Is belief in God’s existence sufficient to put one’s trust in him? Flashcards
(11 cards)
Introduction
- Clarify the question hinge
- Outline two epistemological bases for Christian belief
- Outline Natural theology
- Outline revealed
Clarify the question: It is not about whether we can know God exists (philosophical arguments cover that).
The question is about whether belief in God’s existence alone is enough to put trust in Him.
Two key epistemological bases for Christian belief:
• Faith (trust in God’s revelation)
• Reason (natural theology)
• Most theologians agree faith should be the foundation, but debate exists on reason’s role.
Natural theology: knowledge of God via human reason, especially through:
- Reasoning about the natural world (Catholic view, e.g. Aquinas).
- Sensing God’s presence (Protestant views, e.g. Calvin).
- Revealed theology: knowledge of God through divine revelation (Jesus, Bible).
Introduce the tension: Is knowledge of God’s existence through reason enough for trust, or is faith in revealed theology necessary?
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1: Aquinas and Natural Theology – Reason as Basis for Belief and Support for Faith
Paragraph 1: Aquinas and Natural Theology – Reason as Basis for Belief and Support for Faith
A01
Aquinas accepts human reason cannot fully understand God’s infinite nature but can know:
• God’s existence (cosmological, teleological arguments)
• Moral law (natural law theory)
• God’s nature by analogy
Reason provides probable evidence, not absolute proof; this supports faith but does not replace it.
• Aquinas sees natural theology as leading the mind to admiration, reverence, and love of God (God’s goodness seen in creation inspires trust).
• Aquinas and Catholic tradition view faith and reason as complementary (Pope John Paul II: “two wings”).
• Aquinas acknowledges original sin, but argues it does not destroy reason entirely; reason still inclines us toward good (synderesis).
• Aquinas balances human nature as containing both good and bad – reason can still guide trust in God with God’s grace.
Paragraph 1: Aquinas and Natural Theology – Reason as Basis for Belief and Support for Faith
Strengths
• Strength: Aquinas offers a nuanced, hopeful view allowing natural theology to encourage trust in God.
• Strength: Avoids undermining faith since reason cannot fully prove God.
Paragraph 1: Aquinas and Natural Theology – Reason as Basis for Belief and Support for Faith
Weaknesses
• Weakness: Barth criticizes Aquinas—original sin corrupts reason so much that natural theology is unreliable and dangerous.
• Barth warns natural theology risks idolatry by equating creation with Creator, undermining need for revelation.
• Barth’s view suggests belief in God’s existence from reason alone is insufficient to put trust in Him.
• Aquinas’ approach implies that belief in God’s existence (reason) can justify trust but only as support to faith, not a substitute.
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2: Protestant Views – Faith and Revelation as Essential for Trust
Paragraph 2: Protestant Views – Faith and Revelation as Essential for Trust
A01
• Influenced by Augustine, Calvin, and Barth, Protestant theology emphasizes original sin corrupting reason.
• Calvin’s sensus divinitatis: innate sense of God’s existence, but sin can block it (Plantinga).
• Modern atheism challenges Calvin’s idea, questioning universality of sensus divinitatis.
• Romans 1:20 used to justify natural theology, but:
• Calvin interprets as sensing God’s existence but not fully knowing Him without revelation.
• Barth argues Romans 1:20 warns against reliance on natural theology, which leads to idolatry (Romans 1:25).
• Calvin argues true knowledge of God is not just knowing He exists but knowing how to glorify Him, requiring revealed theology (Bible, Jesus).
• Barth insists faith in revelation is necessary because reason is too corrupted post-Fall.
• Emil Brunner tries middle ground: reason is partially intact (formal imago dei) and can grasp God’s preserving grace, but full knowledge requires revelation.
Paragraph 2: Protestant Views – Faith and Revelation as Essential for Trust
Strengths
Strength: Faith in revealed theology gives a secure foundation for trust beyond uncertain reason.
Strength: Explains why trust must be more than intellectual assent to existence—it requires knowing God’s character and commands.
Paragraph 2: Protestant Views – Faith and Revelation as Essential for Trust
Weaknesses
Weakness: Plantinga’s noetic effect of sin to explain atheism is questionable (good atheists exist).
Weakness: Brunner’s compromise seems inconsistent to Barth, since sin corrupts all aspects of humanity.
The existence of atheism challenges universal sensus divinitatis, implying reason or sensing alone may not suffice for trust.
This tradition argues belief in God’s existence alone (natural theology) is insufficient to trust God; trust requires faith in revealed knowledge.
Conclusion
Belief in God’s existence through reason (natural theology) offers important but limited knowledge.
Aquinas’ Catholic view sees this as a support to faith, not replacement, allowing reason to ground trust but emphasizing need for grace.
Protestant tradition (Calvin, Barth) warns original sin corrupts reason and natural knowledge; faith in revealed theology is essential for genuine trust.
Modern challenges (atheism, critiques of original sin) complicate the debate but do not negate the need for faith for trusting God’s moral character and promises.
Line of argument:
Belief in God’s existence alone is necessary but not sufficient to put one’s trust in Him.
Trust requires more than intellectual assent; it requires faith in God’s revealed nature, moral will, and promises.
Reason can help point towards God and support faith, but ultimately trust depends on faith in revealed theology.
Therefore, while natural theology provides a rational basis, it is faith rooted in revelation that makes trust in God possible and justified.
