Not exact matches
Classical theism, we believe, can
affirm the genuineness of evil and reconcile this with God's omnipotence and omnibenevolence.
What has been shown thus far is that Plantinga, working within the premises of
classical theism, is able to develop a notion of «C» omnipotence and hence
affirm the genuineness of evil.
But when criticizing the concept of God
affirmed by
classical free will
theism, process theists seem to reverse their position by arguing that a being who could coerce should at times do so.
«9 We now realize that whatever is real and important must somehow include the present world of becoming which we most certainly know and
affirm; and this means that we find the
classical form of Christian
theism simply incredible.
Consequently, I hold that if one is to continue to
affirm with the Christian tradition that faith in God is both indispensable and reasonable, it is incumbent on him to show that such faith may be explicated in other terms than those of
classical Christian
theism.
The second main reason for the rejection of this form of
theism is that one can accept it only by
affirming the entire
classical metaphysical outlook of which it is integrally a part.
More recently, 3 however, I have advocated reserving the term «
classical theism» for the version of traditional
theism affirmed by
classical theologians such as Augustine, Anselm, and Thomas, according to which God is timeless, immutable, and impassible in all respects — a doctrine that implies that creaturely freedom must be denied or
affirmed at most in a Pickwickian, compatibilist sense.
Two traits of
classical theism were that it either (like Stoicism and Spinozism) clearly and consistently denied human freedom (in the straightforward sense of actions being not wholly determined by their causal conditions) or else ambiguously or contradictorily
affirmed and denied causal determinism — truly classically in Aquinas's statement that God strictly causes our actions but in such fashion that we were also free to act otherwise.