 |
| 
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/8/2003 7:17 AM (GMT -6) |   | Hi all-
Interesting verse in Proverbs 16.33. Here it is in a few different versions:
NIV: The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.
NRS: The lot is cast into the lap, but the decision is the LORD's alone.
NLT: We may throw the dice, but the LORD determines how they fall.
NJB: In the fold of the garment the lot is thrown, but from Yahweh comes the decision.
Doesn’t this suggest that God decides/determines all that happens even after we cast the lot/do our part? Looks at least like compatibilism?
I think I have a good explanation of this, but I want to check it out first.
Tom
Love never ends | | Back to Top | | |
 |
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 1/8/2003 7:35 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom, istn't deterministm a non-Christian world-view? Aristotilian? A view that makes God merely the controler of preexisting reality?
The Proverbs verse you quoted does not fit that pagan mold.
Take no wooden nickels. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/9/2003 3:29 AM (GMT -6) | | Al: Tom, istn't deterministm a non-Christian world-view? Aristotilian? A view that makes God merely the controler of preexisting reality?
Tom: Well, it doesn't require the pre-existence of reality, just that God know what God intends to determine each step of the way. No biggie. But I agree, I don't think exhaustive determinism is the biblical view. But many do, and some have suggested to me that Prov. 16.33 supports their claim.
Al: The Proverbs verse you quoted does not fit that pagan mold.
Tom: I'm with ya. How does it not support a determinist worldview?
Tom 
Love never ends | | Back to Top | | |
|
Starkman
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2001
Total Posts : 1747
| Posted 1/9/2003 5:40 AM (GMT -6) | | Does it seem resonable to think that when the author wrote the proverb he was thinking, "Yes, every single iota, thought, jot, tittle, action, deed, word, movement of everything that was, is, and will be is by God and God alone"?
That doesn't seem at all to be what the author's getting at!
Starkman | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 1/9/2003 12:04 PM (GMT -6) | | Tom, I'm going to try bringing you up to speed. "Theocentric-determinism" is a heresy. It posits the preexistence of mater, and relagates the diety to merely arranging or giving order to what's out there, all which has its own reason and power for being. That's the kind of "supreme divine Principal" that Aristotle spoke of. (Keselopoulas, p.14) That's what I'm saying. Aristotle did not have a biblical worldview. Not only was everything created out of nothing, its very being and continuation is by the Word and Will of God.
Seems to me that the determinist ilk describes freefloating stuff that is then arranged. Seems to me that a world that praises and glorifies God by its very being is quite contrary to determinism. Determinism stikes me as being very "unorganic", while God's cosmos is integrally connected to God's Word and Will. Seems to me that determinism is mechanical, while creation and providence are personal.
Seems like two very incompatable systems ... at least to me.
I hope that I made my point clearly. You may agree or disagree at your pleasure.
Al | | Back to Top | | |
|
JET
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 397
| Posted 1/9/2003 3:35 PM (GMT -6) | |
quote:
Seems to me that determinism is mechanical, while creation and providence are personal.
But the question is whether the nature of God's creation and providence are such that God somehow determines every outcome in (even the roll of a dice). If so, then Prov. 16:33 poses no problem. If not, then what does Prov. 16:33 mean?
| | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 1/9/2003 3:55 PM (GMT -6) | | JET: But the question is whether the nature of God's creation and providence are such that God somehow determines every outcome...
Al: That is the kind of question everyone seems to be comfortable with, as though that is all there was, and as if it always followed -- or could not follow other questions (or not).
More primary is the nature of the relationship of the Creation to its Creator.
And I haven't found much more than open speculation about mathematical determinations ("every outcome"). Why so little about that actual "nature of God's creation and providence"; AND NOT JUST WHEATHER OR NOT it fits "somehow determin[ing] every outcome."
Broken record. Fundamental questions not asked. Foundational territory not explored.
Al | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/10/2003 12:10 AM (GMT -6) | | Thank you JET. This is a verse which some theological determinists use to justify their view. Here’s my take on it.
The casting of lots appears to have been a specific means of determining God’s will on particular occasions. For example:
The choice of sacrifices: Lev 16.9-10
The distribution of land among Israel’s tribes: Num 26.56 (cf. Josh 15.1; 16.1; 17.1; 19.1; 19.10, 17, 24, 32, 40; 21.4, 10)
Important decisions which people either chose to or were commanded to leave up to God alone: 1Ch 24.7ff; 25.9ff; 26.14ff
To inquire of the Lord: Jonah 1.7
To resolve an impasse between two or more people by leaving the decision up to God: Prov. 18.18
Sometimes God commanded the lot because he wanted to make the choice himself. I can see how this would make sense in the dividing of the land for example. It leaves no opportunity for tribes to complain later that certain persons/leaders were unfair. If everybody agrees that the lot decides it, and God is believed to determine the lot, then there’s no room for complaining. This is the thought behind Prov. 18.18 as well, “The lot puts an end to disputes and decides between powerful contenders.”
So, the lot may have been initiated by people also, as in inquiring of the Lord.
Rather than suggesting that God determines “all” things, the casting of lots was merely a means of recognizing God’s right to determine one very specific thing (the choice of one lamb over another, the allocation of land, etc.). By removing human interference, the lot left the choice up to God and on these occasions God was believed to determine the lot and the matter was settled.
One might argue that this militates against the notion that God equally determines all things. That is, if God is believed to determine ALL things compatibilistically to begin with, then the need and question of the lot as a means for allowing God to determine a specific matter apart from human involvement never really arises. In other words, the institution of the lot presupposes that at least sometimes humans get it wrong and God’s will is not done.
If God intervenes this way, why don’t we use the lot for everything? Should Bill marry Sally? What’s the lot say? Should I accept the job in Detroit or Memphis? It seems that the early church faced this. When presented with two equally qualified persons to fill Judas’ spot, they left the choice up to God. I honestly don’t see any harm in doing this sometimes today. But apart from Acts 2 the early believers didn’t seem to feel that this was a very normal way of determining God’s will. When might choosing the short straw be used today to decide important matters? I don’t really know. That’s another thread. But to me there’s nothing here to suggest determinism. On the contrary, it undermines rather than supports the belief that God alone decides everything that happens in the world.
Tom
Love never ends | | Back to Top | | |
|
PotOnWheel
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 9890
| Posted 1/10/2003 5:00 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom: Rather than suggesting that God determines “all” things, the casting of lots was merely a means of recognizing God’s right to determine one very specific thing (the choice of one lamb over another, the allocation of land, etc.). By removing human interference, the lot left the choice up to God and on these occasions God was believed to determine the lot and the matter was settled.
Al: Interesting, TGB. To get full effect I'll leave out the "rather than" for a moment; leaving just the profound "a means of recognizing God’s right to determine one very specific thing".
To that I'd add that God is whom creation is dependent. (Leave out the pagan 'determinist' framework. Its so narrow that it distorts everything it touches.) Creation "cannot exist or move or progress or come to perfection on its own." (Keselopoulas, p.23) But the reality that the cosmos is created by God is a different scenerio than the picture of a cosmos where all the parts are continuously and individually determined. Determinism places God OUTSIDE creation--setting creation by itself. That's not biblical. Creation and its creator are radically distinct. Yet, creation can attain a "relative likeness...by grace according to the divine energy."
The reason I'm placing this on such a thread is that the Framework one accepts, and argues within, SHAPES all that follows. And while there is much desire on this board to escape Deterministm, perhaps little is done to actually insure escaping it. (Like a disfunctional family arguing with itself, the alliance of Aunt-Classic caste dispersions on the alliance of Uncle-Open. So they only try getting together on Holy-days.)
Where you say, Tom, "That is, if God is believed to determine ALL things compatibilistically to begin with," such has to also stand up when the sentence order is inverted: "ALL things [are]determined [by] God." Is THAT all God is? If so, one has the same kind of "theocentric-determinism" as Aristotle. To merely posit that the independent elements are more independent than determined is to not escape the disfunctional-family. The image of the Creator-God, THAt revelation should so indwell our knowledge and imagination that we can finally escape the pagan bondage that we all so strongly wish to be free from.
Pass the potatoes.
Edited by - Al2Si2H4O9 on 01/10/2003 10:01:51 AM | | Back to Top | | |
|
Alan Rhoda
Registered Member
Date Joined May 2002
Total Posts : 680
| Posted 1/10/2003 2:44 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
If God intervenes this way, why don’t we use the lot for everything? Should Bill marry Sally? What’s the lot say? Should I accept the job in Detroit or Memphis? It seems that the early church faced this. When presented with two equally qualified persons to fill Judas’ spot, they left the choice up to God. I honestly don’t see any harm in doing this sometimes today. But apart from Acts 2 the early believers didn’t seem to feel that this was a very normal way of determining God’s will.
I have a friend who actually tried to apply the verse this way, that is, but casting lots when making important decisions. Everything seemed to work fine until he had second thoughts and decided (without casting the lot, apparently--should we cast lots to decide if we should cast lots?) to cast the lot to see if he should be making decisions by casting lots. The answer: NO.
The problem with using lots, fleeces, and things like that to divine the will of God is that such practices presume that God is somehow obligated to answer us through the lot (or fleece), so that casting the lot amounts to squeezing a particular answer out of God. But what if God doesn't want to answer us directly at that moment (or ever)? What if God sometimes wants US to make our own decisions without first finding out what HIS specific decision for us is? Despite what some have thought, the Bible does not teach that we can expect to discover God's will for us through lots, fleeces, or circumstantial signs. The Bible does teach that in all things we should strive to live righteously and wisely.
Just my two cents.
Alan | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/10/2003 6:09 PM (GMT -6) | | Alan-
Excellent points. And I think that's pretty much where I am today when it comes to finding God's will.
Still, what do you do with Prov. 16.33, 18.18, and the many OT passages in which God did make his will known through the lot?
Tom
Love never ends | | Back to Top | | |
|
JET
Registered Member
Date Joined Jun 2002
Total Posts : 397
| Posted 1/11/2003 5:12 AM (GMT -6) | | NIV: The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.
NRS: The lot is cast into the lap, but the decision is the LORD's alone.
NLT: We may throw the dice, but the LORD determines how they fall.
NJB: In the fold of the garment the lot is thrown, but from Yahweh comes the decision.
What about this:
The roll of the dice normally involves certain natural laws of physics which result in genuinely random outcomes. Nevertheless, the Omnipotent One can providentially control the outcome if He so desires. At certain times it may suit His purpose to do so. If He doesn't contol the outcome, God in effect determines that the outcome shall be random.
Either way, the outcome is determined by God. The decision is the Lord's alone.
If God was NOT free to allow random results, we would have the power to FORCE God to answer any question by merely casting lots.
But this goes against what the writer of Prov. 16:33 is saying, i.e., that "we may throw the dice" all we want, but God remains soverign.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 1/11/2003 5:46 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
What about this:
The roll of the dice normally involves certain natural laws of physics which result in genuinely random outcomes. Nevertheless, the Omnipotent One can providentially control the outcome if He so desires. At certain times it may suit His purpose to do so. If He doesn't contol the outcome, God in effect determines that the outcome shall be random.
Either way, the outcome is determined by God. The decision is the Lord's alone.
If God was NOT free to allow random results, we would have the power to FORCE God to answer any question by merely casting lots.
But this goes against what the writer of Prov. 16:33 is saying, i.e., that "we may throw the dice" all we want, but God remains soverign.
Ooooooooo, JET. Cool. Hmmmm.
Tom
Love never ends | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:51 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 |
|
|