'Farrer then goes on to highlight the philosophical challenges posed by this construal of God. If God does not head or belong to a class of existents, if he is truly a unique, singular being, how can his existence be demonstrated? Every a posteriori argument in support of the existence of God assumes that which we seek to demonstrate. We cannot prove his existence by his effects, observes Farrer, “because we must first know that they are effects, and effects of a perfectly unique activity” (p. 7). But how do we identify the effects of an activity whose agent is transcendently singular? How do we distinguish them from the effects of creaturely agents? The reason I bring this up is simply to point out Farrer’s assumption of a classically Christian construal of the Deity whose existence he seeks to rationally demonstrate. Philosophy did not teach him this God; the Church did.'
Friday, 8 May 2015
Eclectic Orthodoxy: To Be or Not to Be: The A-being god of Theistic Personalists