Open Theism and Determinism

[mattrose]

Well, you quoted me and countered my points. That's why I wanted to respond.

As for your view, I just think you're making an unnecessary jump. We both agree that God is very capable of accomplishing great good through fallen conditions. He can, indeed, teach us and grow us through the negative things that happen to us.

Where we differ in our thinking is that you seem to think that this is the only or best way for God to accomplish God's goals. This seems to limit God severely. I simply believe that God is a good & wise enough being that if Adam & Eve & their progeny would have trusted God and given Him enough time, they could have learned and grown in every good way without all the garbage. Not only would this have been possible, but God would have preferred it.

I think God's infinite goodness and wisdom is worth defending here. His plan was pure. And His reaction to our rebellion (deciding to carry out His plan in spite of us) also demonstrates His goodness and wisdom. But to relabel PLAN B as PLAN A is to call the mud on His character that only got there because of grace and mercy part of His essential character.

[Singalphile]

Hello.

Quick question for open theists, if any one wants to answer:

What would you say about Matthew 24:36 - "But of that day and hour [of the passing away of heaven/earth or the coming of the Son of Man, probably] no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."

Edit: Thanks in advance!

[mattrose]

Personally, I think God 'knows' that He's going to end the world as we know it at the very hour when the balance between the QUALITY and QUANTITY of the church has been maximized. It is, therefore, not a set time (AD2079 and 4:04pm Easter Standard Time), but a strategic time (when it makes most sense in His wisdom). I have this view based primarily on 2nd Peter 3.

QUALITY
You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming.

QUANTITY
The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

[steve7150]

I think God's infinite goodness and wisdom is worth defending here. His plan was pure. And His reaction to our rebellion (deciding to carry out His plan in spite of us) also demonstrates His goodness and wisdom. But to relabel PLAN B as PLAN A is to call the mud on His character that only got there because of grace and mercy part of His essential character.










It's not about God's character which is plainly spelled out in the bible which is Love/Light and He is Spirit. It seems to be about God's use of evil which traditionally seems to be blamed on Adam and Eve. The tree with the knowledge of evil existed before Eve sinned which indicates evil existed before Eve ate the fruit. The fact it existed prior to mans sin still doesn't tell us of it's origin but then again God could have destroyed it unless there was a purpose for it.

[mattrose]

It's not about God's character which is plainly spelled out in the bible which is Love/Light and He is Spirit. It seems to be about God's use of evil which traditionally seems to be blamed on Adam and Eve.

I disagree, but I don't want to belabor the point too much. I think that if God's "PLAN A" was to bring sin and death into the world then that does indeed impugn His character.

The tree with the knowledge of evil existed before Eve sinned which indicates evil existed before Eve ate the fruit. The fact it existed prior to mans sin still doesn't tell us of it's origin but then again God could have destroyed it unless there was a purpose for it.

Again, you're making a logical jump here.

That there was a 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil' does not indicate that evil already existed (a clear distinction could be made between the existence of the potential of evil and the existence of actualized evil).

You're right to point out that EVEN IF evil existed prior to man's sin it wouldn't necessarily indicate that it originates in God's master plan, but you again seem to be making a logical jump when you equate the fact that God didn't destroy it with the implication that (according to your view) sin and death were part of God's PLAN A.

Bottom line, God didn't want them to fall. He gave them everything they needed and commanded them not to do one thing. It was necessary to have them choose obedience, but they didn't disobey out of necessity. They were punished for disobeying (which is sort of baffling if they were just doing what God wanted, and needed them, to do all along). The whole rest of the Bible is seemingly God's amazing PLAN B to bring us back to the beauty of PLAN A.

[steve7150]

That there was a 'tree of the knowledge of good and evil' does not indicate that evil already existed (a clear distinction could be made between the existence of the potential of evil and the existence of actualized evil).

You're right to point out that EVEN IF evil existed prior to man's sin it wouldn't necessarily indicate that it originates in God's master plan, but you again seem to be making a logical jump when you equate the fact that God didn't destroy it with the implication that (according to your view) sin and death were part of God's PLAN A.

Bottom line, God didn't want them to fall. He gave them everything they needed and commanded them not to do one thing. It was necessary to have them choose obedience, but they didn't disobey out of necessity. They were punished for disobeying (which is sort of baffling if they were just doing what God wanted, and needed them, to do all along). The whole rest of the Bible is seemingly God's amazing PLAN B to bring us back to the beauty of PLAN A.









I'm hoping to finish unless new items pop up but i'll try to briefly summarize what i see.

First re God's character, usually we can understand that God sometimes does things which had they been done by a human we would have evaluated the actions very differently. If a human were responsible for the flood and killed almost everyone living on earth we would call him the worst mass murderer in history, but because God did it we accept there were justifiable reasons. So it is possible to understand that there is a different standard in evaluating God's actions verses human actions. So if Plan B is true we can understand that God can find a use for evil as long as He didn't create it. That seems to be the key, it's OK to use it if it happens to be around but if God intended to use it all along then it attacks His character. I guess the reasoning is that it's not God's fault, it's Adam and Eve who willingly chose sin and evil.
God is omniscient and He made Eve's DNA yet He didn't know what Eve would do? How was Eve made?

"For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders,adulteries,fornications,thefts,false witness,blasphemies" Matt 15.19

"And when the women SAW that the tree was good for food and that it was pleasant to the EYE and a tree to be DESIRED to make one WISE she took of the fruit and did eat." Gen 3.6
It is simply already in Eve's heart, lust of the eyes, lust of the flesh and the pride of life. Eve had the sins of the world in her heart plus God sent Satan the master deceiver of the universe to deceive Eve. Would anyone in the world place an even odds bet on Eve, much less God who is omniscient?

"For God has consigned ALL to disobedience that He may have mercy on all" Rom 11.32

"For i consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us." Rom 8.18

"For the creation was subjected to futility NOT WILLINGLY but because of Him who subjected it in hope that the creation would be set free" Rom 8.20 - 21

[mattrose]

Even IF we came to the conclusion that 'The Fall' was inevitable... that STILL wouldn't mean that God wanted it to happen! But I don't even think it was inevitable. I kept wondering why you seem to insist it was inevitable, until I read the following quote.

God is omniscient and He made Eve's DNA yet He didn't know what Eve would do?

This rhetorical question (you seem to think the answer should be 'OF COURSE He would know!) suggests that you're basically of the opinion that we are just our DNA (I doubt you ACTUALLY believe that, but perhaps you have been too strongly influenced by our post-enlightenment mechanistic worldview). Don't we believe as Christians that we are more than just the sum of our cells? Don't you believe there was a personal aspect of Eve that isn't subject to mechanistic determinism?

I do believe there's an aspect of Eve that was a genuine (free) person. Adam & Eve were not pre-programmed bombs waiting to explode. They were genuinely free creatures that were subject to influences. God, in His omniscience, knew the possibilities. I'm sure He know the likelyhood. He may have been 99% certain. But that just brings me back to my first point. Such a realization on God's part STILL wouldn't mean that God wanted it to happen. I have no problem with your position other than the idea that you make it God's PLAN A. No doubt God is wise enough and powerful enough to work in a broken situation and bring about something glorious.

[kenblogton]

Reply to Singalphile
What would you say about Matthew 24:36 - "But of that day and hour [of the passing away of heaven/earth or the coming of the Son of Man, probably] no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."
It says to me that God the Father is the First Person of the Trinity, and relates to 1 Corinthians 15:28 "When he has done this, then the Son himself will be made subject to him who put everything under him, so that God may be all in all."
kenblogton

[steve7150]

Don't we believe as Christians that we are more than just the sum of our cells? Don't you believe there was a personal aspect of Eve that isn't subject to mechanistic determinism?

I do believe there's an aspect of Eve that was a genuine (free) person. Adam & Eve were not pre-programmed bombs waiting to explode. They were genuinely free creatures that were subject to influences. God, in His omniscience, knew the possibilities. I'm sure He know the likelyhood. He may have been 99% certain. But that just brings me back to my first point. Such a realization on God's part STILL wouldn't mean that God wanted it to happen. I have no problem with your position other than the idea that you make it God's PLAN A. No doubt God is wise enough and powerful enough to work in a broken situation and bring about something glorious.







Yes you did make a good point as we are more then our DNA. I think we have a "human spirit" beyond our DNA. Eve did have a human spirit and at least theoretically could have made a different choice. I appreciate that it's important to you as to whether it's God's plan A or B and that God would rather it didn't go the way it did.
I really have no dog in the fight as i'm not trying to convince you or anyone that it was always God's plan. However even if it's God's plan B, it's still God's plan is it not? God only told Adam that he would die if he disobeyed, yet it was God who imposed the curses. Whatever evil is, it is God who has the power to let it in or keep it out whether in plan A or B. What is it about Plan B that compelled God to "allow" evil. Could He have forgiven Eve or Adam? Why punish an additional 50 billion people for Adam and Eve's transgression? If we have freewill , why didn't we get to vote on whether or not we wanted Adam and Eve to represent us?

In the parable of the Wheat and Tares the Master said not to dig up the weeds (evil) because it would uproot (negative impact) the wheat. We are not told why but it does appear to me that good and evil need to grow together for a certain amount of time until the harvest.

So my thinking is that what we may interpret as "evil" is a necessary "thing" for us to experience. And God tells us that He works "all things" for the good for those that love Him and isn't "evil" part of all things?

[Paidion]

What would you say about Matthew 24:36 - "But of that day and hour [of the passing away of heaven/earth or the coming of the Son of Man, probably] no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone."

The primary meaning of the Greek word ειδω is "see", and this works even where translators render it as " know". Here are some examples where it clearly means "see" (in its various tenses):

Matt 2:10 When they saw the star, they rejoiced with exceedingly great joy.
Matt 4:16 The people who sat in darkness have seen a great light.
Matt 8:18 And when Jesus saw great multitudes about Him, He gave a command to depart to the other side.
Matt 11:9 "But what did you go out to see ? A prophet? Yes, I say to you, and more than a prophet.
Matt 12:2 And when the Pharisees saw it, they said to Him, "Look, Your disciples are doing what is not lawful to do on the Sabbath!"

But even in the verses in which translators usually render the word as "know", it can be translated as "see" and still make sense. Try substituting "see" for "know" or "saw" for "knew" in the following verses:

Matt 12:25 But Jesus knew saw their thoughts,
Matt 15:12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, "Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?"
Matt 6:32 "For after all these things the Gentiles seek. For your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things.

Now in the verse in question, if the Father sees the day and the hour of Christ's coming, the idea may be closer to God's intention rather His knowing the day and hour with an absolute certainty. It is recorded in the OT, several times that God changed His intentions in response to man's decisions. Here is just one example:

Jonah 3:10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.