Robots and Will Worshipers
- Thread starter Rudometkin
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
To help you understand: and I'm not even an open theist per say;
The debate is not about the scope and perfection of Gods’ knowledge, for both open theists and classical theists affirm God’s omniscience. God always knows everything. The debate, rather, is about the content of the reality God perfectly knows. It comes down to the question of whether or not possibilities are real.
The actual question isn't about God's knowledge. It's about the nature of reality.
You are definitely on to something, in general. You've forced me to consider this relationship between the transcendent Being, and the those created after His image. Who has the autonomy?
Ultimately, God is sovereign, so, yes, His will supersedes all others. But, one cannot deny the fact that men make random decisions every minute of the day, that are influenced by his environment. ...and yet, all things being equal, two men side-by-side will not make the same decision - each is wired in a different manner. Who did the wiring?
Beautiful analogy!
But, the worst thing that man can do with his autonomy, is lead himself into God's perdition. That is, his actions or being cannot take God out of the equation, or render Him impotent, the way that the hypothetical massive rock could.
Authentic love must be heartfelt, not feigned in either sentiment nor actions. This is only possible if God gave us choice. ...but, again, there is this predictable aspect of what type of people and characters that we are. That is, we do perceive in life that God created a model, where most people fall into one category or another of personality traits. In this respect, one cannot deny an element of contrived beings in God's creation.
Well, me asking for a specific example as proof might be very funny, and Scripture says that Scripture cannot be broken, but you are the one who says you can literally make it say anything. So why don't you either show it, or concede it?
I think you know that what I meant. Perhaps I should have said you can justify anything by miss using the Bible. But you get the point.
I'm happy to see that my arguments have encouraged consideration.
I'm not sold that "wiring" and "being influenced by your environment" are very Biblical terms or analogies. Scripture says that God directs man's steps. This is a direct appeal to God's sovereignty, whereas terms or analogies such as "wiring" and "being influenced by your environment" seem to suggest some sort of unbiblical, mild autonomy that tries to separate man's steps from God's direct control, (as if it is not God actively and directly controlling man's steps with His power, but instead it is the wires, or some sort of algorithm that God set beforehand that is causing the man to step.) But if these terms are meant merely in a relative way, and God's absolutely exhaustive control over man is still affirmed, then I can accept them.
When I speak of man being controlled by God, I'm often, if not always speaking in a metaphysical sense. I don't know where your mind is at well enough to determine this, but it seems to me like you get the "metaphysical sense" confused with the "relative sense", and this would be a categorical error. Please correct me if that is wrong.
Take your statement about men making random choices everyday, for example. The Determinism I affirm can accept this statement to be true, as long as the "random" term is meant in a relative sense. That is because in a metaphysical sense, no things are by chance, or truly random (Proverbs 16:33), but instead God controls everything with precision.
Therefore, the "men randomly make decisions throughout his day" statement of yours doesn't necessarily disagree with my "Determinism", but it seems to me that you are bringing it up as if it is some sort of objection to my Determinism, which seems to be why you add the words, "in general", in your first statement.
What are your thoughts?
Gooblygook. You just said a lot to say nothing.
If God is controlling everything, any talk of choices is absurd.
Show it, refute what I said without using the systems I wrote about, otherwise your own assertions are nothing more than gooblygook.
LOL! What gooblygook! If God controls everything, He chooses what happens!
Well, I mean both empirically and existentially, men clearly make unimpeded, or uncontrived by an external source, decisions, daily. Relatively speaking, yes, for sure. Metaphysically speaking, that is the mystery...? ...yes, Biblically, God is sovereign in all matters under the sun, and in the entire universe. Metaphysically and ontologically, yes also, his supremacy is without controversy or contest.
I guess where the issue lies is that the over-arching principle of the Bible, is God creating the entire universe in order to separate the sheep from the goats. ...or, as it appears that you are implying, in order to exclaim His sovereignty - that is, if man has no choice in loving God, or not.
I find this whole exercise of having men chose heaven or hell, and suffer the way that we do, as a cruel joke if it is not meant to demonstrate to man, the repercussions of our choices? All of our suffering is pointless, if there is no wisdom or edification to be gained from it.
Yes, the Bible proclaims God's sovereignty in the most emphatic and fundamental manner possible. Equally though, God's demand for righteousness from the creatures that He created in His image, is as Biblically didactic and fundamental also.
You said: "If God is controlling everything, any talk of choices is absurd."
Your own rule affirms that logical conclusions are absurd.
Edit: (That is, if God really does control all things, then we must make the logical conclusion that He chooses all things. But according to your rule, if God really does control all things, then any talk of choices is absurd, therefore it would be absurd for us to speak our logical conclusion that God chooses.)
Last edited:
Why do you not answer to what I clearly meant instead creating an alternative meaning? Even when I tell you what I meant you still insist on mis interpreting it.
That is what you get when you make such assertions against my Biblical view. I take you at your word and apply reasoning according to the laws of logic.
"Clearly meant" according to whom? Your words have meanings, and as Scripture points out, (1 Corinth 2:11) I cannot read your thoughts. What else am I supposed to do?
It's on me to write clearly, and so it is with you. If what you said is not what you mean, then fine. I am interested in knowing what you actually mean.
I'm not sure we are using the terms "relative" and "metaphysical" in the same way, because if you indeed affirmed God's total supremacy (as you did) in my sense of the phrase, "in the metaphysical sense", then you'd be affirming that you are a Determinist like me. But you're arguing against it, and it certainly is with controversy (the free will vs determinism controversy,) so I don't think we mean the same things by it.
You brought up another important issue that we can also focus on. In your quote above, I tabbed some of your key points with numbers, such as, [1], and [2]. This is so that I can address your points efficiently with my view.
[1] First, in eternity, God determined that He would be glorified. In order to accomplish this, He determined that elected men would be saved by Christ. In order to accomplish this, He determined that sinful men would be divided into elect and reprobates. In order to accomplish this, He determined that men would fall. In order to accomplish this, He determined that mankind would be created.
Then, within creation, the order is reversed. This is what we see played out. God created mankind, so that He would make them fall, so that the elect would be divided from the reprobates, so that Christ would save the elect men, so that God would be glorified.
This view is called Supralapsarianism. It shows meaning in God's plan, that it is not a cruel joke, but all in order to glorify Him. Whereas my view is God-centered, yours is man-centered.
[2] Here you teach that meaning is contingent on man gaining knowledge, but God assigns His own meanings, and if you do not accept His meanings, then you are in rebellion with Him. This is a very man-centered idea that you have here.
Now if you appeal to meaninglessness over the God that controls absolutely everything for His own purpose, you ought to deal with these views. Even if you do not agree with my views, you ought to understand it so that you can address it.
Right, you told me that if God controls everything, then any talk of choices would be absurd.
Perhaps you will have a better time discussing with me if you actually engage with my views, instead of simply claiming "absurdity" and... what was it? "Gooblygook"?
What part of no human choices if God controls everything, do you not understand?
30 “‘The people of Judah have done evil in my eyes, declares the Lord. They have set up their detestable idols in the house that bears my Name and have defiled it. 31 They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind. 32 So beware, the days are coming, declares the Lord, when people will no longer call it Topheth or the Valley of Ben Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter, for they will bury the dead in Topheth until there is no more room.
God doesn't agree with you that he controls everybody. In fact, just the opposite.
God doesn't agree with you that he controls everybody. In fact, just the opposite.
Similar threads
