WJEC/Eduqas RS for A2/Yr2: Religion and Ethics (DRAFT)

WJEC / Eduqas Religious Studies for A Level Year 2 and A2 Religion and Ethics

For religious believers, then, God, in allowing free will, does give up ‘control’ but the mistake would be to equate this with giving up omnipotence. Therefore, God does not lose omnipotence, nor do we need to redefine it, simply God chooses as and when to exercise omnipotence, to what extent and how far. It is this same principle that is at the heart of the debate between determinism and free will from a religious perspective. Augustine, Calvin, Pelagius and Arminius are all seeking an answer to the problematic relationship between predestination and free will. This may seem to challenge traditional notions of how the Christian God could be omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent; but it is not the same way as it is for philosophy. The key issue from a religious perspective is to offer a solution to understanding the nature of the terms ‘predestination’ and ‘free will’ in the light of God’s absolute omnipotence. Theologians focus much more on how our choices affect our salvation. Their concern is about whether our salvation is achieved through our own free ethical actions or whether our salvation can only be achieved through God’s actions and our choices have no ultimate effect on our salvation. In other words, theologians ask different questions from philosophers, such as ‘how much free will?’ and ‘how much does God choose to control and determine?’ Philosophers are more concerned about such questions as ‘do we have free will?’ or ‘to what extent do we have free will?’ per se; they are different because questions from a religious perspective are already encased within the belief in an almighty, omnipotent deity. In practice this involves positions that are not poles apart as the Specification may suggest. The issue for any religious concepts or theologies is not therefore, are free will and determinism compatible? The answer to this is clearly ‘yes’. The issue seems to be to what extent is this compatibility with omnipotence balanced or distributed between the two parameters of free will and determinism? Therefore, we may find that Augustine and Arminius share much more common ground, despite one defending predestination and the other free will, than do, say, Arminius and Pelagius who both defend free will. In short, if it helps students and teachers, there is still much debate about the precise nature of the arguments presented. The teachings of Pelagius: an introduction Key quote Pelagius is one of the most maligned figures in the history of Christianity. It has been the common sport of the theologian and the historian of theology to set him up as a symbolic bad man and to heap upon him accusations which often tell us more about the theological perspective of the accuser than about Pelagius. (Evans) There is a key paragraph from the writing of Pelagius that summarises well his basis for a doctrine of free will. He writes: You will realise that doctrines are the invention of the human minds, as it tries to penetrate the mystery of God. You will realise that scripture itself is the work of human recording the example and teaching of Jesus. Thus it is not what you believe (in your head) that matters; it is how you respond with your heart and your actions. It is not believing in Christ that matters, but becoming like him.

The theological problem appears to be, ‘on balance, how much free will do religious believers have?’

DRAFT

Two sets of Spec Content were given here, is this correct? – design

Specification content Religious concepts of free will, with reference to the teachings of Pelagius. The role of original sin, humanity maturing in God’s image and accepting the responsibility of free will, free will as used to follow God’s laws, the role of grace in salvation.

Specification content The teachings of Pelagius.

108