Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Human Freedom and the Freedom of Natural Processes: On Omnicausality, A-Causality and God’s Omnipotence

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

Abstract The article traces the development of causality in physical science and examines its functioning in theology, as well as its demand for a different approach to power, especially the omnipotence and omnicausality of God. The three main phases in the development of causality is briefly mentioned with special reference to some applicable notions of Hume, Newton and Kant. Some examples are given of developments that contributed to the erosion of the causality concept in the sciences during the nineteenth century. The possibility of thinking of God in a-causal terms is proposed. The idea of an omni-causal God is build upon a pre-modern monarchical view. The question whether the importance of God as an omni-causal agent forms part of our regulative thinking, is dealt with. Special attention is given to the way Karl Barth interprets our knowledge of God as well as God’s power. We take the stance that the idea of God’s omnipotence does not imply his omnicausality. This implies that he respect the freedom (autopoeticism) of nature as he respect the freedom of humans. This stance obviates the need to prove God as the magical force in or behind natural and physical events. The action of God is seen on the consequential side of events and not on its causal side.

Affiliations: 1: Research Institute for Theology and Religion, University of South Africa P. O. Box 392, 0003 UNISA Republic of South Africa dtoitcw@unisa.ac.za

10.1163/15743012-12341254
/content/journals/10.1163/15743012-12341254
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/15743012-12341254
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/15743012-12341254
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/15743012-12341254
2013-01-01
2016-12-08

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Religion and Theology — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation