Sin in light of exhaustive determinism

“But when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peacefully to him.” (Gen 37:4)

What kind of inability is this “could not”?

…
 
ReverendRV said:
Asking this would be like asking why God the Father and God the Son cannot Condemn God the Spirit, while the Spirit is Holy? Sure, there is more than the Sinlessness of the Holy Spirit to consider as a reason for God not to Condemn him; such as their relationship; but could God rightly do it? You may say there is a difference between the Spirit and 'O Sinful Man'; and you would be right. But your question doesn't presume the difference, but supposes the Lone parameter of all under consideration being equal as Perfect Beings; far be it for you God to do such a thing...

I think that's THE answer; far be it for God to do such a thing without a Good reason. Why? Because it's a Sin to Murder people...
Click to expand...

Reminds me of a story, I once read.

The Angels gathered before God and asked Him to make a perfect thing.

God replied, 'you do not know what you are asking; that would be a terrible thing'.

The Angels re-requested ..... and God relented and a terrible thing was born.
 
Dizerner said:
This is just a denial of God having (actual) free will.

I understand you are (divine) determinist, and that is to be expected.



I cannot do that which I choose not to do.

It does not mean I literally do not have the ability to do otherwise.



Well, our theologies are radically different.

If God is forced to do good, he doesn't really win any virtue for doing what is right... he doesn't even have a choice.

"I will be what I will be" is a valid interpretation of YHWH, and it shows God is not forced to be something.
Click to expand...
"I will be what I will be"

I understand that to mean God has an unChanging nature and He can be no other way.

You understand that it seems, that it is a choice He makes to be that way. And He could actually be another way.

But if He is free to do otherwise, then what reason do you have to believe He will not?

If you claim his promise, isn't He free to break his promises acording to you?
 
Sketo said:
“But when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peacefully to him.” (Gen 37:4)

What kind of inability is this “could not”?

…
Click to expand...

That's a good example, thank you.

Obviously the brothers were not forced to do this and made a real choice.
 
Dizerner said:
This is just a denial of God having (actual) free will.

I understand you are (divine) determinist, and that is to be expected.



I cannot do that which I choose not to do.

It does not mean I literally do not have the ability to do otherwise.



Well, our theologies are radically different.

If God is forced to do good, he doesn't really win any virtue for doing what is right... he doesn't even have a choice.

"I will be what I will be" is a valid interpretation of YHWH, and it shows God is not forced to be something.
Click to expand...
Yep ??
 
Simpletruther said:
"I will be what I will be"

I understand that to mean God has an unChanging nature and He can be no other way.

You understand that it seems, that it is a choice He makes to be that way. And He could actually be another way.

But if He is free to do otherwise, then what reason do you have to believe He will not?

If you claim his promise, isn't He free to break his promises acording to you?
Click to expand...

Well, that's a very deep question.

The truth is, if you come at a from a logical standpoint, there is literally no way to know if God is deceiving.

Don't you think something that created you and knows infinitely more than you could always find a way to make you think he's trustworthy when he's not?


We can approach this different ways.

We could say, well it's a kind of Pascal's wager, there's no point in worrying about it because if God wanted to deceive you, it's not like there's anything you can do about it, so just hope that he isn't and operate on that assumption.

We might take a sophisticated approach and just claim it's one of the paradoxes of being God—he can both ensure to deceive and assure a person in a way beyond logic, such that he has an ability to make known he is not deceiving.


I think both views have merit, and we should both hope and assume God is able to reveal he is not deceiving us.


But here again is a major problem I have with Calvinism—God has a "secret" decree that contradicts his "revealed" decrees many times, and I would never be able to rest or trust in a God like that.

I have to know God means what he says and isn't holding back or hiding something from me, such that, he could excuse lying to me or deceiving me.

And those who hold to a secret decree may try to argue it's not lying, but essentially it is dishonest in nature, and I have found several Calvinists who hesitated that honesty was even an attribute of God!

You could say "but God deceives people!", and yet, God only deceives people in judgment in the Bible after previously they rejected the truth. You will never, ever find a Biblical place where God deceives someone and it's not judgment for sin.


So I can understand the struggle in working out how we could know whether God could be honest.

But a God who freely chooses his character is not somehow volatile or double-minded for doing so, the fact that he chose to be that way shows he means what he says, and this does not necessarily leave it "up in the air" for him to later change his mind about it. There is such a thing as choosing to never change, you don't lose your free will, you just solidify your decision.
 
Last edited:
Dizerner said:
Well, that's a very deep question.

The truth is, if you come at a from a logical standpoint, there is literally no way to know if God is deceiving.

Don't you think something that created you and knows infinitely more than you could always find a way to make you think he's trustworthy when he's not?


We can approach this different ways.

We could say, well it's a kind of Pascal's wager, there's no point in worrying about it because if God wanted to deceive you, it's not like there's anything you can do about it, so just hope that he isn't and operate on that assumption.

We might take a sophisticated approach and just claim it's one of the paradoxes of being God—he can both ensure to deceive and assure a person in a way beyond logic, such that he has an ability to make known he is not deceiving.


I think both views have merit, and we should both hope and assume God is able to reveal he is not deceiving us.


But here again is a major problem I have with Calvinism—God has a "secret" decree that contradicts his "revealed" decrees many times, and I would never be able to rest or trust in a God like that.

I have to know God means what he says and isn't holding back or hiding something from me, such that, he could excuse lying to me or deceiving me.

And those who hold to a secret decree may try to argue it's not lying, but essentially it is dishonest in nature, and I have found several Calvinists who hesitated that honesty was even an attribute of God!

You could say "but God deceives people!", and yet, God only deceives people in judgment in the Bible after previously they rejected the truth. You will never, ever find a Biblical place where God deceives someone and it's not judgment for sin.


So I can understand the struggle in working out how we could know whether God could be honest.

But a God who freely chooses his character is not somehow volatile or double-minded for doing so, the fact that he chose to be that way shows he means what he says, and this does not necessarily leave it "up in the air" for him to later change his mind about it. There is such a thing as choosing to NEVER change, you don't lose your free will, you just solidify your decision.
Click to expand...
Yes it’s the inconsistent calvinist syndrome at work . It starts with a false concept if God and trickles down to all their doctrines .
 
Sketo said:
“But when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him and could not speak peacefully to him.” (Gen 37:4)

What kind of inability is this “could not”?
Click to expand...
Dizerner said:
Obviously the brothers were not forced to do this and made a real choice.
Click to expand...

I agree… but it also obvious they “could not” do otherwise… in some sense.

So would you agree that they both “could not” do otherwise (in some sense) and we’re not forced?

…
 
Sketo said:
I agree… but it also obvious they “could not” do otherwise… in some sense.

So would you agree that they both “could not” do otherwise (in some sense) and we’re not forced?

…
Click to expand...

They did not like the dreamer.
 
Sketo said:
You mean they “could not” like the dreamer…

…
Click to expand...

Nope ...... they did not like the dreamer.

At this point it is dream world verses "our" reality.

The dream world tends to win ...... but for us not being, we don't like not being.

The story is basically dream world won, and we are not.

As a matter of course Israel took his son's back.

From the dreamer.
 
Last edited:
Dizerner said:
We need to make the right objections to Calvinism, it's very important.

Logically, we should not argue that it is immoral for God to create things specifically to destroy, this is the entirely wrong foundation.

We should argue that it is not consistent with a maximally loving character to do such a thing.

That is, God doesn't do it because he couldn't do it, he does it because he wouldn't do it.
Click to expand...
Yes we see two completely different Gods between calvinists and nons with nature / character .
 
Dizerner said:
Well, that's a very deep question.

The truth is, if you come at a from a logical standpoint, there is literally no way to know if God is deceiving.

Don't you think something that created you and knows infinitely more than you could always find a way to make you think he's trustworthy when he's not?


We can approach this different ways.

We could say, well it's a kind of Pascal's wager, there's no point in worrying about it because if God wanted to deceive you, it's not like there's anything you can do about it, so just hope that he isn't and operate on that assumption.

We might take a sophisticated approach and just claim it's one of the paradoxes of being God—he can both ensure to deceive and assure a person in a way beyond logic, such that he has an ability to make known he is not deceiving.


I think both views have merit, and we should both hope and assume God is able to reveal he is not deceiving us.


But here again is a major problem I have with Calvinism—God has a "secret" decree that contradicts his "revealed" decrees many times, and I would never be able to rest or trust in a God like that.

I have to know God means what he says and isn't holding back or hiding something from me, such that, he could excuse lying to me or deceiving me.

And those who hold to a secret decree may try to argue it's not lying, but essentially it is dishonest in nature, and I have found several Calvinists who hesitated that honesty was even an attribute of God!

You could say "but God deceives people!", and yet, God only deceives people in judgment in the Bible after previously they rejected the truth. You will never, ever find a Biblical place where God deceives someone and it's not judgment for sin.


So I can understand the struggle in working out how we could know whether God could be honest.

But a God who freely chooses his character is not somehow volatile or double-minded for doing so, the fact that he chose to be that way shows he means what he says, and this does not necessarily leave it "up in the air" for him to later change his mind about it. There is such a thing as choosing to never change, you don't lose your free will, you just solidify your decision.
Click to expand...
All of this assumes He really chose a certain character. And isn't just making it all up.

Your view of Him allows for him to make it all up. And really no reason to assume He is not. So I cannot see a rational basis to trust him given your view.

Him "revealing" it to you personally suffers the same problem. Why believe anything He reveals?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top