to what extent can human knowledge tell us about God

• what did Aquinas argue?


  he argued that human reason can gain lesser knowledge of God, including:

  • God’s existence: through the teleological (design) and cosmological arguments.
  • God’s moral law through natural law theory.
  • God’s nature by analogy, through the analogies of attribution and proportion.
• what did Augustine and Barth argue?


  Barth’s argument is that it is dangerous to rely on human reason to know anything of God, including God’s morality. He said “the finite has no capacity for the infinite”, meaning our finite minds cannot grasp God’s infinite being.  Barth was influenced by Augustine, who claimed that after the Fall our ability to reason become corrupted by original sin. This is a problem for natural theology which wants to make use of reason. After the corruption of the fall, human reason cannot reach God or God’s morality. Only faith in God’s revelation in the bible works.
• what did Aquinas respond to Barth?


  Aquinas concludes that original sin has not destroyed our orientation towards the good nor is our reason always corrupted. Original sin can at most diminish our inclination towards goodness by creating a habit of acting against it. Sometimes, with God’s grace, our reason can discover knowledge of God’s existence and natural moral law. So, natural theology is valid.
• what are the three 'goods' that pre-fall human nature contain according to Aquinas’?

  
  

  1. the properties of a human soul, e.g. rationality.
  2. An inclination towards the good (telos) as a result of being rational.
  3. Original justice/righteousness; perfect rational control over the soul.
• “Participation of the eternal law in the rational creature is called the natural law”. – Aquinas
• what did Barth respond to Aquinas?


  Barth still seems correct that being corrupted by original sin makes our reasoning about God’s existence and morality also corrupted. Even if there is a natural law, we are unable to discover it reliably. The bad in our nature unfortunately means we cannot rely on the good. Whatever a weak and misled conscience discovers is too unreliable.
• what did Barth say about Aquinas natural theology?


  Aquinas’ natural theology undermines faith by making revelation pointless: If natural theology was valid then humans would be able to know God’s existence or God’s morality through their own efforts. Barth argues that would make revelation unnecessary. Yet, God clearly thought revelation was necessary as he sent Jesus. It follows that natural theology cannot be valid.
• what did Aquinas respond to Barth?


  Aquinas insists that his natural theology does not undermine faith but instead supports it. Aquinas’ arguments for God’s existence are only intended to show the reasonableness of belief in God. They at most show that there is evidence for some kind of God. This is nowhere near strong enough to actually replace faith. The Bible doesn’t contain reasoned arguments for God like that.
• Aquinas still accepts that we need revelation to gain the divine law. Similarly, regarding arguments for God, a posteriori reasoning only provides evidence that a designer or necessary being exists. Aquinas still accepts that we need faith to know the Christian God in particular exists.
• What is Calvin's concept of sensus divinitatis?

  It is the belief that all humans have an innate sense of the divine.
• How does natural theology relate to our senses according to Calvin?

  Natural theology deals with our other senses like sight, which help us gain knowledge of the natural world.
• What does the sense of divinity allow us to do?

  It allows us to sense God's existence.
• Why did Calvin believe there was no rational way to be an atheist?

  Because of the innate sense of divinity that all humans possess.
• How did Calvin view the beliefs of "backward peoples" and those "remote from civilization"?

  He believed they have a belief in God due to the innate sense of divinity.
• What does Calvin's argument about the sense of divinity suggest about God's existence?

  It suggests that God exists and has placed this sense in the hearts of all people.
• What is a criticism of Calvin's sensus divinitatis?

  The spread of atheism in the 21st century suggests that this sense of God doesn’t exist.
• How did the perception of atheism differ between Calvin's time and the 21st century?

  In Calvin's time, it was unimaginable for someone to be rationally atheist, while in the 21st century, atheism is more prevalent.
• What significant philosophical development regarding atheism occurred since David Hume?

  There has been significant philosophical defense of atheism since David Hume.
• In which region is atheism now considered the majority held view?

  In northern Europe, atheism is now the majority held view.
• What do many atheists claim regarding their sense of God?


  Many atheists say they have no sense of God.
• how did Plantiga defend Calvin?


  Plantinga defends the sensus divinitatis from the argument that not everyone has such a sense. He argues that sin has a noetic quality, meaning it changes someone’s ability to have knowledge and insight, which could block the sense of God.
• how does St Paul Roman 2:15 show human knowledge is useful for knowledge of God?


  “Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse”.

  Paul here seems to suggest that God’s qualities can be understood from what he has made, i.e. the natural world.
• what was Calvin's analysis Roman 2:15?


  Calvin was influenced by romans 1:20  but attempted to explain how it justifies natural theology without using human reason, i.e. the sensus divinitatis.
• What is Calvin's revealed theology primarily influenced by?

  Augustine’s views on the fall and original sin
• How does Calvin view the Garden of Eden in relation to God's design for the world?


  As God's intended design for the world as a paradise
• What effect does the fall have on the world according to Calvin?

  It disfigures the world, making it difficult for natural theology to reveal God
• What limitation does Calvin place on natural theology's ability to reveal God?

  It can only reveal the truth of God’s existence, not the full revelation of God
• What does Calvin emphasize about knowledge of God?

  It is not simply a matter of knowing that God exists
• “We know God, not when we merely understand that there is a God but when we understand … what is conducive to his glory”.
• we only truly know God when we know how to glorify God through worship and following God’s moral commands. Natural theology cannot achieve that knowledge. Jesus was God revealing himself and the Bible is a record of that revelation. We therefore require revealed theology; faith in Jesus and the Bible to have the full revelation of God’s existence. Calvin argued that people should see their mind as nothing more than a passive reception of the revelation of the Bible.
• what do Calvin and Barth rely on?


  Calvin and Barth rely on the classic protestant argument that we should not rely on reason to understand anything about God or God’s morality because original sin has corrupted our reason. We should just have faith in the Bible and that should be our only source of knowledge about God’s existence or morality. This argument relies on a traditional view of original sin that goes back to Augustine, that human nature is corrupted, including our ability to reason.
• How does Barth respond to the claim that Romans 1:20 justifies natural theology?

  Barth argues that natural theology leads to idolatry as indicated in Romans 1:25.
• What does Romans 1:25 say regarding the Gentiles?

  It states, "They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator."
• What does Barth claim about the consequences of natural theology?

  He claims it leads to idolatry and the worship of false idols.
• What does Barth mean by the 'qualitative distinction' between humans and God?


  It refers to the fundamental difference in nature between God and humans.
• How does Barth illustrate the misunderstanding of God in natural theology?

  He illustrates it by stating that God is experienced in natural things like birds and in humans or half-spiritual entities like Nation or Fatherland.
• What is the main argument Barth makes regarding natural theology and idolatry?

  • Natural theology leads to idolatry.
  • Romans 1:25 warns against exchanging truth for lies.
  • Worship of created things instead of the Creator.
• how can natural theology be defended against original sin?


  by denying the existence of original sin. Original sin being a totally false doctrine is very unpopular position in traditional Christianity but there are some serious theologians who hold that position, such as Pelagius and some liberal Christians. Liberal Christians would argue that the scientific evidence suggests that we cannot take the genesis story of creation, including the fall, as literal events. In that case, Augustine cannot be correct in claiming that humanity was cursed by original sin.
• how can original sin be defended?


  Augustine could be defended that his views on human nature can be derived from the evidence of his observations of himself and his society. For example, Augustine told a story about how, as a child, he stole a pear from a garden, not because he was hungry but just for the pleasure of sinning. He concluded even children desire to sin and so must be born that way. Concupiscence can also be observed: people have their own will overwhelmed by bodily desires, which Augustine takes to be evidence for original sin.
• “The long habit of doing wrong which has infected us from childhood and corrupted us little by little over may years and ever after holds us in bondage and slavery to itself, so that it seems somehow to have acquired the force of nature”. – Pelagius