
do anything logically possible), omniscience (direct knowledge of all that it is possible to
know), and omnibenevolence (God’s will is in accordance with moral values). Leibniz argues
that the concept of God can only be incoherent if these perfections contradict each other,
and although he claims this cannot happen since the qualities are simple and unanalysable,
we may object that such contradictions do arise. This is seen in issues such as the paradox
of the stone, the euthyphro dilemma, omniscience vs free will, and the challenge of God’s
relationship with time. Therefore, I will argue that the concept of an omnipotent,
omnibenevolent, omniscient God is incoherent, because these qualities put together
contradict each other. The crucial reason for this is the euthyphro dilemma, which shows that
God’s omnipotence and omnibenevolence are incompatible.
PARA 1 - GOD AND TIME:
P) Everlasting vs Eternal + problems
A) Anthony Kenny: Eternal existence is illogical (simultaneity)
C) Stump and Kretzmann: ET simultaneity (not illogical)
E) Strong response, but eternal existence is still vague and ambiguous, so may not be
metaphysically possible (not crucial, but requires more explanation)
PARA 2 - OMNISCIENCE VS FREE WILL:
P) Principle of Alternate Possibilities + Outline issue (we cannot reject free will)
A) Solution 1 (God as Everlasting) > weak (limiting definition of omniscience)
Solution 2 (Compatibilism)
C) God’s knowledge is certain and specific
E) Solutions are weak, Omniscience and Free Will are incompatible
PARA 3 - EUTHYPHRO DILEMMA (CR):
P) Divine Command Theory + Outline issue
A) Lemma 1 (Independent Morality) challenges God’s omnipotence
C) Changing morality is logically impossible > wrong bc no contradiction in denying morality
E) So if Morality is Independent, God is not Omnipotent + Plato’s Form of The Good
A) Lemma 2 (Dependent, Arbitrary Morality) challenges God’s omnibenevolence and
morality collapses into a tautology
C) God’s will is structured by his love > but that is also arbitrary
E) Omnipotence and Omnibenevolence are incompatible
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the concept of God as an omnipotent, omniscient,
omnibenevolent being is incoherent, because of the ambiguity in the existence of an eternal
being, the contradiction between free will and God’s omniscience, and crucially the problem
(pink = out of spec content)
LOA: No, the concept of God is not coherent.
CR: The Euthyphro Dilemma shows God’s omnipotence and omnibenevolence contradict
each other.
INTRO: The concept of God slightly differs amongst people and religions, but they mostly
agree that God is maximally great and perfect with qualities like omnipotence (the power to
do anything logically possible), omniscience (direct knowledge of all that it is possible to
know), and omnibenevolence (God’s will is in accordance with moral values). Leibniz argues
that the concept of God can only be incoherent if these perfections contradict each other,
and although he claims this cannot happen since the qualities are simple and unanalysable,
we may object that such contradictions do arise. This is seen in issues such as the paradox
of the stone, the euthyphro dilemma, omniscience vs free will, and the challenge of God’s
relationship with time. Therefore, I will argue that the concept of an omnipotent,
omnibenevolent, omniscient God is incoherent, because these qualities put together
contradict each other. The crucial reason for this is the euthyphro dilemma, which shows that
God’s omnipotence and omnibenevolence are incompatible.
PARA 1 - GOD AND TIME:
P) Everlasting vs Eternal + problems
A) Anthony Kenny: Eternal existence is illogical (simultaneity)
C) Stump and Kretzmann: ET simultaneity (not illogical)
E) Strong response, but eternal existence is still vague and ambiguous, so may not be
metaphysically possible (not crucial, but requires more explanation)
PARA 2 - OMNISCIENCE VS FREE WILL:
P) Principle of Alternate Possibilities + Outline issue (we cannot reject free will)
A) Solution 1 (God as Everlasting) > weak (limiting definition of omniscience)
Solution 2 (Compatibilism)
C) God’s knowledge is certain and specific
E) Solutions are weak, Omniscience and Free Will are incompatible
PARA 3 - EUTHYPHRO DILEMMA (CR):
P) Divine Command Theory + Outline issue
A) Lemma 1 (Independent Morality) challenges God’s omnipotence
C) Changing morality is logically impossible > wrong bc no contradiction in denying morality
E) So if Morality is Independent, God is not Omnipotent + Plato’s Form of The Good
A) Lemma 2 (Dependent, Arbitrary Morality) challenges God’s omnibenevolence and
morality collapses into a tautology
C) God’s will is structured by his love > but that is also arbitrary
E) Omnipotence and Omnibenevolence are incompatible
CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the concept of God as an omnipotent, omniscient,
omnibenevolent being is incoherent, because of the ambiguity in the existence of an eternal
being, the contradiction between free will and God’s omniscience, and crucially the problem
