A Theology Question
The question was raised in this space in recent days about whether, if the origin of the cosmos, being a necessary being, possessed of free will, but omnipotent, that origin could change its nature by its own act?
In other words, if God the Father is all powerful, can he abdicate that power, and make himself into something other than God the Father?
The question is more involved than it seems. There is a whole range of things we encounter in life where one can do something, in that one has the power, but one may not, in that one lacks permission.
In English, grammar mavins make a distinction between “I shall not” and “I will not” because the first expresses an expectation or prediction (“I shall not eat the moon”) and the second expresses a decision or commandment (“I will not eat my brother’s unwatched but yummy moon pie”).
(The mavins insist on confusing us by swapping the terms in the second person. “You shall not” is a commandment, whereas “You will not” is a prediction.)
In this case, we are dealing with a being that is, by hypothesis, a supreme being, an eternal being, which in turn implies pure actuality with no potential for change. The supreme being causes all motion but does not move, and does so willfully and deliberately.
That is, the world and all the events set in motion by this prime mover are contingent and not necessary. Contingent means things did not need to happen this way as opposed to another way: the cosmos could have been one where the speed of light was lower, or gravity repelled rather than attracted masses, or the earth was a cube rather than a globe.
Contrariwise, by definition the supreme being is a necessary being, or, rather THE necessary being, since their can be only one: the origin of everything that has an origin. His nature cannot be other than it is, because he is necessarily and logically what he is, and cannot be any other way.
To ask if he could change his nature by an act of will is to propose a paradox: can love be so overpowering in its love, that it actually becomes hatred, contempt and indifference? It is a nonsense question.
But love by definition is voluntary. If compelled, it might be infatuation, but is not love. So can love, if is voluntary, voluntarily cease and halt, do an about-face, and turn to hate? The answer is that it can do so but may not. It has the power, but not the permission.
If it did do so, it would change in its nature. Love that turns to hate is love no longer, but hate.
So in this case. If the supreme being, the necessary being, the uncaused first cause voluntarily changed his own nature, and became a contingent and mortal being like a man, he would no longer be the same person as himself. He would be something begotten out of himself: he would be his own son.
About John C Wright
John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title.
