What's the difference between saying...

15,369 Views | 485 Replies | Last: 3 yr ago by Patriot101
Patriot101
How long do you want to ignore this user?
God allowed this or God caused this or that?

Let's say that a man takes his very young daughters to a remote cabin in the forest. He leaves his very young daughters in the cabin, leaves the door wide open, and goes for a hike or goes to gather some fire wood.

Then wolves come in through the opened door and drag off his young for a meal.

Do we say the father allowed this to happen or do we say the father caused this to happen?
What's the difference?
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Job gives insight into that thought process. But Job was nor irresponsible like the father in your story was imho.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You should check out Greg Boyd's sermon on Job. Fantastic!



As for the OP's analogy, I think it's flawed. A better analogy, imo, would be a parent helping their child learn to ride a bike. Is the parent to blame when the child insists on the parent letting go, even though the parent knows what will likely happen but lets go anyways? No.
AgLiving06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think given the vagueness of the example, there's really no "right" answer to be had here. It's also includes multiple "decision points" that each need their own facts.

So first off, lets define our terms.

God allowed - I would argue this is a passive action.
God caused - This would be an active action.

When I look at your story, I see a couple decision points:

1. Man brings his young daughter(s) to the cabin.
2. Man leaves the door open when he leaves
3. Wolves take daughter(s) for food.

Given the information we have, I'm not sure we could draw any real conclusion one way or the other.

For example:
1. Did the man have a choice in bringing his daughters?
2. Did the man decide to leave the door open of his own will?
3. Why are the wolves there? Why are the wolves hungry?

You can make an argument that every action was passive, or active, or somewhere in between.

It really only becomes a problem (in my opinion) if you take an absolute standard of passive or active as the only answer.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well in a classic system, God is responsible for absolutely everything. As an omniscient, omnipotent creator there is no room for anything else. If a hurricane hits Florida next summer, then it's because God created the universe knowing a hurricane would hit Florida next summer, and he did not create a universe where the hurricane did not hit Florida next summer. Or God created a world where Genghis Khan would be responsible for the deaths of tens of millions, knowing it would happen when He created it.

It doesn't make sense to make God passive in such a scenario. Absolutely power and absolute knowledge leaves no room for chance or surprise. You have to limit one of those attributes in some way for God to ever be considered passive.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
UTExan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Patriot101 said:

God allowed this or God caused this or that?

Let's say that a man takes his very young daughters to a remote cabin in the forest. He leaves his very young daughters in the cabin, leaves the door wide open, and goes for a hike or goes to gather some fire wood.

Then wolves come in through the opened door and drag off his young for a meal.

Do we say the father allowed this to happen or do we say the father caused this to happen?
What's the difference?
Since God is sovereign, the answer is simple. We repent from our sins, depend on His mercy and make known our prayers and supplications to Him for our protection. We also take active measures to avoid disease, danger and make provision for personal and family protection. If things go badly, we trust in Romans 8:28 and ask for his wisdom and provision. Whatever happens, we trust in God, having no mind of our own when circumstances are out of our control.
It is better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness- Sir Terence Pratchett
“ III stooges si viveret et nos omnes ad quos etiam probabile est mittent custard pies”
TheArtistFormerlyKnownAs
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I disagree. I have yet to hear a good argument as to why God isn't the cause of all this misery.

If he knew it was going to happen before he created the universe, than there is just no escaping that he caused all the pain, torment and misery faced within said universe.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TheArtistFormerlyKnownAs said:

I disagree. I have yet to hear a good argument as to why God isn't the cause of all this misery.

If he knew it was going to happen before he created the universe, than there is just no escaping that he caused all the pain, torment and misery faced within said universe.
You would like God of the Possible by Greg Boyd.
craigernaught
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You like Greg Boyd as much as Zobel likes anyone with an unpronounceable Greek name.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
craigernaught said:

You like Greg Boyd as much as Zobel likes anyone with an unpronounceable Greek name.
Hahaha yeah, I'm a huge fan. He's had such a positive influence on my faith, especially coming from the abusive cult that I grew up in.
Post removed:
by user
kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think he is now Zobel. . . . maybe?
Martin Q. Blank
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Quote:

God allowed this or God caused this or that?
The first makes me think God does not know everything, something has come to his attention for permission, and he is granting it or not.

The second is the classical view of God that he is the First Cause.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I disagree. I have yet to hear a good argument as to why God isn't the cause of all this misery.

If he knew it was going to happen before he created the universe, than there is just no escaping that he caused all the pain, torment and misery faced within said universe.

I think it ends up being a semantics discussion around the power of God vs the goodness of God...and we end up rationalizing the situation by defining one in terms of the other.

Some will argue that God limits his power to preserve his goodness, while others will say that he defines what good is.
Patriot101
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Open theism is against Christianity. You can't go there, Pacifist. Please say no.
kurt vonnegut
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
AgLiving06 said:

I think given the vagueness of the example, there's really no "right" answer to be had here. It's also includes multiple "decision points" that each need their own facts.

So first off, lets define our terms.

God allowed - I would argue this is a passive action.
God caused - This would be an active action.

When I look at your story, I see a couple decision points:

1. Man brings his young daughter(s) to the cabin.
2. Man leaves the door open when he leaves
3. Wolves take daughter(s) for food.

Given the information we have, I'm not sure we could draw any real conclusion one way or the other.

For example:
1. Did the man have a choice in bringing his daughters?
2. Did the man decide to leave the door open of his own will?
3. Why are the wolves there? Why are the wolves hungry?

You can make an argument that every action was passive, or active, or somewhere in between.

It really only becomes a problem (in my opinion) if you take an absolute standard of passive or active as the only answer.

The father in our example may have been 'Dad of the Year' taking his daughters on the yearly camping trip and decided to leave the door open to give the girls fresh air while he went for a short hike in an area that is not known to have wolves, bears, or any other potentially dangerous wildlife. For the reasons that AgLiving mentioned, I don't think the analogy really works.

I think the most problematic part of OPs analogy is that implies a comparison of how causation and consequences works with humans with how it works with God. Human actions always have all sorts of unintended consequences (like for the girls and the wolves). Can you say the same about God? I think that just depends on your opinion and 'version' of God.

A better example would be a child born with a severe birth defect. One that is purely genetic and happens by chance rather than by any action of the mother or father. Does God allow that happen through chance? Or does God cause that?

Trying to understand or describe intention of a being that you define as 'all-powerful' or 'all-knowing' or 'beyond time' or whatever is a fool's errand. It seems to me that the only way for us to describe celestial causation with a human analogy is to forfeit a lot of the power you assign to God.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Patriot101 said:

Open theism is against Christianity. You can't go there, Pacifist. Please say no.


Care to show your work on that statement?
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
That's me. Changed my username.
Patriot101
How long do you want to ignore this user?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/is-open-theism-still-a-factor-10-years-after-ets-vote/%3famp
Post removed:
by user
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Unfortunately yes. Got some lovely messages.
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AstroAg17 said:

Too much Covid hate?


Now I'm curious.
Star Wars Memes Only
How long do you want to ignore this user?
kurt vonnegut said:

I think he is now Zobel. . . . maybe?


Ahh, I was wondering too.
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

Care to show your work on that statement?

The simplest explanation is that He ceases to be God. I, too, think that's a bit harsh in terms of being against Christianity. However, I think that open theism raises more problems than it solves.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
People on f16 didnt appreciate my evidence-based approach to the pandemic. Sticking to peer reviewed papers is facism, or something.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Oh, no one told me ETS had almost refuted open theism. If I had known that, then I could have saved so much thought and research. So much wasted time and effort when the mighty and peerless ETS had come close to censoring the proponents of open theism. That the bastion of evangelical orthodoxy once came into the broad vicinity of the topic and nearly rejected it is all I need to hear
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
ramblin_ag02
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
diehard03 said:

Quote:

Care to show your work on that statement?

The simplest explanation is that He ceases to be God. I, too, think that's a bit harsh in terms of being against Christianity. However, I think that open theism raises more problems than it solves.


I disagree, as otherwise the problem of free will is paradoxical. And without free will, the bedrock concepts of human love and sin are meaningless. Without sin and human love, Christianity is senseless

Though if you're going off the description of open theism in that article then you're right. Either the article mischaracterized it or the proponents in said article were sadly unrefined with it
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
Post removed:
by user
diehard03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I disagree, as otherwise the problem of free will is paradoxical. And without free will, the bedrock concepts of human love and sin are meaningless. Without sin and human love, Christianity is senseless

Though if you're going off the description of open theism in that article then you're right. Either the article mischaracterized it or the proponents in said article were sadly unrefined with it

it's obvious that there are some problems one must contend with...but I'd rather contend with our understanding of sin and human love than to define God in a certain way so that something isn't senseless to us.

Again, to reiterate, I don't think it's enough to cause disunity (in my opinion)
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
From my reading of the first chapter of Job, God allows Satan to torment Job. Am I reading that wrong?

Now I firmly believe in the complete sovereignty of God and His foreknowledge of everything. But there are instances in the Bible when people repented(like Nineveh)and God relented.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
dermdoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I also would like to add that Martin Q Blank helped me on this with his wonderful tribute to God's sovereignty in, I believe, his grandmother's death.

As some of y'all know, I lost a sister to cancer three years ago and struggled with the concept of it being God's plan.

Now I can rest in God's sovereignty.
No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Patriot101 said:

Open theism is against Christianity. You can't go there, Pacifist. Please say no.
Perhaps your understanding of open theism is, but it's really not. Here are some resources that may help you grow in a proper understanding of the position:

15 Reasons Open Theism is TRUE
How People Misunderstand Open Theism
Open Theism: A Basic Introduction
5 Ways the Bible Supports Open Theism

You may disagree with it, which is fine. But to say it's "against Christianity", and by default to say that those who subscribe to open theism are "against Christianity", is asinine. It sounds like those who screech that a rejection of Eternal Conscious Torment, or Penal Substitution, is "against Christianity".
Patriot101
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Revelation 13:8

"...and all who dwell on earth will worship it, everyone whose name has not been written before the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who was slain."
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG

Quote:

And without free will, the bedrock concepts of human love and sin are meaningless. Without sin and human love, Christianity is senseless
This. If humans do not truly possess free will, we cannot even truly love God. To love, one must be able to choose not to love. Free will is essential to the Christian faith, imo, and is not possible if every single thing is meticulously blueprinted. We are simply following a script with no real choice, and no real ability to love others or God.
Martin Q. Blank
How long do you want to ignore this user?
PacifistAg said:


Quote:

And without free will, the bedrock concepts of human love and sin are meaningless. Without sin and human love, Christianity is senseless
This. If humans do not truly possess free will, we cannot even truly love God. To love, one must be able to choose not to love. Free will is essential to the Christian faith, imo, and is not possible if every single thing is meticulously blueprinted. We are simply following a script with no real choice, and no real ability to love others or God.
Did Christ truly choose to die for your sins?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.