 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > On Possibly Being A Gratuitous Creation... | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 5/6/2003 9:38 AM (GMT -6) |   | OK, TGB - if all that's being said is that humans are not necessary beings, i totally agree. And I do think that most determinists would also say so.
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true."
- James Branch Cabell | | Back to Top | | |
 |
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/6/2003 9:44 AM (GMT -6) | | RD: OK, TGB - if all that's being said is that humans are not necessary beings, i totally agree. And I do think that most determinists would also say so.
Tom: Then I did a bad job explaining it!  OK sure, we'd all agree that humans (and all creation) are ultimately gratuitous. God is the only necessary being in the universe. Right? Well, what I mean (and what I think other openness folk here have meant) when they say a person's existence is "gratuitous" is that given creation, and given God's forknowledge, God has no eternal, predestined, plan for that specific individual, no individually specific reason why that person is born. Determinists wouldn't agree with this.
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
ReasonableDoubt
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2003
Total Posts : 655
| Posted 5/6/2003 12:02 PM (GMT -6) | | That's very interesting - this reminds me of arguments with atheists about the meaning of life. Why are we here- what is the "grand design" for me? Many atheists state there is none, and why does there have to be one- everything can be explained materially, and as far as a 'purpose' for your life- it's just whatever you make of it.
So if God has no specific plan for an individual before they are born, does he have one later?
If, as Greg says, "God COULD predestine certain aspects of a future person (e.g. the name and one activity of Cyrus, Josiah)." how do we know that he does not do that for all? It's akin to the old arguments that God is omnipotent, but he limits his own power. Which seems very silly - if you're limiting your own power, and the only way you manifest yourself is in that limited manner, how can one ever know that you are actually omnipotent? Heck, I could be omnipotent. I am just limiting my power here on earth for the rest of you mortals. :) How do you know that's not true?
I don't understand how this OV works - is it that God could predestine and determine if he so chose, and in fact, he sometimes does do that, but most of the time he chooses not to?
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds, and the pessimist fears this is true."
- James Branch Cabell | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/7/2003 3:04 AM (GMT -6) | | RD: That's very interesting - this reminds me of arguments with atheists about the meaning of life. Why are we here- what is the "grand design" for me? Many atheists state there is none, and why does there have to be one- everything can be explained materially, and as far as a 'purpose' for your life- it's just whatever you make of it.
Tom: But we haven’t suggested that our lives are meaningless or without purpose, or that the only meaning to be had in life is what we can manufacture for ourselves. To say my birth was gratuitous does is not to say my present existence is meaningless. You’re making the connection. But it doesn’t follow.
God has a grand design for all human beings (Eph 3.19 is a nice summary of it): “To know God’s love and be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God.” Our knowing God’s love and being filled with his fullness glorifies God the most and satisfies us most. This is the “grand design” and it applies to every human being ever born. It gives meaning and direction to every life. So, though my birth was gratuitous (i.e., I could have NOT been born), my life now is not meaningless (i.e., I cannot now exist and not be the personal object of God’s grand design; a purpose which swallows me up WHEN I am born without requiring THAT I be born). This is nothing like atheistic arguments for the ultimate meaninglessness of life. On the contrary, we argue FOR the ultimate meaning of life.
RD: So if God has no specific plan for an individual before they are born, does he have one later?
Tom: But God does have a specific plan for each individual THAT is born BEFORE they are born.
RD: If, as Greg says, "God COULD predestine certain aspects of a future person (e.g. the name and one activity of Cyrus, Josiah)." how do we know that he does not do that for all?
Tom: Because explaining Cyrus and Josiah on open view grounds doesn’t require the predestining of the birth, DNA included, of the individuals who would eventually fill that role. God determines THAT somebody called Cyrus will set his people free. But this leaves a lot of room for God to search for the right circumstances (family, economy, social status) to fulfill this. God may have been involved in some last minute adjustments in responding to changing circumstances.
I for one am disinclined to think God so predetermines everything this way, our morally accountable choices for example. It’s one thing for God to determine the name and vocation of a person. God is free to do that. But Cyrus is still morally responsible for the kind of person he becomes. God doesn’t predetermine our choices and then hold us accountable for them.
RD: It's akin to the old arguments that God is omnipotent, but he limits his own power. Which seems very silly - if you're limiting your own power, and the only way you manifest yourself is in that limited manner, how can one ever know that you are actually omnipotent?
Tom: Let me see if I understand you. You agree that God is omnipotent. But you feel this claim is justified only if we have verifiable evidence of God’s “manifesting” omnipotence. And (I’m assuming this step), God’s determining all things unconditionally is evidence of omnipotence whereas granting us the freedom to exercise our wills in ways he neither determines nor desires is not a manifestation of omnipotence. Is that what you’re saying?
But God doesn’t ONLY exercise his abilities in the limited ways that directly benefit us. And there’s no a priori reason for assuming that an omnipotent God MUST maximize his power ever opportunity he has. An omnipotent God is able to do what’s needed. If what’s needed is speaking a universe into existence, he can do that (and has). If redeeming humans is what’s needed, then the power manifested is appropriate to the requirements inherent in atoning for us humans. Atoning for us seems to have required a vulnerable, personal, incarnate form, one that would let us murder him. This is not a LESS THAN omnipotent act on God’s part. In fact, Gina, can you think of a being making such a sacrifice who was NOT omnipotent?
RD: Heck, I could be omnipotent. I am just limiting my power here on earth for the rest of you mortals. :) How do you know that's not true?
Tom: Because God already limited his power here on earth in human form for the rest of us mortals. His name was Jesus. If you lived the same life he lived, spoke the words he spoke, and performed the miracles he performed (all from beginning to end), I might be tempted to think God had decided to incarnate again. But given what God said to the world when he incarnated in human form in Jesus, I suspect the second time the omnipotent God visits us there’ll be quite a bit of fireworks. That kinda excludes you and me.
RD: I don't understand how this OV works - is it that God could predestine and determine if he so chose, and in fact, he sometimes does do that, but most of the time he chooses not to?
Tom: Yes. That’s basically what it is. God could have created a world in which everything to the last minute detail was unconditionally determined by God. But there are metaphysical price tags to any sort of world God could have created. If you want a world that behaves exactly as you wish in every detail, you determine everything yourself and watch it unfold. But the metaphysical price tag for creating this kind of world is: $ No love. Not even God can predetermine that another person love him. Want a world where people choose to love you? Ah, the price tag for creating this kind of world is: $ They might NOT love you. That’s the price tag, even for God.
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 5/7/2003 3:48 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
RD: If, as Greg says, "God COULD predestine certain aspects of a future person (e.g. the name and one activity of Cyrus, Josiah)." how do we know that he does not do that for all?
Maybe the assignments are predestined, not the actors. Just like the elect are a preordained group, who is actually in the group is up to each of us.
Even though the skies are blue, don't they let the sunshine through? | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 5/7/2003 3:56 AM (GMT -6) | | Laika: Maybe the assignments are predestined, not the actors. Just like the elect are a preordained group, who is actually in the group is up to each of us.
Tom: Precisely. And you didn't use 587 words to say it! 
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
| 31 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 5:29 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|