Tom I appreciate much that you laid down as clearly as you could a short synopsis of your thinking. Thx, it helps a lot. I hope you don’t mind me going through it for the purpose of reflecting/studying and checking its validity according to Scriptures.
Does a Heap of Dust have the inherent ability to Love?
Originally Posted By: Tom
Regarding love, my thinking is that God created beings to love and to be loved, which required free will.
E:I agree that we are created to be loved, but I disagree that we have inherent ability to love.
Remember the context here is love of man for woman, or love of children. You don't believe people have this ability to love?
Do you agree with me that we are but dust?
No. This might be the crux of our disagreement. This would make our behavior just complex chemical reactions.
E:For sure God highly organized the dust(atoms) to a very sophisticated being, but reality is we are still just a heap of dust.
No, we're more than simply a heap of dust. We are sentient beings, with the ability to make decisions that originate from ourselves, decisions contrary to God's will.
Would you say that a heap of dust can love? I’m sure you wouldn’t say so. So what makes you say that organized dust can more so?
One could argue the other way. It's obvious that human beings can and do love each other. Therefore human beings cannot merely be organized dust, since organized dust cannot love.
Freewill allows Love to be Rejected?
Originally Posted By: Tom
Free will opens the possibility of love being rejected.
This Freewill logic implies that God’s Words through the Spirit of Christ has no power on man and man abilities to reject His Words when heard in our minds is greater than the power of His Words itself. This is a total contradiction of what we say in regards to His creative power. We say that God’s Word is bidding and whatever He speaks it happens.
Keep in mind the context is love of children, and man to woman (and vice versa). I don't see that these things happen because of God's word bidding it to happen. Not all humans choose to love. Isaiah speaks to this, in the comparison of God's love as greater than a mother's love.
E:By having 90% of mankind burning in the Hell fire is basically also saying that God’s Love is impotent and has no influence and is not stronger than “evil”. Hasn’t God created us in His image? Shouldn’t we be capable to recognize***(see note below) and respond to His Love? What does this has to say about God’s workmanship? Quite a failure I would say and there’s not much glory at having 10% saved or less at the end of the GC.
The context was loving children and man/woman. I don't see how this applies.
***Note: When I say we should be capable to recognize God’s voice, I mean here the basic elements, not the carnal mind. The carnal mind/logic/reasoning think God is foolish, but our basic cells and even the genes do recognize and respond to God’s voice/Love. The normal cells are selfless and do demonstrate God’s character in all their activities and working together selflessly for other cells and for the sake of the body. They are truly in harmony between them and with God. It is the mind(heart) of man that is corrupt -- not in harmony with their body and with God and is demonstrating selfishness characteristics.
Same comment.
Freewill Logic and Risky Love
Originally Posted By: Tom
Another way of stating this is that love entails risk, which is an unfortunate experience that most of us go through at one time or another.
E:Love entails “risks”? So, are you implying that God didn’t know that so many were going “to decide to reject His Love” and it was a risk He took when He created them?
I think God took a risk in creating us, yes.
E:But if you do believe that God knows the end from the beginning as the Bible indicates, then God surely did put His creatures in a high risky unfortunate experience.
Love entails risk.
It makes me think of something like Russian roulette by giving them a gun(freewill) however, in this scenario you tell them which chamber have a bullet inside and they chose it and deliberately reject God’s love = suicide. Would you give birth to children knowing that 9 out of 10 are going to shoot themselves and suffer greatly before doing so? If God knew that 9 out of 10 are going to die terrible death and have a hard life, then it does portray God very irresponsible and cruel.
I disagree. According to the SOP, God created millions of worlds. Even with our world in rebellion, this was the only one, so considering the universe as a whole, the risk is very small. Adam and Eve could have chosen to obey, which would have left only the angels. And Lucifer, it's written, almost chose to repent. Then there would have been none.
So there's no cruelty involved here. It's only when we postulate that God was certain that Lucifer would sin (or Adam/Eve) that cruelty comes into play.
Freewill Logic attempt to Make Sense with Mass Annihilation
E:I understand that this logic attempts to make some sense out of this Hell doctrine and its mass annihilation that has been passed down to us and our forefather for the past 1700+ years. By putting the blame on the creatures, it claims to leave God’s hands clean so He can remain “righteous” in all of this.
Yes, that's the essence of the Great Controversy, that God is innocent.
E:But sadly this logic still leaves God’s hand quite dirty for :
(1) When God created beings with free will, did He not know that they would start doing evil things?
Correct. God did not expect that free will be used to reject Him.
E:(2) Is a Creator not responsible for that which He creates?
T:If you choose to have a child, and it becomes evil (but not due to how you raised it), are you responsible for the evil that it does?
E:(3) Why would a good and all-knowing God create either spiritual or physical beings with a poor ability to respond to Him and to His Love?
I think your concept of "all-knowing" is more Greek than what's in Scripture.
E:Freewill Logic, Annihilation, and Justice
Also this logic does not make God righteous for a real Righteous God will bring True JUSTICE. True Divine Justice has two purposes in the Laws of Moses (1) Restitution to the victim (2) Restoration of the offender. Divine Justice is not accomplished until these two purposes are achieved. Annihilation of any creature is a punishment and does not bring any Divine Justice. Annihilation doesn’t bring restitution to the victim but only revenge. Plus definitely there’s no restoration of the offenders through annihilation. It only eliminates those that disagree like a dictatorship (or any man who wants control).
I think we got off the question in relation to free will involving the ability to love one's children or spouse.
E:Freewill Logic at the Expense of God’s Sovereignty
Worst is this Freewill logic is at the expense of God’s sovereignty.
(1)It makes God incapable of creating any being without making them with a free will (for what purposes? so to govern themselves? So we can be little gods? Remember, there’s only One God).
I don't know what your point is here. What I said is that free will is necessary in order to love. God created beings to love and be loved is the reason I gave.
(2) It makes God an innocent Bystander in history.
This is half right. God is innocent, but He's not merely a Bystander. Jesus Christ makes that evident.
[qutoe](3)It makes God a helpless impotent god in the sky who has all the power to stop evil, but is too much of a gentleman to do much about it.[/quote]
God has worked, and is working, through Jesus Christ to stop evil, and evil will be defeated. Where are you seeing impotence here?
(4)It makes God an irresponsible weak ruler.
I'm not following your logic here. If you have children, and raise them well, and they choose not to do your will, why would it follow that you are an irresponsible, weak ruler?
E:Freewill Logic vs. Quality End product vs. His Sovereignty and Wisdom and Glory
Also this Freewill logic suggest that it is the only way God could end up with a quality product in the end of time, and that God knew ahead of time that only a tiny percentage of men would "pass the test" and be saved.
This is looking at things myopically, as if only our world was involved. But there were millions of worlds. Well over 99.99% of all sentient beings will be saved, not the tiny percentage you are asserting.
E:Of course God did not like this result—that He grieves over it—and yet this All-Wise God could find no other way to achieve His goal of bringing forth children.
The bottom line is that God's sovereignty and wisdom are greatly diminished by this logic.
Well, your premise is off, to start with, since very few choose to rebel, considering the universe as a whole. It could well have been none, and almost was, as God did everything He could in regards to Lucifer, and Lucifer almost repented.
E:To start it suggest that beings do things according to their own will, independent of God and that God is largely pushed around by His own universe.
It's just one little spot, so I think you're overstating the case here. It's certainly better than the alternative of God's being responsible for evil.
E:Also, it suggests that God wasn’t wise enough to make a plan that would save everyone and that He was just incapable.
Love doesn't have to do with the wisdom of the lover only, but with the one being loved. If the one being loved chooses not to love back, this does not necessarily speak poorly of the lover.
E:Plus where is God’s glory in having 1/3 of the angels and 90% of man burning in hell? Doesn’t it paint God as a failure in His creation plan and in His Saving powers? Wouldn’t you say by this high failure end result that God has greatly missed the mark? Not much “glory” in that.
If only our world were involved, and angels, that might be arguable. But that's not the case. Of the millions of worlds, only one has lost people in it, and the saved of even that one will include a numberless multitude.
What speaks to God's glory is that while He had millions of worlds of faith beings who loved Him, He loved this one insignificant world too much to let it go, and made the ultimate sacrifice to save whosoever would respond.
E:What led to this Mess : The Rejection of God’s Love or a Puffed up Head?
Not sure what you're asking here. Certainly the rejection of God's love was involved.
Originally Posted By: Tom
In our world, God's love was rejected, which led to the mess that we have.
E:Let’s read what the Bible actually says about the Fall of Lucifer and man more carefully. It was not a question of rejecting God’s love that led to this mess.
Originally Posted By: Ez 28:17
The fall of Lucifer was due that he elevated himself(Eze 28:17 “Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: ”) which is how his mind got corrupted. This principle of the origin of sin is stated in Rom 1:21 “Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. “ We continually elevate ourself too and we are ignorant of how God works in us. Ep 4:18 “Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:” ).
Here's another statement on the subject:
The law of love being the foundation of the government of God, the happiness of all created beings depended upon their perfect accord with its great principles of righteousness. God desires from all His creatures the service of love—homage that springs from an intelligent appreciation of His character. He takes no pleasure in a forced allegiance, and to all He grants freedom of will, that they may render Him voluntary service. {GC 493.2}
But there was one that chose to pervert this freedom.
This looks to be echoing what I said, doesn't it? Notice the important of love, and the linking of love to free will. And also that Lucifer choose to misuse this freedom.
Originally Posted By: Tom
All the evil there is in the world is the result of man's choosing his own way over God's way, which he is able to do, because of free will.
E:God and Evil
Hmmm…. all the evil there is in the world is because God created evil!
No, none of the evil there is in the world is because God created evil. God did not create evil. I don't understand how you could so misunderstood what I wrote. Here's what I wrote:
All the evil there is in the world is the result of man's choosing his own way over God's way, which he is able to do, because of free will.
This is very similar to what Ellen White wrote, that I just quoted.
God did not create evil, but created sentient beings with "freedom of will," one of whom chose to misuse that freedom.
E:I’m starting to see that “evil” is another of these words in our vocabulary that needs redefining according to God’s perspective and not according to man’s limited view.
"Evil" is that which is contrary to God's will, which is embodied by the 10 commandments, which articulate the principles of agape.
Here is some of the things the Bible tells us about evil :
1. That God created evil (Is 45:7)
In the sense of permitted. God is often represented as doing that which He permits.
2. That God gives the power to evil creatures for their actions (Dn 8:24; Rev 17:17; Jer 27:6; etc…)
In the sense of giving them life, you mean?
3. That God calls servants the evil creatures(e.g. Satan(Job 41:4), King of Babylon(Jer 25:9; 27:6; 43:10)) to execute His Judgments(Jer 25:9; Job 41:4;etc… )
4. That God allows what evil to bring(Job 41:4; Jdg 9:23; 1Sa 16:15,16, 23; Jer 35:17; 39:16; 40:2; Eze 6:11; etc…),
5. That God even takes credit of all evils by saying that he has done all these evil things.(Job 42:11; 1Kg 9:9; 17:20; 2Ch 34:28; Neh 13:18; Jer 32:23,42; 42:10; 44:2; Eze 14:22; Deu 32:39; Is 45:7; Ams 3:6; Is 19:22; etc…)
This is the same principle of God's being represented as doing that which He permits.
E:Do we really have the Ability to choose God’s way?
Of course. Many texts bring this out. In Jeremiah 18, for example, God tells us He will change His actions depending upon what we choose to do. Exodus as well, quite a few times, in the early 30's.
E:Concerning man’s choosing his own way versus God’s that you assume brought all this “evil” on us, the Bible tells us the following :
1. Fallen creatures there is none that seeketh after God (Rom 3:11), does not understand God(Rom 8:5-7;1Cor 2:14; 2Pet 2:12; Jud 1:10; Dn 12:10), and think God is foolish(1Cor 2:14; 1:18, 23). So therefore in their “natural” fallen state, it is impossible for man to choose God.
This is true. Left solely to one's own devices, fallen man would not choose God.
2. God hardened whoever’s heart He desires : Rom 9:18 “Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.”
(a) Pharaoh: 7x (Ex 7:13; 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:8) the Bible says that God hardens Pharaoh heart, versus 3x(Ex 8:15, 32; 9:34) Pharaoh hardens himself.
(b) King Heshbon : God hardened King Heshbon heart for the purpose “to put the dread of thee(the Israelites) and the fear of thee upon the nations.” Deut 2:25 God sent before hand a message of peace and asking permission to go through their land(v.26-29), then God heardens the Kings heart (v.30) for the respond He wants, so He can accomplish His purpose stated in v.25. Det 2:30 “But Sihon king of Heshbon would not let us pass by him: for the LORD thy God hardened his spirit, and made his heart obstinate, that he might deliver him into thy hand, as appeareth this day.”
(c) The Israelites : Jeremiah acknowledge that it was God that caused the people to err and had hardened their heart : Is 63:17 “ O LORD, why hast thou made us to err from thy ways, and hardened our heart from thy fear? Return for thy servants' sake, the tribes of thine inheritance.
These are typical Calvinistic arguments. There are typical Arminian counter arguments that could be adduced.
E:3. God keeps peoples heart/eyes/ears closed at His will and will only open them when they are ready to hear (Deut 29:4; Is 6:9,10; Jhn 8:43; Acts 28:26, 27; Ep 4:18; 2Thes 2:11,12; Rom 11:7-12; 25-33; etc…) and for his own purpose in working His plan of Salvation.
Doesn't saying God will only open the ears of others when they are ready to hear mean that God gives understanding to people when they want to know the truth?
4. Scriptures says plainly that it is God that “worketh all things after the counsel of His own will“ Eph 1:11. It doesn’t say that things are worked through our own will like you suggest with the freewill logic.
This doesn't make sense. That we have free will wouldn't imply that God works all things according to our will. Why would that make sense?
For example, if you have a friend, and that friend has free will, would it follow that you work out all things according to your friend's will?
Plus it says very specifically that “it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure” (Phil 2:13).
This doesn't say against our will. God works to will and to do of His good pleasure if we our willing. He doesn't overpower us to do so.
E:Plus see these other texts which I will quote for convenience sake.
Originally Posted By: Scriptures How God moves Man
Jer 10:23 O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.
Ps 37:23 A man’s heart deviseth his way: but the Lord directed his steps.
Prov 20:24 Man’s going are of the Lord; how can a man then understand his own way?
Prov 16:1 The preparations of the heart in man and the answer of the tongue, is from the Lord.
I used to be a Calvinist, so I'm familiar with all these texts and arguments. There are counterarguments to these as well.
E:The Purpose of the Great Controversy Revised
Originally Posted By: Tom
The Great Controversy is an examination of God's part in what has happened, which will show that God has been consistently acting in harmony with the principles of agape, principles embodied by Jesus Christ.
E:Tom, I used to share the same view as you concerning the GC.
So you were Arminianist, and became Calvinistic, whereas I went the other direction. That's interesting. But I guess you weren't familiar with the Arminian counterarguments(?) (Since you don't mention them).
E:But now, I don’t see the GC as “an examination of God’s part” for the sake to see if God is consistent. For sure God’s works and the way he’s handling this GC is highly examined by all his creatures. Plus God is consistent for He is Agape and His Laws are His character. However, I now view that the GC is primarily for our sake for the following purposes :
1. To write all His Laws into our heart (Jer 31). At creation and largely at birth our heart was/is initially blank, but now the work is even harder because our heart has become corrupt. However, it is not impossible for God--for with God “all is possible”. Right?
It's not possible for God to act contrary to His own character.
E:2. God in His Wisdom allowed this “freewill” allusion by which he will use it to bring us to maturity(Rom 8:18-23; Job 34:11; Is 26:9; Hab 1:12; Hos 2).
Do you mean "illusion"? What about evil? If God is doing everything independent of anyone else's will, why do it in such a stupid way?
E:3. To humble His puffed up amazingly perfectly formed creatures.
If His creatures are simply the way God made them, why did He make them this way? Why not make them not puffed up to start with?
E:God will bring us back to our proper place while teaching us the truth on how things really works(Hos 2:8-13; Ep 1:11; Phil 2:13; Jer 31:18, 19 ) and come to know to what extend that God is Sovereign by which He “worketh all things after the counsel of his own will” Ep1:11. Only then we will regain our reason just like He did with King Nebuchednazzar. We are all guilty of the same sin of King Nebuchednazzar’s in taking God’s glory(Dn 4:30). Jesus said “whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased” Mat 23:12 There’s many other texts stating this work of God as in Is 2:12 “For the day of the Lord of hosts shall be upon every one that is proud and lofty, and upon every one that is lifted up; and he shall be brought low.”
We should already have been in our proper place, if we're simply doing God's will.
E:4. It is through trials(Deut 28 & 29; Lev 26) that He humbles us back to the “dust”.
This isn't necessary for the millions of other worlds. Why should we alone have to suffer so?
E:In Biblical terms this humbling back to dust is termed with the word “destroy” (‘abad h6… which also means “to go astray”. This double/single meaning destroy/lost is exactly the same as the greek word appolumi g622). Only when we are destroyed (realize that we are but “dust”) that we can be found and come to see God as He truly is -- the Almighty Sovereign El Shaddai -- and truly repent “in the dust and ashes”.
If we view this destruction as being due to God alone, and not due to any choice on our part, it could lead to our viewing God as being responsible for our suffering, and for the evil in the world in general, which might not speak well of God.
E:5. To build in us the Trust(Belief/faith) in Him, and to destroy the trust in self. Only when Christ is lifted up(and our self abased) that we will be able to hear. Trust in Him is what predispose us to hear God’s small still voice and to differentiate it from the voice of our own reasoning. It is always through faith/Trust that any of God’s great wonders and works has ever been accomplished(Heb 11).
I agree with this, but view this as happening when our sinfulness is contrasted to God's goodness. If God is not really good, I don't see how this could happen, and I don't see how God could be good if He does evil.
E:6. To restore all creation back to their original glorified heritage according to His grand Law of Jubilee.
7. To bring All things in subjection under Christ so God can be All in All.
PS. Sorry Kland and NJK, I took too much time replying to Tom. I’ll get back to you next week.
To summarize a few points:
1.We look to disagree in regards to the future. I think you see it according to the traditional view, where the future is fixed, and God looks forward, like in a crystal ball, to see what will happen. I think the future is more like a web, which is rich in possibilities, and when God looks into the future, He sees all of these possibilities; not just one strand of the web, but the whole web.
2.I think we both see a logical contradiction in an all-knowing, all-powerful, good God and the traditional ideas in regards to foreknowledge, the existence of evil, and the future judgment. We resolve the contradictions we see differently, however, with you going the Calvinistic/Universalist direction, and me in the Arminian/Open Theism direction.
3.In discussing Calvinistic vs. Arminian ideas, I think it would be good to present both sides. This debate is well known, having gone on for several centuries.
4.I had one more point, but I forgot it. If it comes back to me, and I think it's worthwhile, I'll add it.
A couple of quick questions.
A.Do you see that the existence of evil is due to God's will?
B.Do you view God as responsible for the evil that is in the world?
