Why Did The One Not Remain Within Itself?
God's creative act, if genuinely free, would ground the existence of creatures without necessitating them. Since God is perfectly responsive to reason, his freely creating requires that he have an adequate but non-coercive reason to create. A coercive reason for an act is one that outweighs the...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Contributors: | |
| Format: | Print Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
University Press
[2019]
|
| In: |
Oxford studies in philosophy of religion
Year: 2019, Volume: 9, Pages: 106-164 |
| Standardized Subjects / Keyword chains: | B
God
/ Creation
/ Foundations of
|
| RelBib Classification: | AB Philosophy of religion; criticism of religion; atheism NBC Doctrine of God |
| Summary: | God's creative act, if genuinely free, would ground the existence of creatures without necessitating them. Since God is perfectly responsive to reason, his freely creating requires that he have an adequate but non-coercive reason to create. A coercive reason for an act is one that outweighs the reasons for any alternative act, whereas an adequate reason is one that is not outweighed by the reasons in favor of any alternative act. How, in the absence of an offsetting reason not to create, is God's adequate reason not also a coercive reason, i.e., one that would necessitate creation? Chapter 7 argues that God's creating and God's remaining within himself each have to be understood as determinate manners in which God may affirm his own unsurpassable goodness. Cantorian reflections are then deployed to explain how God's extra, i.e., un-offset, reason to create does not give him more of a reason to create than to not create. Finally, God's actual reason to create is identified. |
|---|---|
| Reference: | Kritik in "God's Perfect Will (2022)"
|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Oxford studies in philosophy of religion
|