Morris "Our Idea of God"

Book Summary

Thomas V.Morris, Our Idea of God: An Introduction to Philosophical Theology. Downers Grove, Ill: IVP, 1991.

Known by his University of Notre Dame students as ‘TV Morris’, this modern scholar is a former rock guitarist. He has recently become one of the most active business speakers in America due to his unusual ability to bring the greatest wisdom of the past (talks on philosophy) into the challenges we face now. ‘Our idea of God’ is just one of his attempts to show how some simple, straightforward philosophical methods of thinking can cast clearer understanding on some conceptual and obscure theological matters. This book deals mainly with the doctrine of God- “whether the conception of God can be articulated which is both philosophically plausible and biblically faithful”. It covers the theology issues such as the compatibility between God’s foreknowledge and human freedom, God’s omnipotence and its difficulties, the ontological argument of God, and the heavily debated Incarnation and Trinity.

Morris starts by affirming that the biblical understanding of the creation of human beings will help us to comprehend His existence and nature. There are many views held throughout the centuries on this God-concept such as pantheism and monotheism. Various methods must be applied to test its validity to arrive with the best conception of God possible. To this, Morris applies and develops Anselm’s theory of Perfect Being Theology which states God must be the greatest possible being conceived. This means, God has the greatest possible array of compossible great-making properties which is unsurpassable by any other possible array. Methods are then applied to deduce that no one and nothing can rival God’s greatness. This particular theology focuses on the intrinsic properties of God, which Morris used as the starting point to argue for God’s existence and His nature. It is then subsequently being complemented with creation theology, and possibly enhanced with explanatory theology.

The structural representations of God’s goodness are presented by three models of divine goodness, which are appropriately thought of as complementing one another; i.e. the plenitude of being model, the duty model and the benevolence model. All these models agree on God is necessarily good, and above morality. The starting point however to start affirming the moral goodness of God is based on the benevolence model.

(1) God engages in acts of supererogation. God’s act is one which goes beyond the call of duty. Human agents exist in a state of being bound by moral duty. Consequently, we act under obligation. However, God is of a quite different ontological status; He is not bound like us. Therefore, he does not share our relation to moral principles; he does not have obligations. This is the moral component of divine goodness. (2) God acts in perfect accordance with moral principles and together with (1), forms what Morris called ‘axiological’ goodness of God. Although God’s goodness consist in His acting perfectly in accordance with moral principles (necessary moral truths), these principles are dependent on God himself, being willed by Him out of the necessity of his nature.

Morris splits the discussion of the power dimension of God into the practical knowledge (ability), the moral dimensions (capability) and will power (determination). Along these discussions, when theists ascribe God as omnipotent, we are affirming that God has every power that is logically possible to possess. Thus, the popular paradox of the stone was dismissed as an incoherent-act description as it is a logical impossibility.

Perfection attributed to God also requires essential omniscience. Problem with foreknowledge of God and free will of human will is discussed with great lengths here. Many views are presented (such as Molinism and Presentism) at this second level to the conception of God. The extent of God’s knowledge to some extent, is open to dispute and still negotiable. However as Morris explained, within the perfect being theology discussed, the bible can be used as our basic conception of God. Christian theists thus can share the same theism regardless of how we might differ on our understanding of the completeness of God’s knowledge.

Chapters 6 to 8 are inter-related. Morris ventures into the philosophical arguments on the being of God, which concerns the real metaphysical unity of God (Chapter 6). This topic is intimately related to the ideas of divine eternity and immutability (Chapter 7). This chapter ask the question ‘Is God atemporal eternal or temporally everlasting?’ Morris weighs both atemporalists and temporalist arguments with substantial correctness of both views. Chapter 8 ends the ontological argument with the necessity of creation, and how God’s being viewed from previous two chapters will give different conclusion to our understanding of our relation to Him. The last chapter is dedicated to explore the Christian conception of God, which are not shared in other religions and philosophical theists- incarnation and trinity. Even with the so-called mystery to these doctrines, Morris expounded convincingly that they are not entirely incomprehensible to human thought to grasp, although they remain majestic truths.

Evaluation

In many standard philosophical introductory books, students are introduced to "proofs" without any philosophical context and certainly without a balanced treatment of theism and the reasons and intuitions that fuel theistic argumentation. In Our Idea of God, Morris introduces and advances theistic understanding and the concept related to it in a very simple and thorough manner. This is not so much a book of straight apologetics for reasons to defend theistic arguments, but it does however highlights favourable evidence behind Christian convictions (especially on stand-alone doctrines such as incarnation and trinity) and introduces us to the art and pleasure of philosophical reflection.

It is not so much that all of Christian theology somehow depends solely on the success of the philosophical arguments. After all, philosophical theology is just one of the many ways we do theology. Nevertheless, Morris has succeeded in showing forth the importance of philosophical knowledge in all his arguments. Readers will find that philosophical knowledge enables one to appreciate more deeply the meaning of the doctrinal formulation of the ideas we have of God- that He is perfect goodness, omniscient, omnipotent, and God incarnate, with the distinguished argument of kenotic theory which is seen as depriving Jesus’ divinity (Morris favours the two-views theory).

It is also the case that the philosophical concepts elaborated in this book are central, basic, and critical. The nature of being, existence, contingency, necessity, properties, causality, dependence and many others are intricately connected. The fundamental issues in metaphysics play a role in this argument, and vice versa. The most fundamental for Morris and which every Christian theistic philosopher should aspire to emulate, is his construction of a philosophical theology, which is thoroughly consonant with the biblical portrayal of God. Ideas of God expounded are not just incidental, logically consistent with the biblical materials, but rather ideas that are deeply adjusted to the biblical revelation.

Morris’ warning on Christian’s easy adaptation and support of the metaphysical doctrine of creation such as the ‘Big Bang theory’ warrants further evaluation and thinking on our part. Just as Big Bang did not endorse any form of divine creation, the present Intelligent Design not necessarily supports the Christian God as the Intelligent Designer, but rather another scientific theory of physical cosmology with a possibility of a designer. On this, maybe a supplement text on cosmological arguments should accompany Morris.

The only possible difficulty in rating the usefulness of this book is the level of the readers in their knowledge of both theology and philosophy. Readers should break apart the arguments and learn the art of philosophical arguments. It is all about clarity and precision. It is surgical thinking. Only then, we can come away with opportunity for a more fruitful engagement with theology.