Thomas Aquinas essentially defines omnipotence as the power to do all that is logically possible. Other theologians have similarly defined omniscience as the ability to know all that it is possible to know. In his interesting study on evil and providence, Peter Geach suggests that God is not omnipotent but rather "almighty." Emil Brunner also develops this concept in The Christian Doctrine of God (volume I, page 248ff).
Brunner contends: "The Biblical conception [of God's almightiness] means God's power over the whole universe; but omnipotentia means the abstract idea that 'God can do everything.'" See Brunner, p. 248.
This distinction seems theologically meaningful or substantial. What are your thoughts on this matter?
Hi Edgar,
ReplyDeleteI hope you and your family are well, my old friend.
I find Brunner's remarks intriguing. Perhaps I misunderstand, but if God is not omnipotent then it would seem that he does not fit the definition of what Plantinga argues makes for a "maximally great" being and thus weaken the force of the ontological argument for God's existence. Does Brunner address these issues? Also, do you know if Brunner advocates open theism?
Yb,
Nathan
Hi Nathan,
ReplyDeleteWe're doing well, Nathan. I hope you and yours are also getting along well.
I emphasize the point that Bruuner and Peter Geach both seem to make this distinction between divine omnipotence and almightiness. Brunner does not like the term "omnipotence" for God because of what the word's etymology seems to imply. Yet Brunner does accept the term "Almighty" (El Shaddai or Pantokrator). Of course, he is writing well before open theism rears its head, but I'm not sure that he would accept open theism whole cloth.
On the other hand, there are parts of Brunner's theology where he argues that God experiences "MOTUS" and he delineates the conceptual relationship between God and time.
Yb,
Edgar
The family is as well as can be expected, thanks for asking. Though, I'll spare you the details for another day... ;)
ReplyDeleteThanks for the useful information, Edgar. Not being familiar with Brunner's work, I should have checked the dating of his material first.
Yb,
Nathan
I understand about the family. You can be more specific later, if you like. :-)
ReplyDeleteI appreciate you asking about Brunner. The first volume of his Dogmatics is from the 1940s and it's good to remember that Brunner's theology is best understood within the context of Karl Barth, the putative most important theologian of the 20th century and Neo-Orthodoxy.