One of this week’s reading is Theodore Drange’s article “Incompatible-Properties Arguments: A Survey”, in which he presents several arguments aimed at showing that various attributes of God that many theists affirm result in contradictions. In my view, most of these alleged contradictions are fairly easy for a careful theist to avoid. Others are more challenging. Here’s one that I find particularly interesting:
The Justice versus Mercy Argument
1. If God exists, then he is an all-just judge.
2. If God exists, then he is an all-merciful judge.
3. An all-just judge treats every offender with exactly the severity than he/she deserves.
4. An all-merciful judge treats every offender with less severity than he/she deserves.
5. It is impossible to treat an offender both with exactly the severity that he/she deserves and also with less severity than he/she deserves.
6. Hence, it is impossible for an all-just judge to be an all-merciful judge. (from 3-5)
7. Therefore, it is impossible for God to exist. (from 1,2,6)
As Drange notes, many theists seem to want to affirm all of the premises, but this lands them in a contradiction. Is this a convincing refutation of theism? Or can a theist plausibly deny one or more of the premises (esp. 1-4)? If so, which premise should the theist reject and why?
Feel free to address this or any of Drange’s other arguments.
If I were a theist the I would try and refute premise one and three, that God is an all just judge, on the grounds of biblical history. In the old testament God was a punisher of the wicked and was very angry. Yet in the new testament he got less angry with humanity after Jesus came and forgave all of our sins, as the Christians put it. In this way I would argue that since Jesus saved all of us from our sins, God became an all merciful judge and judges less severely for our actions. Though the Christians use one bible, I feel compelled to say they would argue with biblical relevance, as the bible changes the way God’s moods are so does God change his moods. Thus he went from an all just judge to an all merciful judge when Jesus died, again all of this from what I know of Christian theology and their potential to argue this point. This is not necessarily what I believe, just what I think a person could use to argue this point.
I think that this argument can be overturned by God also being all-knowing. The theistic God is perfect and knows why He does things. God also has divine foreknowledge of “the greater picture.” I think it is possible for God to act accordingly to the individual case, because God knows what is in the best interest of the individual involved. (In order to better teach a lesson.) God chooses whether he should be more merciful for one person or give the exact deserved punishment for another. One person may better learn God’s lessons through mercy, another may need justice. I don’t think that this is contradictory. Do you think it is possible for God to be able to do both, according to the circumstances?
Interesting idea, Ben. As I understand your thought, God is not essentially either all-just or all-merciful. He can’t be if he can change from one to the other. This amounts to a rejection of premises 1 and 2 of Drange’s argument.
Shannon, your reply is a little different, but I think it also amounts to a rejection of premises 1 and 2. God, on your proposal isn’t essentially either all-just, or all-merciful. Rather, God is sometimes just and sometimes merciful, deciding whether to dole out justice or mercy on a case-by-case basis. That makes sense to me.
This comment has been removed by the author.
I have a two part comment
First is in response to your post. I find there no reason for anyone to believe God is all-just or all-merciful. There is nothing in the Bible that I have read that states God’s character as one who in every decision acts all-merciful and in every judgement all-just. I also have a lot more knowledge of the Hebrew bible than the new testament, so it may be placed in there. In which I would easily say I don’t believe in that God so I have no problem here. In the bible God acts meciful to some and justly to others and most are examples of stories for the sake of apoint not historical writings. So Dange cannot disprove the God of Israel by this contradiction.
second part is that there are many contradictions with our concept of God which include Him being immutable(unchangeable). I believe if theists want to believe G-d is personal, loving, a creator with intentions and omniscient (in my case anyway) they cannot celieve he is immutable. God has to be mutable in a way for the last one is because I believe He is within time and experiences the world and its events inline with us. In this case He can be omniscient,omni benevolent, and omnipotent and not have a problem of evil since he does not foresee events of evil he can stop. So while he experiences the world within time he knows everything there is to know right now. And also he changes in ways like he had intentions and then created, he knows different things at different times, and if you want that he is personal to your life and loving. At least thats a really really brief summary of what I think of these contradictory concepts of God