Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Innocent Children Suffer

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    The angels* and the believers in heaven have already made their decision to follow God and not sin. I don't think they CAN sin any more. It's like saying, "OK God, I don't want to sin against you, so take away my ability to do so"

    So in that one regard, I don't think we do have free will in heaven.

    (*At one time the angels did have a choice to make and Satan and those that chose with him were cast out. So those that are left have chosen to follow God and never sin.)
    I think we all will have free will still, but as free will beings we will all have passed a trial of faithfulness I suppose, and those free will beings who choose God will remain faithful to him. I suppose the question could then go back to, "well why didn't God make free will beings who would choose him in the first place?" But I'm not sure that's a logical question or scenario. Something about having "free will" means that our choice plays a role in relationship, and you can't create a free will person who will only choose the things you want them to choose anymore than you can create a married bachelor or a squared circle. Pretty sure Dr. WLC gets into this, but it's been awhile since I've familiarized myself with it.

    The Molinist view, as you know, is that God does the second best thing, in that, logically prior to creation, through his foreknowledge, God foreknew what any free will creature would decide, and so he more or less stacked the deck by providentially ordering the world so that most people who could freely choose to be in right relationship with him would.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Adrift View Post
      I think we all will have free will still, but as free will beings we will all have passed a trial of faithfulness I suppose, and those free will beings who choose God will remain faithful to him. I suppose the question could then go back to, "well why didn't God make free will beings who would choose him in the first place?" But I'm not sure that's a logical question or scenario. Something about having "free will" means that our choice plays a role in relationship, and you can't create a free will person who will only choose the things you want them to choose anymore than you can create a married bachelor or a squared circle. Pretty sure Dr. WLC gets into this, but it's been awhile since I've familiarized myself with it.

      The Molinist view, as you know, is that God does the second best thing, in that, logically prior to creation, through his foreknowledge, God foreknew what any free will creature would decide, and so he more or less stacked the deck by providentially ordering the world so that most people who could freely choose to be in right relationship with him would.
      And we will have already experienced sin so we will KNOW how bad it is.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Hornet View Post
        There is a non-Christian that I talked with recently and he said that he does not see a good reason for why God would allow innocent children to receive the consequences of living in a sin-cursed world. The examples he gave were the unborn being aborted, infants being born with a disease, and so on.
        The reality of ongoing human and animal suffering and death cannot be minimised. It suggests to humans, originally intended to be faithful image-bearers of God, that, as it is, something is terribly amiss with the condition of the entire cosmos. ‘For we know that the whole creation groans together and travails together until now’ (Rom. 8.22, BLB[1]). The subject being broached is theodicean in nature. The question may be framed thus: How can the justice/righteousness of a (purportedly) all-good, all-powerful, all-wise, all-knowing, loving god be maintained in the light of the evil(s) (natural, moral, and/or supernatural) present in the world?

        As trite as it might appear to our eyes or sound to our ears, I believe free will[2] is a key term and concept that must be addressed in this discussion. From a Christian theistic perspective, apart from working with some form of a free-will defence, I personally cannot see how a theodicy (which, effectively, is a God-defence) can be upheld. For if, as Christian theistic determinists maintain, God has unconditionally decreed all that occurs in his created order, persons are held morally responsible for doing that which they were foreordained to do. Consequently, proponents of this view cannot speak coherently about God permitting the entrance of evil into his cosmos, but rather infallibly decreeing it.


        Originally posted by Hornet View Post
        How would you respond to this? Would it be correct to say that no one is innocent from God's perspective because everyone inherits a sinful nature and a guilty standing from Adam?
        Even if the Augustinian doctrine of ‘original sin’ – inherited depravity and imputed guilt to all of Adam’s descendants – is taken for granted,[3] this does not account for the ill effect suffered by sinful human beings worldwide, on a continual basis, throughout the course of history, as a result of the choices made by other sinful human beings. Even if a newborn child is not considered wholly innocent and, in some sense, is guilty for the transgression of Adam, it does not follow that s/he he is deserving of the ills that befall him/her at the hands of other sinful persons.


        Notes

        1. Berean Literal Bible (2016).
        2. That is, ‘free will’ defined non-deterministically, libertarianly (contra compatibilistic conceptions of ‘freedom’).
        3. Augustine’s basic view, whilst accepted by Roman Catholics and generally received by the Protestant Reformers, is not universally affirmed. Some believe that humans receive the inheritance of a sinful nature as a result of Adam’s transgression, but not imputed guilt (see e.g., Adam Harwood, The Spiritual Condition of Infants: A Biblical-Historical Survey and Systematic Proposal [Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2011]). Others, often persons within the Restoration/Stone-Campbell Movement, deny both imputed guilt and inherited depravity, arguing rather that a depraved nature is acquired via the commission of actual/personal sins by the individual (see e.g., Jack Cottrell, ‘Original Sin, or Original Grace?’, in Set Free! What the Bible Says about Grace [Joplin, OH: College Press 2009], pp. 317–332).
        For Neo-Remonstration (Arminian/Remonstrant ruminations): <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
          [Â…]

          To the OP:

          Unlike many (most) here, I do not ascribe to the "blueprint world view" model of God's sovereignty (God controls everything including sinful acts), but rather, I [subscribe] to the "warfare world view". There is a war on that still rages in the heavenly realms and here on earth. [H]umans and angelic beings (including demons) have free will. Human and demonic free will are responsible for all the ills of this present world. And, since God very rarely (if ever) blatantly overrides our free will, we and other free will agents determine what world we live in. Of course, those of us who are Christ Followers, have a responsibility and duty to fight these enemies of mankind and God with the authority we now have in Jesus Christ as Son's of the Most High God...and joint heirs with our Brother, Jesus Christ! Bad things happen because of evil people and evil beings.
          For those who might wish to explore this ‘warfare world view’, see the following works from Gregory A. Boyd:
          • God at War: The Bible and Spiritual Conflict (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1997);
          • Satan and the Problem of Evil: Constructing a Trinitarian Warfare Theodicy (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2001); and
          • Is God to Blame? Moving Beyond Pat Answers to the Problem of Suffering (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003).

          Boyd’s Is God to Blame? (2003) is essentially a distillation of his Satan and the Problem of Evil (2001), intended for a broader readership. If one approaches Boyd’s works from an Arminian or otherwise free-will theistic perspective, whilst s/he will likely find him-/herself in agreement with much of what Boyd has to say, the one objectionable feature the reader might discover is Boyd’s persistent advocacy of openness-of-God theology (i.e. open theism) throughout.* Nevertheless, I would especially recommend Is God to Blame? (2003) for its staunch non-deterministic reading of the scriptures.


          * Boyd has dedicated an entire book addressing this subject. See Gregory A. Boyd, God of the Possible: A Biblical Introduction to the Open View of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000).
          For Neo-Remonstration (Arminian/Remonstrant ruminations): <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by The Remonstrant View Post
            For those who might wish to explore this ‘warfare world view’, see the following works from Gregory A. Boyd:
            • God at War: The Bible and Spiritual Conflict (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1997);
            • Satan and the Problem of Evil: Constructing a Trinitarian Warfare Theodicy (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2001); and
            • Is God to Blame? Moving Beyond Pat Answers to the Problem of Suffering (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003).

            Boyd’s Is God to Blame? (2003) is essentially a distillation of his Satan and the Problem of Evil (2001), intended for a broader readership. If one approaches Boyd’s works from an Arminian or otherwise free-will theistic perspective, whilst s/he will likely find him-/herself in agreement with much of what Boyd has to say, the one objectionable feature the reader might discover is Boyd’s persistent advocacy of openness-of-God theology (i.e. open theism) throughout.* Nevertheless, I would especially recommend Is God to Blame? (2003) for its staunch non-deterministic reading of the scriptures.


            * Boyd has dedicated an entire book addressing this subject. See Gregory A. Boyd, God of the Possible: A Biblical Introduction to the Open View of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000).
            If memory serves, Littlejoe is an Open Theist, so I'm sure he'd be cool with that.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by The Remonstrant View Post
              For those who might wish to explore this ‘warfare world view’, see the following works from Gregory A. Boyd:
              • God at War: The Bible and Spiritual Conflict (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 1997);
              • Satan and the Problem of Evil: Constructing a Trinitarian Warfare Theodicy (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2001); and
              • Is God to Blame? Moving Beyond Pat Answers to the Problem of Suffering (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2003).

              Boyd’s Is God to Blame? (2003) is essentially a distillation of his Satan and the Problem of Evil (2001), intended for a broader readership. If one approaches Boyd’s works from an Arminian or otherwise free-will theistic perspective, whilst s/he will likely find him-/herself in agreement with much of what Boyd has to say, the one objectionable feature the reader might discover is Boyd’s persistent advocacy of openness-of-God theology (i.e. open theism) throughout.* Nevertheless, I would especially recommend Is God to Blame? (2003) for its staunch non-deterministic reading of the scriptures.


              * Boyd has dedicated an entire book addressing this subject. See Gregory A. Boyd, God of the Possible: A Biblical Introduction to the Open View of God (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2000).
              Yes, I have all those books and you are right! They are excellent...and I don't think Boyd is "heavy handed" with the Open Theism in his Warfare books...I agree it can be agreeable to non-OVT's...
              Last edited by Littlejoe; 05-31-2019, 02:35 PM.
              "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

              "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Adrift View Post
                If memory serves, Littlejoe is an Open Theist, so I'm sure he'd be cool with that.
                Yes, you are correct... and YES, I am!
                "What has the Church gained if it is popular, but there is no conviction, no repentance, no power?" - A.W. Tozer

                "... there are two parties in Washington, the stupid party and the evil party, who occasionally get together and do something both stupid and evil, and this is called bipartisanship." - Everett Dirksen

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Littlejoe View Post
                  Yes, you are correct... and YES, I am!
                  Yes, Lj, I recalled that you were an open theist (and an annihilationist as well, if my memory serves me rightly).
                  For Neo-Remonstration (Arminian/Remonstrant ruminations): <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by The Remonstrant View Post
                    The reality of ongoing human and animal suffering and death cannot be minimised. It suggests to humans, originally intended to be faithful image-bearers of God, that, as it is, something is terribly amiss with the condition of the entire cosmos.
                    Quite true...

                    ... if, as Christian theistic determinists maintain, God has unconditionally decreed all that occurs in his created order, persons are held morally responsible for doing that which they were foreordained to do. Consequently, proponents of this view cannot speak coherently about God permitting the entrance of evil into his cosmos, but rather infallibly decreeing it.
                    "The One forming light and creating darkness,
                    Causing well-being and creating calamity;
                    I am the LORD who does all these." (Isa. 45:7)

                    "If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the people tremble?
                    If a calamity occurs in a city has not the LORD done it?" (Amos 3:6)

                    "Who is there who speaks and it comes to pass,
                    Unless the Lord has commanded it?
                    Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
                    That both good and ill go forth?" (Lam. 3:37–38)

                    Even if the Augustinian doctrine of ‘original sin’ – inherited depravity and imputed guilt to all of Adam’s descendants – is taken for granted, this does not account for the ill effect suffered by sinful human beings worldwide, on a continual basis, throughout the course of history, as a result of the choices made by other sinful human beings.
                    But how is it that sins committed by others are not possibly sent from the hand of God?

                    "So it will be that when the Lord has completed all His work on Mount Zion and on Jerusalem, He will say, 'I will punish the fruit of the arrogant heart of the king of Assyria and the pomp of his haughtiness.' " (Isa. 10:12)

                    And I notice that no one who presents the free-will defense of the problem of evil, seems to quote Scripture...

                    Blessings,
                    Lee
                    Last edited by lee_merrill; 06-01-2019, 01:50 PM.
                    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                      Quite true...



                      "The One forming light and creating darkness,
                      Causing well-being and creating calamity;
                      I am the LORD who does all these." (Isa. 45:7)


                      "If a trumpet is blown in a city will not the people tremble?
                      If a calamity occurs in a city has not the LORD done it?" (Amos 3:6)

                      "Who is there who speaks and it comes to pass,
                      Unless the Lord has commanded it?
                      Is it not from the mouth of the Most High
                      That both good and ill go forth?" (Lam. 3:37–38)


                      But how is it that sins committed by others are not possibly sent from the hand of God?

                      "So it will be that when the Lord has completed all His work on Mount Zion and on Jerusalem, He will say, 'I will punish the fruit of the arrogant heart of the king of Assyria and the pomp of his haughtiness.' " (Isa. 10:12)

                      And I notice that no one who presents the free-will defense of the problem of evil, seems to quote Scripture...

                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      Isaiah 45:7 is not a good support for your argument: there would be few who deny that God will bring calamity on people for their sins. Lam 3:37-38: Likewise. Isaiah 10:12: again, likewise.
                      As to the more general problem of evil, Ephesians 6:12 would not be a bad place to start.
                      Last edited by tabibito; 06-01-2019, 02:28 PM.
                      1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                      .
                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                      Scripture before Tradition:
                      but that won't prevent others from
                      taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                      of the right to call yourself Christian.

                      ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                        Isaiah 45:7 is not a good support for your argument: there would be few who deny that God will bring calamity on people for their sins. Lam 3:37-38: Likewise.
                        Yes, but these are more general statements.

                        Source: The New Bible Commentary

                        The God of all the earth. [Isaiah] 1–8 These verses put the Lord’s control of Cyrus in the setting of his total sovereignty (7), his world-wide self-revelation (6) and his will to vindicate the right (8).

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Isaiah 10:12: again, likewise.
                        But this was to show that sins committed by others are possibly sent from the hand of God.

                        As to the more general problem of evil, Ephesians 6:12 would not be a bad place to start.
                        That's a good verse about struggling with evil, yes.

                        Blessings,
                        Lee
                        "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                          Yes, but these are more general statements.

                          Source: The New Bible Commentary

                          The God of all the earth. [Isaiah] 1–8 These verses put the Lord’s control of Cyrus in the setting of his total sovereignty (7), his world-wide self-revelation (6) and his will to vindicate the right (8).

                          © Copyright Original Source

                          Certainly - but in this particular passage, God declares that he will exercise that sovereignty. He has sovereignty - yes. That is asserted in many passages. In somewhat fewer, but still many, passages, it also becomes clear that he does not ordinarily exercise his sovereignty.


                          But this was to show that sins committed by others are possibly sent from the hand of God.
                          There would be places that show sins being committed by some whom God sends - passages that show God sending people expressly to commit sin might be difficult to find.
                          1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                          .
                          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                          Scripture before Tradition:
                          but that won't prevent others from
                          taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                          of the right to call yourself Christian.

                          ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                            Certainly - but in this particular passage, God declares that he will exercise that sovereignty. He has sovereignty - yes. That is asserted in many passages. In somewhat fewer, but still many, passages, it also becomes clear that he does not ordinarily exercise his sovereignty.
                            Which passages would those be, though? I believe God is always exercising his sovereignty:

                            "The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD." (Prov. 16:33)
                            "The Lord works out everything for his own ends--even the wicked for a day of disaster." (Prov. 16:4)
                            "The mind of man plans his way, but the Lord directs his steps." (Prov. 16:9)
                            "Many are the plans in a man's heart, but it is the Lord's purpose that prevails." (Prov. 19:21)

                            There would be places that show sins being committed by some whom God sends - passages that show God sending people expressly to commit sin might be difficult to find.
                            "For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur." (Acts 4:27–28)

                            Blessings,
                            Lee
                            "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                              "For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur." (Acts 4:27–28)
                              Nothing there says that God put them there, much less put them there to engage in perfidy. As for the proverbs ... 16:33 shows that outcomes are in the hands of God. The others simply show that the plans of men don't come to anything when the Lord exercises the power of veto. 16:4 in particular shows that God will stay his hand until the time is right.
                              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                              .
                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                              Scripture before Tradition:
                              but that won't prevent others from
                              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                              of the right to call yourself Christian.

                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                                Nothing there says that God put them there, much less put them there to engage in perfidy.
                                "... to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur" implies God's direct sovereignty in what they did. Are you saying God did not plan the cross?

                                16:4 in particular shows that God will stay his hand until the time is right.
                                "The Lord works out everything for his own ends" states that God is working in everything, not that he stays his hand...

                                Blessings,
                                Lee
                                "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                                Comment

                                widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                                Working...
                                X