Theological Opinions

[Rían]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

i guess you'd have to spell of this "evidence" for me

The evidence would be whatever it took for you to believe that Christianity is true. It doesn't matter what that is.

but, i probably wouldn't do anything different than i do now... i think i live a life that is pretty respectful of others from a moral point of view and that should be good enough for any "creator"

So where should God, IYO, draw the "good enough" line? Just below you? What if a rapist/murderer thought God should draw the line just below him? What if Mother Teresa thought God should draw the line just below her (which would probably cut us both out)? Why should a perfect God tolerate ANY wrongdoing, and if He does, where should He draw the line and why? Pretty tough on those people who are just below the line, IMO...

if this was not enough, and i was also expected to worship this creator (as some forms of christianity imply)... i don't think i would, even if i knew it would lead to eternal damnation... i could not be sincere in any such worship

A good definition of worship, IMO, is to speak the truth about someone. Would you admire a good bass player sincerely? Then why not admire someone who MAKES that bass player and gives them their body and the talents to play the bass so well?

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

I knew you would. I know that your view is more of a cross between predestination and free will, the logic of which I never have really grasped.

The Bible contains some concepts that can be tough to grasp, and many times a paradox (note - NOT a contradiction, just a paradox, which is a SEEMING contradiction) is used in order to teach or illustrate something. We are admonished to plan and be good stewards; OTOH, we are also admonished to "take no care for the morrow". There are lots of things like that. Human language cannot adequately convey everything, IMO. The Bible has some clear teachings on predestination, yet the verses on free will outnumber the verses on predestination by at least 1,000 to 1, as a rough guess. And I can see how a God outside of time would know what our choices are "ahead of time", yet to me that does not negate our free will. I"m aware of the other verses you've listed; some I think you've taken out of context and others I would agree with you that sometimes God causes a person to do something for His greater good. Yet I think overall, He has made humans in His image, and that includes the ability to make choices (although in His mercy He has limited our choices so we won't totally destroy each other).

I'm not saying that there's no human responsibility either. We do have a participation in what occurs. We experience things and do things and share in the blame.

Why should a just God make us share in the blame if it's not our fault what we do?

In the final analysis however, God is behind all things and teaches those he loves through all events.

In one sense I agree with the first part - God is certainly behind all things because He gives people life. And He certainly can teach those he loves though all events.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Radagast The Brown

I think that with the great power God has, he also has great responsibility (sounds like Spiderman ). It's sort of like being really powerful, to see the people who trust you being murdered systematically, even industrially, and ignore. It can be compared to the responsibility the US has now, as the leading power in the world today.

Who am I to advise God? But to answer the question - I'm sure he could've done something, if not to stop the murders completely, to minimize the number of murdered.

Where should God draw the line, IYO? Why should he only minimize the number murdered, instead of stopping all the murders? Why should he stop at the Holocaust? Why not stop the ALL murders? Why stop at murder - why not stop all cruelties, like when my son in a wheelchair gets laughed at by kids at the playground? Where do you think God should draw the line at stopping people's actions, and why?

[Lief Erikson]

Okay, here's one pretty long and detailed response to your post, RÃ*an .

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

The Bible has some clear teachings on predestination, yet the verses on free will outnumber the verses on predestination by at least 1,000 to 1, as a rough guess.

If you include every time God advises men or tells them to do something as an indication of free will, I guess you're right. However, I don't think that's a valid reckoning. God might have a good reason for telling people to do one thing and then making them do something else. It very clearly says in scripture that he did just that with pharoah at the time of the Exodus. I'm sorry to use the words "making them" do something else. It's a very poor choice. We have our own personalities, and I don't think God makes us act outside of those personalities. Just like a good author doesn't make his characters act out of character, but rather according to their own personalities, we all have the freedom to act according to our own natures. God writes his characters in such a way that their freedom to be themselves is not tampered with.

If I, as an author, chose to interact with the characters I write, I might well choose to tell them to do things. However, I might also in my story write the characters refusing to obey me. I would have my own reasons for this- the improvement of the story structure, to add new layers of excitement and interest. God has different motivations. He wants us to know him personally, for unlike my book characters, his people have been given the breath of life. He wants us to see the negative consequences of rejecting him as well as the positive consequences of accepting him.

The fact that God tells people, "do what is right," does not necessarily mean that they have a choice. I could tell characters in my book, "do what is right," and then write what happens next. My characters will respond to my words according to their different personalities and backgrounds. I am writing what they do, yet they still have the freedom to be themselves, and if as themselves they reject my words, they (presuming that I am God) might show themselves to be unworthy.

God can still be in complete control of events, while saying, "do what is right." He can say, "do what is right," and then make people refuse to do what is right, in order to reveal himself in more ways. Again, "make" is a bad word, for it implies that they are acting in abnormal ways. God doesn't interfere much, as far as I can tell, with people's freedom to act according to their natures.

I have only seen one verse in the Bible so far (and I've read most of the Bible) that to me can most easily be interpreted as implying free will. That verse is a bit of a puzzle to me.

Isaiah 54:15- "If anyone does attack you, it will not be my doing; whoever attacks you will surrender to you."

The concept that if someone attacks it is not God's doing is not a predestination view but seems on first glance to imply free will. However, shortly after that comes a verse that says, "It is I who have created the destroyer to work havoc." I have created the destroyer to work havoc, not "I have created the destroyer who works havoc." Again, the word choice implies purpose and design.

54:15 is the only verse I've seen that seems to me to imply free will, though I'd be interested to see any other scriptural indications.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

And I can see how a God outside of time would know what our choices are "ahead of time", yet to me that does not negate our free will.

It means he created the universe in the way he did with the full knowledge of how it would turn out, when he could just as easily have created it a different way. He could have created a universe in which people freely chose good, and in which evil and pain never existed. However, instead he chose to create this universe. God chooses what reality he creates. It is part of his role as creator.

What are your thoughts on this thought?

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Yet I think overall, He has made humans in His image, and that includes the ability to make choices (although in His mercy He has limited our choices so we won't totally destroy each other).

Yes, we are made in God's image and with the same amount of freedom he has. That is the freedom to act according to our natures. God has only the freedom to act according to his nature. He cannot sin. He cannot do evil. His nature is Love, and evil can have no place in it.

In the same way, I have a set nature. I cannot suddenly be my brother. I cannot have his nature. I cannot have anyone's personality except my own. Sin is the only interferance in this freedom, for it prevents us from acting according to our natures, making us "slaves". So if it weren't for sin, we would be much closer to God's freedom. If we didn't have sin to deal with, the only barrier in freedom that I know of would be lack of knowledge, for lack of knowledge inhibits us from making the choices we would freely make by nature.

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Why should a just God make us share in the blame if it's not our fault what we do?

You've just asked exactly the same question that is asked and answered in Romans 9. "God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. One of you will say to me, 'Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?'"

And note that Paul does not answer, "We actually do resist his will, and therefore are deserving of blame." Rather, Paul answers:

"But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'why did you make me like this?'"

God has the right and the position as Creator to be the best judge of what should be made. If he decides to create people whose personalities are warped, who will ignore his words and who he has destined for destruction, he is the only one in the position to judge whether or not this is best. He is God, perfect in love, wisdom and holiness.



My favorite predestination analogy, the author analogy:

When I write a book, I create villains. If I destroy my villains, this is just. My audience is eager to see justice done to the villains (I differ from them in this . I like my bad guys.[/tangent]). The personalities of the characters I am writing are evil. Unless I interfere with their free will, they often just won't be changed. Because of their actions and their personalities, they deserve judgment. Of course, I created those personalities. Therefore, I actually am responsible for the evil those characters do. Does that mean that those characters don't deserve judgment? Actually, it doesn't mean that. Because those personalities are malevolent, even though I made them so, those personalities must be judged. Was it right for me to make them like that?

This comes back to Paul's question. God has the right to make people's personalities as he chooses, for he is God and in the best position to judge. We cannot judge, for we are in no position to do so. We cannot see what God sees when he creates "vessels" from lumps of clay.

[Rían]

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

My favorite predestination analogy, the author analogy:

If I responded an hour ago, I would have said, diplomatically, that I think your analogy is a poor one, and then explain why.

But I'm responding now, and frankly, I think that analogy stinks to high heaven.

I just found out a friend has a brain tumor.

I'll go back to the first response and an explanation in a day or so, because I think the dignity of man deserves a thoughtful, thought-out response.

[Lief Erikson]

I am very sorry about your friend, RÃ*an. I will be praying.

[Nurvingiel]

I'm sorry about your friend RÃ*an.


I don't believe in predestination either. Lief, I don't think we can apply your analogy to the world. If your villain makes a decision, it's because you wrote it that way. Thus, none of your characters really have free will, because you plan all their choices and thoughts for them. (I know, sometimes characters develop a life of their own, but the ideas you get from them still only happen if you write them down, thus, they still don't have free will.)

I do not believe that God plans our thoughts and actions. I think He gave us free will so we could make our own decisions. That makes our faith (in any religion) more special - we actively chose this when we could have done something easier.

People (not you, but generally) can use predestination as a cop-out. If the world is full of evil, well, it's because God let it be there or put it there, so we can't do anything about it. Or you (general) could say it's God's fault there is evil in the world.

If there is predestination, then what is the point of working hard, of loving, or of trying to do good? If you succeed or fail, it was already destined to be so. With free will, your choices have meaning and value.

In short, I just don't think God is a micro-manager.

[Grey_Wolf]

I sometimes see life as walking on a mountain, when I have a job and safe income for example I'm about half-way up the slope and now that I'm unemployed I'm down at the bottom.

[Spock]

GW, a favorite saying of mine to help during times of stress:

“When faced with a mountain, I will not quit! I will keep striving until I climb over, find a pass through, tunnel underneath or simply stay and turn the mountain into a gold mine, with God's help.�

All the best.

[Grey_Wolf]

Originally Posted by Spock

GW, a favorite saying of mine to help during times of stress:

“When faced with a mountain, I will not quit! I will keep striving until I climb over, find a pass through, tunnel underneath or simply stay and turn the mountain into a gold mine, with God's help.�

All the best.

Thanks. Will keep it in mind. And I know sooner or later I'll get a job.

[Lief Erikson]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I don't believe in predestination either. Lief, I don't think we can apply your analogy to the world. If your villain makes a decision, it's because you wrote it that way. Thus, none of your characters really have free will, because you plan all their choices and thoughts for them. (I know, sometimes characters develop a life of their own, but the ideas you get from them still only happen if you write them down, thus, they still don't have free will.)

Of course, if you believe in free will, the analogy doesn't fit. I think it fits pretty well from a predestination standpoint, to explain predestination.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

I do not believe that God plans our thoughts and actions. I think He gave us free will so we could make our own decisions. That makes our faith (in any religion) more special - we actively chose this when we could have done something easier.

I look at it differently. We're agreed that the term free will is being used as meaning freedom from God, correct? So God does not choose what actions we make. We do. Granted?

In that case, God has no hand in our choices, by definition. If he has no hand in our choices, he is leaving them to random chance. To me, a God who assigns his creations' fates to random chance doesn't seem to care about them very much. I don't think that RÃ*an's view that predestination and free will work together really makes sense either, for it is a contradiction in terms. God can't make an impossible chess move without breaking the rules, even though he's omnipotent. He can't do what intrinsicly doesn't make sense. Therefore he cannot both control our fates and not control our fates. They're contradictory.

Furthermore, according to scripture, "broad is the path to hell, and narrow the path to life." One could very easily interpret this (from a free will standpoint) as meaning God has loaded the dice (what we do, he left to random chance) against us.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

People (not you, but generally) can use predestination as a cop-out. If the world is full of evil, well, it's because God let it be there or put it there, so we can't do anything about it. Or you (general) could say it's God's fault there is evil in the world.

Neither of these points means that predestination is wrong. I have said that it is God's fault that there is evil in the world, so I am one of the "general people" in that respect. The cop-out that we can't make a difference in the world doesn't make too much sense to me. Frodo Baggins in LoTR was able to make a difference. True, Tolkien wrote this, however, it was in Frodo's personality to do what he did. Frodo freely chose it. It would have been out-of-character for him not to choose it. God doesn't make us choose things that are out-of-character, or at least not even slightly often, so far as I know.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

If there is predestination, then what is the point of working hard, of loving, or of trying to do good? If you succeed or fail, it was already destined to be so.

How does that make it meaningless? The fact that it is predestined means that God has purpose in all that happens and designs reality for with righteous intentions. That means it has meaning from God in addition to the value we already see.

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

With free will, your choices have meaning and value.

One of the problems I have with free will is that I don't believe this is so. With free will, our choices come from us rather than from God. God is leaving our choices to random chance. He leaves our fates and lives to random chance. To me, this implies not caring. If what we do is left to random chance, that implies to me that it has little meaning or value.

When someone carefully paints a picture, that implies caring about what is created. When someone throws paint randomly at the canvas, that doesn't.

I admit, though, that predestination can be somewhat humbling. A negative aspect to free will belief is that some people might have a tendency to think they're better than other people, for they accepted the road to salvation while others rejected it. Predestination says that they were intended for salvation and others weren't, so we have nothing on which to base boasting.

[inked]

"By the way, Inked or RÃ*an, how would someone who believes in free will respond to that scripture? If some events are men's will rather than God's, how are these events "God's will for you in Christ Jesus"?"

God's will has more than one apect, Lief. There is God's absolute will which will be accomplished, then there is His conditional will which allows human freedom of choice that matters by the reservation of His omnipotence to that end, and then His permissive will, which allows the consequences of human's choices to play out in the created order.

Originally Posted by Lief Erikson

That verse says, "God bound all men over to disobedience," not, "God punished all men for disobedience." "Bound" implies tying, or restraining, or constraining. It implies the use of force, anyway. Look it up in the dictionary. Bound them to do something. What? Disobedience. Oh well . I know we just disagree on this, so let's look at some of the other verses in the chapter I hope you'll give me explanations for. Don't worry; I won't take you through all the predestination verses in the Bible. Just the ones in this chapter.

Right below verse 32, verse 31 says, "so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now receive mercy as a result of God's mercy to you." This states very clearly that there is a divine purpose in their disobedience. I think. How would you interpret that?

Another verse from the same chapter. Verse 25: "Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in." In other words, the hardening will continue until the number of Gentiles that God has in mind have come in, and then the hardening will stop. Coincidence? Not likely. The much more plausible interpretation is that God is in charge of their hardening, and will harden them until the number of Gentiles he has selected come in. Then, he will remove the hardness of heart.

Another verse, number 8. "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day." God gave them. God blinded them. God deafened them. And the following verses talk about eternal judgment coming as punishment.

Another verse, number 25: "I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in." This verse implies very strongly that God is in control of the amount of time that Israel will be hardened.

Verse 15: "For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world . . ." Their rejection is the reconciliation of the world? Verse 19 implies purpose in this. "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." It goes on to say that the branches were broken off because of unbelief, but that the new branches stand by faith. However, lack of faith is the reason the branches were broken off, while verse 19 clearly points out a purpose in their being broken off. The "because" and the "so that" have different meanings, and the word choices send different messages.

Then in the conclusion of the chapter, the glorious doxology, "For from him and through him and to him are all things." "From him . . . are all things."

Those are the predestination scriptures I can find from that chapter alone. There are lots, lots more. Consequence you mentioned, and consequence is a part of God's judgments and choices. However, God's choices go further back then that, they go deeper. He doesn't just give people the consequences. He chooses it all beforehand. And if someone persecutes me, this is God's will for me in Christ Jesus. "From him . . . are all things." All things, not, all things except A and B and C . . .

Well, I can find a lot more predestination scriptures than that. There are many, throughout the Bible. When I believed in free will, a few years ago now, I found myself swimming against the tide of scripture, because I thought at that time that predestination was an ugly concept. Now that I've thought free will through a bit better, I see that it actually seems the more ugly concept, and predestination the brighter one.

I'll understand if you don't have time to respond about all of these verses, though I'll also be a bit disappointed .




I'll respond to you soon, Brownjenkins. No time yet.

Lief,

"Bound over" is 'delivered to the natural consequences of the actions in question,' IMHO. I do not think it a precise description of God's action with a metaphorical rope. Rather like the experience we all had of "hot" when our parents or caretakers said, "No! Don't tough that, it's hot!" If we persisted, and we all did, we learned naturally what the experience of hot was all about. One could say that, "Mrs. Jones, seeing Tommy reach for the grill's side, tried to warn him, "No, Tommy; HOT!," but being unable to arrest his rapid movement, saw him bound over to the tougher aspects of having a nervous system that functioned as it was supposed to!"

God knew that mankind would potentially disobey Him and He absolutely willed that the sovereign purpose of Creation would not be ruined eternally by that disobedience - even though its redemption would require the Incarnation, Passion, Crucifixion, and Resurrection to accomplish it! So all men were bound over to disobedience (in the same sense as above) so that the Redemption might cover all humans.

Israel's hardening is Israel's choice. God observed it just like Paul observed it, except that being in God's milieu, eternity, the present is ever "now" to all moments. Paul, creaturely observed in the milieu of time, which we necessarily regard as prior to, in the instance of, or not yet arrived. Paul's constraint of language and experience does not constrain God in that fashion.
And it was this form of language that socked Calvin and all TULIPS into the logical (from human perspective) straitjacket you adhere to. Foreknowledge in God's experience of the eternal now is not constraint.

Israel's rejection of the Messiah is the world's gain. Note that in John 12, it is the arrival of the Greeks (Sir, we would see Jesus.) that causes Jesus to say "The time is at hand." Israel had been intended from the very beginning to be God's messenger to the nations, but having become insular and self-righteous, was not accomplishing that purpose. There, YHWH incarnated to accomplish it and spread the Redemption to the entire aion/cosmos/world/age.

Branches were broken off by the intent of the branches and God graciously grafted in the gentiles. This is the whole Israel as God's vineyard motif and I refer you to Jesus' parables and the OT prophets for the context.

Yes, Paul and John both use the word LOGOS to describe the creative activity of the Word eternally pre-existent with the Father, but begotten, and they also use the concept of procession of the Spirit eternally between the Father and the Son. We call this the Trinity and everything that exists because of the outpouring creativity of the Godhead. I refer you to the Creeds, the anteNicene Fathers, the Definition of Chalcedon, and the Athanasian Creed for the thematic outline of acceptable terminology involved in this Johannine and Pauline (and indeed apostolic) understanding. Paul stated in his speech at Athens that even the pagans knew this (as your poet's have said). That has interesting implications too.

It is interesting that Roman Tradition will not assert predestination to the TULIP degree but admits of its existence in some senses. The Greek Orthodox churches accept it in a limited way as well. Both these ancient Traditions deny Calvin's formulations. I will stay on the side of the angels in this one with both Rome and Byzantium and Canterbury, for that matter.

edit: I will not admit of a God who can be circumscribed or apprehended by my intellect or logic alone. He'd be too much like me and what BJ et alia all fear!

'Nuff?

[brownjenkins]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

The evidence would be whatever it took for you to believe that Christianity is true. It doesn't matter what that is.

short of something that happened after i was dead, i can't concieve of anything i could witness that would make me believe in a christian god... even things which appear to be miracles can have alternate explanations, and they only point to the existance of some sort of "supernatural", not to what that supernatural is like

i.e. a catholic priest praying over a dying cancer patient and that patient being miraculously cured (even if it was me) would not necessarily lead me to say, "catholicism is true!"... it could be luck... it could be that the priest himself had some powers we do not quite understand... it could be that the patient had some powers we do not understand and the priest just set them in motion... or it could even be that there is some sort of god who helps out in situations like that from time to time, but is not necessarily the "catholic god" as the bible defines him

in fact, if i was to believe in god, i would most likely hold to the belief that he does exist, but that all the religions that exist in the world are only human interpretations of what they think god is about... and no one religion has it completely right (or completely wrong)

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

So where should God, IYO, draw the "good enough" line? Just below you? What if a rapist/murderer thought God should draw the line just below him? What if Mother Teresa thought God should draw the line just below her (which would probably cut us both out)? Why should a perfect God tolerate ANY wrongdoing, and if He does, where should He draw the line and why? Pretty tough on those people who are just below the line, IMO...

that's another issue i have with catholicism... i don't think god should draw a line... humans draw the line between right and wrong because we have to live side by with one another... we can not survive without each other, so we must make rules in order to survive

god (if you accept him as all-powerful, etc.) doesn't have this problem... he has all the time in the world, and all the resources in the world... it seems to me to be somewhat of a copout to say... "here's free will and here's the rules you should live your life by... follow them to be saved, break them and be damned"

i would hope that a true loving creator would put a lot more effort into bringing his creations along... all his creations

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

A good definition of worship, IMO, is to speak the truth about someone. Would you admire a good bass player sincerely? Then why not admire someone who MAKES that bass player and gives them their body and the talents to play the bass so well?

i would admire him if he was humble... the bible doesn't paint god as being very humble

[Spock]

Spoken like a true fan of Dana Scully.

[Lief Erikson]

I don't know, Inked. I might respond later. I've got a winter college course final exam the day after tomorrow, so I don't think I could manage it until then. After that though, maybe. If the discussion hasn't completely changed subjects by then.

[Insidious Rex]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

in fact, if i was to believe in god, i would most likely hold to the belief that he does exist, but that all the religions that exist in the world are only human interpretations of what they think god is about... and no one religion has it completely right (or completely wrong)

Bingo...

Its all about the veil... How we interpret the divine.

[Spock]

Originally Posted by Insidious Rex

Bingo...

Its all about the veil... How we interpret the divine.

Michael Jackson Spotted in Robe and Veil

MANAMA, Bahrain - Pop star Michael Jackson was spotted shopping in a Bahrain mall on Wednesday, hiding his face behind a veil and donning a black robe traditionally worn by women in the Gulf.

[Insidious Rex]

Well perhaps Michael Jackson is the key to the divine...

"Only through me little boy will you achieve complete nirvana..."

[Spock]

lolrotf

[inked]

Originally Posted by brownjenkins

short of something that happened after i was dead, i can't concieve of anything i could witness that would make me believe in a christian god... even things which appear to be miracles can have alternate explanations, and they only point to the existance of some sort of "supernatural", not to what that supernatural is like

i would hope that a true loving creator would put a lot more effort into bringing his creations along... all his creations

i would admire him if he was humble... the bible doesn't paint god as being very humble

Ah, BJ, nothing could get you to believe. That is a "issue of the will, not of the evidence."

As to the effort He put into His creation, the claims are stupendous!

John 1:1 - 4 He made it and without Him nothing exists.
Phillipians 2: 5 -11 He emptied Himself of the glory that is His and became human to restore that which mankind had lost by disobedience through His perfect obedience, even to death on a cross.


That's pretty humble by any standards, BJ.

And the whole creation is to be made anew through that Power He demonstrated when He rose from the dead.

But, you have already decided that you will not believe. **shrugs**

There is not absence of evidence, BJ; there is absence of consideration of evidence.