I think it means exactly that. If it is inevitable that you will give $5.00 to a beggar tomorrow, how can you do otherwise? For if you don't give the beggar the money, then it was NOT INEVITABLE.Homer wrote:Just because it is inevitable that I will do something does not mean that I will not willingly, without coercion, decide to do it.
Open Theism and Determinism
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
The typical way people avoid open theism AND determinism at the same time is by believing:
1. God decided to create time (but not subject Himself to it)
2. God decided to make creatures with libertarian free will (but maintained the right to intervene)
3. God let time play out with the combination of free creatures and His divine intervention
In such a scenario, it is thought, open theism is avoided b/c God knows the future and determinism is avoided b/c God created genuinely free creatures (didn't determine how they would choose).
I suggest, however, that while this classic Arminian response sounds reasonable at first glance, it doesn't actually avoid either open theism or determinism.
How so?
Well, even if step 3 took less than a nano-second from God's perspective, God was still 'open' toward the future during that process. In other words, you cannot avoid the idea that God did not know what was going to happen in the sequence as the sequence played out. This view only avoids that God doesn't know the finished sequence now. So the view doesn't completely avoid open theism. It just avoids the idea that the future is still open. It once was, but now is not.
As for determinism, this standard arminian response avoids determinism as the sequence played out (we were given genuine freedom), but it cannot avoid the fact that the sequence did indeed already play out (from God's perspective). This view avoids the idea that God predetermined all outcomes, but it does not avoid the idea that all outcomes are now determined in the sense that they can not play out other than how God 'saw' them play out. They weren't predetermined, but they are now determined.
Given that the classical arminian view does not exactly avoid either determinism or open theism, I think it makes more sense to pick between those two views... and that is not a difficult choice for me to make.
1. God decided to create time (but not subject Himself to it)
2. God decided to make creatures with libertarian free will (but maintained the right to intervene)
3. God let time play out with the combination of free creatures and His divine intervention
In such a scenario, it is thought, open theism is avoided b/c God knows the future and determinism is avoided b/c God created genuinely free creatures (didn't determine how they would choose).
I suggest, however, that while this classic Arminian response sounds reasonable at first glance, it doesn't actually avoid either open theism or determinism.
How so?
Well, even if step 3 took less than a nano-second from God's perspective, God was still 'open' toward the future during that process. In other words, you cannot avoid the idea that God did not know what was going to happen in the sequence as the sequence played out. This view only avoids that God doesn't know the finished sequence now. So the view doesn't completely avoid open theism. It just avoids the idea that the future is still open. It once was, but now is not.
As for determinism, this standard arminian response avoids determinism as the sequence played out (we were given genuine freedom), but it cannot avoid the fact that the sequence did indeed already play out (from God's perspective). This view avoids the idea that God predetermined all outcomes, but it does not avoid the idea that all outcomes are now determined in the sense that they can not play out other than how God 'saw' them play out. They weren't predetermined, but they are now determined.
Given that the classical arminian view does not exactly avoid either determinism or open theism, I think it makes more sense to pick between those two views... and that is not a difficult choice for me to make.
-
kenblogton
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:39 pm
- Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
Reply to steve7150
People are free to believe what they wish. For a faith belief to be solid, it must be grounded in Scripture.
Thanks for answering Ken,
So you think the non free will part of creation is deterministic. It's generally believed man must have free will for true love to exist but how about Satan? Why would God allow Satan to have free will? I think Satan is a tool of God to accomplish God's purposes and he is not a fallen angel and that Isa 14 and Ezekial 28 are not about Satan. What do you think?
God gave Satan free will because He gave all the angels free will. In Luke 10:18, Jesus says He saw Satan fall from heaven and in 2 Corinthians 11:14, Paul tells us that Satan can masquerade as an angel of light. Isaiah 14 is about the king of Babylon, but verses 12-15 do not refer to a mortal; Ezekiel 28 is about the king of Tyre, but verses 12-15 do not refer to a mortal.
The creature (us) was made subject to vanity not willingly. Yet James says God does not tempt us therefore that seems to leave one option which is that Satan subjected them to vanity and/or Eve's potential lusts subjected her to vanity but both originated from God's hand.
"To know good and evil" You said Adam already knew good. But the knowledge of good and evil are in ONE TREE. You can't have one without the other. Couldn't God have put good in one tree and evil in the other? Couldn't He have put the tree of good right in the middle of the garden and the tree of evil in a far corner?
There is only one tree of the knowledge of good and evil indicated; If they had known of, and committed, evil before, they would have been kicked out of Eden then.
God created the heavens by His Spirit but He created the "crooked serpent" by His hand. I think creating the serpent is being contrasted with the rest of creation for a reason, because he is different then everything else. The crooked serpent , the old serpent is Satan.
In Job 26-31, Job speaks of God and His creation. Why do you think the crooked serpent is Satan and not the monster creature Leviathan?
kenblogton
People are free to believe what they wish. For a faith belief to be solid, it must be grounded in Scripture.
Thanks for answering Ken,
So you think the non free will part of creation is deterministic. It's generally believed man must have free will for true love to exist but how about Satan? Why would God allow Satan to have free will? I think Satan is a tool of God to accomplish God's purposes and he is not a fallen angel and that Isa 14 and Ezekial 28 are not about Satan. What do you think?
God gave Satan free will because He gave all the angels free will. In Luke 10:18, Jesus says He saw Satan fall from heaven and in 2 Corinthians 11:14, Paul tells us that Satan can masquerade as an angel of light. Isaiah 14 is about the king of Babylon, but verses 12-15 do not refer to a mortal; Ezekiel 28 is about the king of Tyre, but verses 12-15 do not refer to a mortal.
The creature (us) was made subject to vanity not willingly. Yet James says God does not tempt us therefore that seems to leave one option which is that Satan subjected them to vanity and/or Eve's potential lusts subjected her to vanity but both originated from God's hand.
"To know good and evil" You said Adam already knew good. But the knowledge of good and evil are in ONE TREE. You can't have one without the other. Couldn't God have put good in one tree and evil in the other? Couldn't He have put the tree of good right in the middle of the garden and the tree of evil in a far corner?
There is only one tree of the knowledge of good and evil indicated; If they had known of, and committed, evil before, they would have been kicked out of Eden then.
God created the heavens by His Spirit but He created the "crooked serpent" by His hand. I think creating the serpent is being contrasted with the rest of creation for a reason, because he is different then everything else. The crooked serpent , the old serpent is Satan.
In Job 26-31, Job speaks of God and His creation. Why do you think the crooked serpent is Satan and not the monster creature Leviathan?
kenblogton
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
God gave Satan free will because He gave all the angels free will. In Luke 10:18, Jesus says He saw Satan fall from heaven and in 2 Corinthians 11:14, Paul tells us that Satan can masquerade as an angel of light. Isaiah 14 is about the king of Babylon, but verses 12-15 do not refer to a mortal; Ezekiel 28 is about the king of Tyre, but verses 12-15 do not refer to a mortal.
OK so if Satan had free will why didn't God stop him from interfering with the testing of Eve. Eve was innocent and Satan is the Master Deceiver of the Universe, what chance did she have? Plus Eve already had these impulses. Why didn't God simply allow Eve to fight off her impulses without Satan?
I don't have time now to get into Isaiah 14 and Ezekial 28 , but i wonder if you didn't have an image of Satan being a perfect angel who fell because of pride if you would see him in these verses? His name is never mentioned and both sections specifically identify who they are talking about and similar language is used in other places in both these books. BTW Eden is an actual country the KIng of Tyre traded with. Many commentaries think that Satan's fall from heaven means that he lost his power.
OK so if Satan had free will why didn't God stop him from interfering with the testing of Eve. Eve was innocent and Satan is the Master Deceiver of the Universe, what chance did she have? Plus Eve already had these impulses. Why didn't God simply allow Eve to fight off her impulses without Satan?
I don't have time now to get into Isaiah 14 and Ezekial 28 , but i wonder if you didn't have an image of Satan being a perfect angel who fell because of pride if you would see him in these verses? His name is never mentioned and both sections specifically identify who they are talking about and similar language is used in other places in both these books. BTW Eden is an actual country the KIng of Tyre traded with. Many commentaries think that Satan's fall from heaven means that he lost his power.
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
But I could do otherwise. I just did not want to and God knew that and he knew that's what I would do. I don't see what's so hard about that.I think it means exactly that. If it is inevitable that you will give $5.00 to a beggar tomorrow, how can you do otherwise? For if you don't give the beggar the money, then it was NOT INEVITABLE.
-
kenblogton
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:39 pm
- Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
Reply to steve7150
OK so if Satan had free will why didn't God stop him from interfering with the testing of Eve. Eve was innocent and Satan is the Master Deceiver of the Universe, what chance did she have? Plus Eve already had these impulses. Why didn't God simply allow Eve to fight off her impulses without Satan?
If Satan has free will, God can't stop him from tempting anyone. In 1 Corinthians 10:13, God promises He won't allow us to be tempted beyond what we're able to handle. Eve told Satan that she & Adam were told by God not to eat of the forbidden fruit, but she allowed Satan to con her and chose to disobey.
I don't have time now to get into Isaiah 14 and Ezekial 28 , but i wonder if you didn't have an image of Satan being a perfect angel who fell because of pride if you would see him in these verses? His name is never mentioned and both sections specifically identify who they are talking about and similar language is used in other places in both these books. BTW Eden is an actual country the KIng of Tyre traded with. Many commentaries think that Satan's fall from heaven means that he lost his power.
In Isaiah 14:12, Satan is referred to by one of his titles, Lucifer (morning star) and that he was "cast down to earth" - earthly kings are not cast down to earth. In Ezekiel 28:13, Eden is referred to as "the garden of God" - not an earthly country.
Satan's power in mentioned in many places in the New Testament. For instance, in Acts 26:17-18, God tells Paul " I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.'"
kenblogton
OK so if Satan had free will why didn't God stop him from interfering with the testing of Eve. Eve was innocent and Satan is the Master Deceiver of the Universe, what chance did she have? Plus Eve already had these impulses. Why didn't God simply allow Eve to fight off her impulses without Satan?
If Satan has free will, God can't stop him from tempting anyone. In 1 Corinthians 10:13, God promises He won't allow us to be tempted beyond what we're able to handle. Eve told Satan that she & Adam were told by God not to eat of the forbidden fruit, but she allowed Satan to con her and chose to disobey.
I don't have time now to get into Isaiah 14 and Ezekial 28 , but i wonder if you didn't have an image of Satan being a perfect angel who fell because of pride if you would see him in these verses? His name is never mentioned and both sections specifically identify who they are talking about and similar language is used in other places in both these books. BTW Eden is an actual country the KIng of Tyre traded with. Many commentaries think that Satan's fall from heaven means that he lost his power.
In Isaiah 14:12, Satan is referred to by one of his titles, Lucifer (morning star) and that he was "cast down to earth" - earthly kings are not cast down to earth. In Ezekiel 28:13, Eden is referred to as "the garden of God" - not an earthly country.
Satan's power in mentioned in many places in the New Testament. For instance, in Acts 26:17-18, God tells Paul " I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.'"
kenblogton
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
If Satan has free will, God can't stop him from tempting anyone. In 1 Corinthians 10:13, God promises He won't allow us to be tempted beyond what we're able to handle. Eve told Satan that she & Adam were told by God not to eat of the forbidden fruit, but she allowed Satan to con her and chose to disobey.
Why would Satan have free will? The reason humans have free will is so we can choose God but why would Satan necessarily have free will? Even if God generally allows Satan free will why when Eve makes this decision which would contribute to the destiny of mankind , why allow Eve to be exposed to Satan the Master Deceiver of the universe? Does that seem like a fair contest? There really is only one reason why, which is that it meets His (God's) purposes.
Why would Satan have free will? The reason humans have free will is so we can choose God but why would Satan necessarily have free will? Even if God generally allows Satan free will why when Eve makes this decision which would contribute to the destiny of mankind , why allow Eve to be exposed to Satan the Master Deceiver of the universe? Does that seem like a fair contest? There really is only one reason why, which is that it meets His (God's) purposes.
-
kenblogton
- Posts: 147
- Joined: Tue Sep 10, 2013 1:39 pm
- Location: Barrie, Ontario, Canada
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
Reply to steve7150
Why would Satan have free will? The reason humans have free will is so we can choose God but why would Satan necessarily have free will?
Both angels and humans have free will. If angels did not have free will, Satan could not have chosen to disobey God, to rebel.
Even if God generally allows Satan free will why when Eve makes this decision which would contribute to the destiny of mankind , why allow Eve to be exposed to Satan the Master Deceiver of the universe? Does that seem like a fair contest? There really is only one reason why, which is that it meets His (God's) purposes.
God's purpose was for mankind NOT to sin. Adam & Eve and every human since has been exposed to Satan's tempting - why exempt Eve? The good that God brought out of our original parents' sin was Christ.
kenblogton
Why would Satan have free will? The reason humans have free will is so we can choose God but why would Satan necessarily have free will?
Both angels and humans have free will. If angels did not have free will, Satan could not have chosen to disobey God, to rebel.
Even if God generally allows Satan free will why when Eve makes this decision which would contribute to the destiny of mankind , why allow Eve to be exposed to Satan the Master Deceiver of the universe? Does that seem like a fair contest? There really is only one reason why, which is that it meets His (God's) purposes.
God's purpose was for mankind NOT to sin. Adam & Eve and every human since has been exposed to Satan's tempting - why exempt Eve? The good that God brought out of our original parents' sin was Christ.
kenblogton
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
There's nothing "hard" about it. But it doesn't deal with my argument above. You say, "I just did not want to". If you did not want to give the beggar the $5, and in fact didn't give him the $5, then it was NOT INEVITABLE that you would. However, we began with the premise that it WAS inevitable.Homer wrote:But I could do otherwise. I just did not want to and God knew that and he knew that's what I would do. I don't see what's so hard about that.Paidion wrote: I think it means exactly that. If it is inevitable that you will give $5.00 to a beggar tomorrow, how can you do otherwise? For if you don't give the beggar the money, then it was NOT INEVITABLE.
It still stands that if it is inevitable that you will give $5.00 to a beggar tomorrow, you cannot do otherwise. If you can otherwise, then it was not inevitable.
1. If God knows you will give the beggar $5 tomorrow, then you will give the beggar $5 tomorrow.
2. If you do not give the beggar $5 tomorrow, then God does not know that you will give the beggar $5 tommorow.
According to formal logic, sentences 1 and 2 are logically equivalent. This implies that if the first is true then so is the second.
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: Open Theism and Determinism
In Isaiah 14:12, Satan is referred to by one of his titles, Lucifer (morning star) and that he was "cast down to earth" - earthly kings are not cast down to earth. In Ezekiel 28:13, Eden is referred to as "the garden of God" - not an earthly country.
The title "Lucifer" was never used prior to Isaiah 14 and it was never used after Isaiah 14, so there is no confirmation it means Satan. In fact "morning star" which the KJV translates as "Lucifer" is used for Jesus in Rev 22.
As far as angels having free will, we see in Job that Satan asks God for permission to attack Job. God allows Satan but limits the damage Satan is allowed
to inflict. Job is likely the oldest book in the bible and right from the start we see God limiting Satan. So before Genesis we have evidence that God could have kept Satan out of the garden but He didn't because allowing Satan in was part of God's purposes.
The title "Lucifer" was never used prior to Isaiah 14 and it was never used after Isaiah 14, so there is no confirmation it means Satan. In fact "morning star" which the KJV translates as "Lucifer" is used for Jesus in Rev 22.
As far as angels having free will, we see in Job that Satan asks God for permission to attack Job. God allows Satan but limits the damage Satan is allowed
to inflict. Job is likely the oldest book in the bible and right from the start we see God limiting Satan. So before Genesis we have evidence that God could have kept Satan out of the garden but He didn't because allowing Satan in was part of God's purposes.