Would an Omnipotent God Be Accountable for Human Choices: An Exploration of Theistic Responsibility and Implications

Introduction

In the ongoing debate between atheism and theism, one recurring question is whether an omnipotent and omniscient God would be accountable for human choices. This inquiry leads to deeper philosophical discussions on the nature of free will, divine sovereignty, and moral responsibility. In this article, we will explore the concept of divine accountability, examine arguments from both atheist and theist perspectives, and discuss the implications that may arise if an omnipotent God is deemed responsible for human actions.

Background

The question of whether a supreme being should be held accountable for human choices stems from two primary philosophical concepts: determinism and compatibilism. Determinism posits that all events, including human decisions, are predetermined by prior causes, while compatibilism maintains that free will can coexist with determinism, allowing for moral responsibility despite the deterministic nature of reality.

The Atheist Perspective

Atheists often argue that if an omnipotent and omniscient God exists, then He would be responsible for creating a world in which humans are predisposed to make specific choices based on their inherent natures. If such a being exists, it logically follows that this deity is accountable for human actions since they stem from the very design of reality.

Theistic Responses

Divine Sovereignty and Human Free Will

One common response among theists is that while God may possess ultimate sovereignty over creation, He has granted humans genuine free will to make moral choices. This position allows for the coexistence of divine providence and human autonomy, thereby absolving an omnipotent deity from direct responsibility for human actions.

Moral Responsibility and Human Agency

Another response involves emphasizing the role of human agency in shaping our decisions. Theists argue that although God may possess complete knowledge of every event in history, He does not interfere with or dictate individual choices. In this view, humans bear moral responsibility for their actions because they have been endowed with free will by a loving Creator who desires genuine relationship and mutual accountability.

Implications

If an omnipotent God were held accountable for human choices, several significant implications might arise:

Moral Absolution of Individuals

If divine predestination is accepted as the primary determinant of human behavior, then individuals could no longer be held morally responsible for their actions since they are merely following a predetermined script written by an all-powerful being.

Challenges to Theodicy and Divine Justice

The problem of evil, or theodicy, would become even more perplexing if God were accountable for every action committed within His creation. How could a just and loving deity permit—or worse yet, orchestrate—suffering and injustice? Such questions pose significant challenges to traditional conceptions of divine justice.

Consequences for Human Relationship with God

If an omnipotent deity is responsible for human choices, then the nature of our relationship with this being would necessarily be altered. It could lead to a perception of puppetry rather than genuine love and devotion, as individuals might struggle to find meaning in their actions if they are ultimately predetermined by divine will.

Counterarguments from Theistic Philosophers

Alvin Plantinga’s Free Will Defense

Noted Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga offers a defense against the problem of evil by arguing that God allows for genuine human free will as a means of achieving deeper moral goodness and love. In this view, an omnipotent deity may be ultimately responsible for creating beings capable of moral agency but is not culpable for individual choices made in response to that freedom.

William Lane Craig’s Molinism

Prominent philosopher and theologian William Lane Craig posits a middle knowledge perspective known as Molinism, which suggests that God possesses comprehensive understanding of every possible world He could create, including the free decisions individuals would make within those worlds. According to this view, an omnipotent deity chooses to actualize a specific world based on His sovereign purposes while still preserving human free will and moral responsibility.

Conclusion

The question of whether an omnipotent God should be held accountable for human choices is complex and multifaceted. While atheists argue that such a being would inevitably bear responsibility for our actions, theists offer various defenses emphasizing divine sovereignty, human agency, and compatibilism between determinism and free will. Ultimately, the implications of attributing direct responsibility to an omnipotent deity are far-reaching, impacting our understanding of moral responsibility, justice, and even the nature of our relationship with God Himself.

References

• Craig, W. L. (1998). The Only Wise God: A Response to Process Theism. In G. R. Evans & C. S. Gibson (Eds.), God, Freedom and Responsibility (pp. 245-264). Routledge.
• Plantinga, A. (1974). God, Freedom, and Evil. HarperCollins.