Assess the claim that the universe provides no evidence for the existence of an
omnipotent God (35)
AO1: Select and demonstrate clearly relevant knowledge and understanding through the use
of evidence, examples and correct language and terminology appropriate to the
course of study. (21)
AO2: Sustain a critical line of argument and justify a point of view. (14)
Did you include?
yes
developed Comment: TA/SA/PA
What made it successful?
If no, what should have been
included and why?
Explanation of the concept of omnipotence
3 ways to understand
Do logically impossible
Do logically possible
Simple description of God’s power
Descartes: God can do everything
Philosophical and logical problems
Aquinas logically impossible actions eg 2+2=5
are not ‘proper things’ you can do or not do.
God can’t change: immutable(however if he
makes choices he must change)
God can’t sin
C.S Lewis agreement ‘meaningless
combinations of words do not acquire a
meaning because we prefix them with ‘God
can’
Theological problems
Hebrews 6:18 ‘it is impossible for God to lie’
Paradox of the stone
God is almighty
Peter Geach (capacity for power over
everything)
God can do all things logically possible
Anthony Kenny ‘a narrower
omnipotence…possession of all logically
possible powers….logically possible for a being
with the attributes of God to have’
J.L Mackie: God’s omnipotence is incoherent
(he must be able to do everything but there are
definite limitations)
Solutions to paradoxes
George Mavrodes’ solution to paradox of stone
(logical impossibility
William of Ockham’s solution: 2 powers of God
Absolute power (before creation)
Ordained power (options currently available to
God)
Conclusion
Problem of evil will always conflict with God’s
omnipotence
Could traditional theodicies provide the
answer?
Did you include?
yes
developed
Comment: TA/SA/PA
What made it successful?
If no, what should have
been included and why?
Used accurate technical terms
Used good connectives to link and contrast
philosophers
Clear and organised using good grammar
and spelling
Analysed and contrasted the different
theories using clear evidence and
sustaining the argument
Conclusion that brings the question
together
Overall grade and comment (phrases used are from the marking criteria)
Student comment
P: Positive
E:Error
N: Next step
Student target and how you will achieve it
Mark scheme
Assess the claim that the universe provides no evidence for the
existence of an omnipotent God. [35]
AO1
Some candidates may begin with an explanation of what it might mean to
say that God is omnipotent. For some Christians the definition may be
straight-forward in the sense of being without limits. However candidates
may be able to explain that philosophically the definition is much more
complex. They may, for example, address the question of whether God
could create a stone too heavy for Him to lift. It is important however
that they go beyond the discussion involved in the definition and address
the issue of whether or not there is evidence for there being a God with
this attribute within our universe. Some may, for example, explore the
issue of what would count as evidence in this context. They may, in a
contrary way, explore the extent to which the existence of evil in some
form or other would point to a lack of evidence for an omnipotent God.
Alternatively, some may look at the complexity and order in the universe
and use them as evidence that not only does God exist but that He would
need to be all powerful to have arranged such a large and well-ordered
universe.
AO2
Again it is important that in their AO 2 response candidates focus on an
evaluation of the evidence for or against the existence of an omnipotent
God and not just slip into an answer to the question. Does an omnipotent
God exist? Their evaluations should be integral to the particular line they
take and not be a separate part of the essay; that way the views they
express will come out of the explanations they are making and not be
attached as a sort of GCSE appendix. So, for example, if they are using a
scientific explanation for the issue of God’s omnipotence they may
critically assess the views of scholars such as Hawking, Dawkins or
Polkinghorne.
Hodder revision booklet
Assess the claim that the universe provides no evidence for the
existence of an omnipotent God. [35]
AO1
 Explain what the implications of God being omnipotent are,
and if there is evidence for his omnipotence.
 You could examine the responses of the theodicies of
Augustine and Irenaeus.
 Or, you could look at the universe and consider its order and
complexity.
AO2
 You need to evaluate the evidence for or against the existence
of an omnipotent God.
 You could critically assess Polkinghorne Dawkins or Hawking.
 Or you could critically assess the theodicies.
Examiner’s report
Q4 Assess the claim that the universe shows no evidence of the
existence of a omnipotent God.
This was a popular question, but produced some responses which
were attempts to use pre-prepared answers. For some candidates it
was the opportunity to write at length about Boethius or to use
general Problem of Evil essays.
Many candidates wrote about the alleged dilemma of an omnipotent
God creating a stone too heavy to lift, sometimes paying scant
attention to the part of the question about evidence from the
universe rather than logical puzzles. Some candidates simply wrote
out proofs for the existence of God, ignoring ‘omnipotent’ in the
title. Some candidates suffered because they did not know what
omnipotence meant, confusing it with omniscience, benevolence or
omnipresence.
Many candidates were able to go through the variety of different
views on omnipotence with critical success. Useful discussion of
‘where’ God may be situated in relation to the spacio-temporal
universe gave candidates a deeper basis for discussion in some cases
although not all candidates were able to establish relevance.
Most candidates were able to identify that this question could
require a discussion of the problem of evil and so were able to
provide a variety of levels of discussion on this front. A few weaker
answers ended up discussing some of the classical arguments in a
very shallow way making the essay a hybrid between the problem of
evil and the classical arguments for the existence of God.
Few candidates identified the difficulty of providing evidence of a
non-physical being through the universe. Hick’s notion of epistemic
distance or the religiously ambiguous nature of the universe were
rarely discussed.