“God as a Moral Agent (2)” by Abolghasem Fanaei

This article reports on the second part of a detailed inquiry into the nature of God's agency. The two main questions of this research are:

"Is God a moral agent?"; meaning, "Does God have a moral nature?"; and "Are God's essence, attributes, desires, will, and actions subject to moral evaluation and judgment, just as the essence, attributes, desires, will, and actions of human beings are?". If so, "Is divine morality the same as human morality, or does divine morality differ, wholly or partially, from human morality?".

The author compares three competing theories about the nature of God's agency and explores and explains the theoretical and practical consequences of adopting each of these three theories. These three theories are: "God as an autocratic agent", "God as a pragmatic agent", and "God as a moral agent". In the first part of this research, after outlining the generalities and introductory discussions, we addressed the theory of "God as an autocratic agent" and examined and critiqued this conception of God's nature. The second part of this research, presented in the form of the present article, deals with the other two conceptions of God's nature. In the third part, which will be presented in the form of another article, we will address God's role in practical theology and elaborate on the logical consequences of these three conceptions of God in practical theology.

This article delves into the second part of a comprehensive inquiry into the nature of divine ‎agency. The central questions guiding this research are:‎ ‎(1) “Is God a moral agent?” This probes whether God possesses a moral nature and if His ‎essence, attributes, desires, will, and actions are subject to moral evaluation, akin to human ‎beings.‎ ‎(2) If God is a moral agent, “Is divine morality identical to human morality, or does it diverge ‎entirely or partially?”‎ This article compares and critically examines the theoretical and practical implications of three ‎competing theories of divine agency: “God as an autocratic agent,” “God as a pragmatic agent,” ‎and “God as a moral agent.” The first part of this research, focusing on the conception of God ‎as an autocratic agent, was previously presented. This second part explores the remaining two ‎conceptions. A third article will elaborate on the consequences of each conception for ‎practical theology.‎

.

---

.

Receive the article in Persian

Receive the article abstract in English

.

---

.