God's Sovereignty vs. Man's "Will"

[pcosmar]

I think God loves us and sets us free. If we come to Him, we're His. If not, we were the devil's all along. He may be able to predict that. I'd be surprised if He can't. But it obviously serves His interests to let the wheat and the chaff separate themselves. Or, at least, it's obvious to me.

Good.
That is Free Will.

That is what I have been looking for. An actual statement. (as opposed to arguing with someone saying the same thing)

So what is the argument?

[PaulConventionWV]

If He made us do it then it's not wrong for us either.

Sure it is. I see no inconsistency.

If God created Lucifer then made Lucifer sin then made Adam and Eve sin as well then and then made every bad choice ever made throughout eternity then God is going against His own nature. You are using circular reasoning and logically contradicting yourself and going against express scripture that states that God doesn't tempt man to sin. Further you are contradicting your own assertion that God created us as "free agents." I'm not sure you even know what you believe.

God cannot "tempt" man to sin because that would entail Him goading us into an action that we do of our own free will. Other created beings may tempt us, but God does not tempt us because He doesn't simply try to make us do things.

No. It's a case of "Do as I make you do even though I falsely claim that I don't want you to do it."

God can tell us that He does not want us to do them, but that does not imply that we actually have the ability to defy God.

[PaulConventionWV]

Good.
That is Free Will.

That is what I have been looking for. An actual statement. (as opposed to arguing with someone saying the same thing)

So what is the argument?

Those were not my words.

[PaulConventionWV]

If God had wanted to create robots, He would have done so.

How do you know He didn't?

If we create a robot, can the robot rebel against us?

[acptulsa]

God cannot "tempt" man to sin because that would entail Him goading us into an action that we do of our own free will. Other created beings may tempt us, but God does not tempt us because He doesn't simply try to make us do things.

If you're going to take both sides of this debate, what do you need us for? You could argue with yourself in your closet, and give us a break.

[PaulConventionWV]

And again,, What is your point?

You seem to be arguing simply for the sake of arguing..without any point.

My point is that God is completely sovereign.

[PaulConventionWV]

You act like we're putting God in a box, but you're putting God in one hell of a lot tighter box than we are.

God is too sovereign to choose not to act? God is too sovereign to choose not to act?! God's sovereignty is so fragile that if He didn't choose which brand of toothpaste we grabbed at the store His sovereignty is destroyed? He is sovereign, but not so sovereign He can choose whether to act or not?

Or you're such a control freak that you can't conceive of a Being having power and not using the $#@! out of it? Because if that's the case, I'll stop wasting my time trying to reason with you.

God can choose not to act, but if He chooses not to act, then we can't act without Him because our existence depends on His action. How can we then make a decision that God did not make us do if He is all-knowing and created us? Those two things entail that He made us do them.

[jmdrake]

Sure it is. I see no inconsistency.

Then you should look harder.

God cannot "tempt" man to sin because that would entail Him goading us into an action that we do of our own free will. Other created beings may tempt us, but God does not tempt us because He doesn't simply try to make us do things.

So God just makes us sin instead of tempting us to sin? That's not what the Bible says.

James 1:13,14
When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed.

God can tell us that He does not want us to do them, but that does not imply that we actually have the ability to defy God.

If God gave man the ability to choose, and there is every Biblical indication that he did, then that means man does have that ability. But that ability is limited by God's ultimate power. Go back and read the story of the tower of Babel. God says "If we don't do something man will do whatever he wants." So God intervened. Your view is that God was directing man to build the tower in the first place. In which case God intervening to stop man is just God stopping Himself.

[PaulConventionWV]

I am trying to wrap my head around your arguments.

and failing..

are you just arguing for the sake of argument?,, or do you actually believe something?

Just because God allows something does not mean he caused that something.
Because He perceived it before hand does not necessarily mean that He caused it.

God sees the end from the beginning.. The result is what matters.. the bumps in the road are irrelevant.

Do you believe that 1) God created everything and 2) God knew what would happen when He created everything?

If you do, then God must have caused everything that happens to happen and there is nothing that can happen without His action.

[jmdrake]

God can choose not to act, but if He chooses not to act, then we can't act without Him because our existence depends on His action. How can we then make a decision that God did not make us do if He is all-knowing and created us? Those two things entail that He made us do them.

How can God "choose not to act" if you claim that every action is actually done by God all along? You're tripping over yourself.

[PaulConventionWV]

We do you keep trying to make up your false definition of sovereignty? We have the power that God delegated to us. God delegating power to a lesser and allowing that lesser being to make freewill choices in no way violates His sovereignty. The Bible doesn't teach that. You and others like you just made that up.



I never said God isn't powerless to stop us. That's a straw man argument and you either know it or should know it. I don't believe God chooses to intervene in decisions like what color socks I put on. That neither means nor implies that He is powerless to intervene.



God is a slave to your philosophy is the sense that you will not allow Him the freedom to grant freedom because you believe, for no real reason, that to do so would violate some definition of sovereignty that you basically just made up and that you have contradicted in this very post. The contradiction you made is that you've been going on and on about how if man is able to make any decision that means that God doesn't have the power, but then you came back with "God delegated contingent power" which is what the rest of us have been saying all along. Contingent power is NOT puppeteering.

Let me make this really simple. Do you believe that 1) God created everything and 2) God knew everything that would happen when He created it?

[jmdrake]

Do you believe that 1) God created everything and 2) God knew what would happen when He created everything?

If you do, then God must have caused everything that happens to happen and there is nothing that can happen without His action.

I believe that God created all possible realities and allows them to unfold with certain restrictions.

[acptulsa]

God can choose not to act, but if He chooses not to act, then we can't act without Him because our existence depends on His action. How can we then make a decision that God did not make us do if He is all-knowing and created us? Those two things entail that He made us do them.

Fail.

We can't act until He does. So? He acted before we were conceived. How can we make a decision He didn't make us do if He created us? The same way a child can do something his or her parents don't approve of. Can we do something He couldn't predict? Doubtful. So? So? So?

If you try to micromanage any kids you might have the way you claim God micromanages you, your kids will never grow, will never learn, and will never, ever develop a sense of responsibility. They will never make this society better, and if they can't do that, they'll never be allowed in heaven either.

God, I hope you never have kids.

[erowe1]

Good.
That is Free Will.

That is what I have been looking for. An actual statement. (as opposed to arguing with someone saying the same thing)

So what is the argument?

As long as whatever it is that you mean by "free will" is compatible with the truth that God predestined all things that happen, I have no problem with it.

[PaulConventionWV]

If you're going to take both sides of this debate, what do you need us for? You could argue with yourself in your closet, and give us a break.

How am I taking both sides? I don't understand.

[erowe1]

If God says it's wrong for men to sin then causes men to sin then God is doing something wrong.

That is not true. Things can be wrong for men but not wrong for God. For example, God has the absolute right to take any human life by any means for any reason at any time. But we do not have the right to do that. So if God uses one person to murder another, that person would be guilty of murder, but God would not be guilty of anything wrong at all.

[acptulsa]

How am I taking both sides? I don't understand.

You say man has no free will, then you say we do. Then you claim you don't understand how we could consider that the least bit contradictory.

One second God can't let us decide whether or not to tie our shoes without sacrificing His sovereignty, the next our sin has to be our own free will because God is perfect. Then God can sin without being a hypocrite because no rule--and no principle--applies to Him, not even His own.

When you get through tying yourself in a knot, wake us up if you need help untangling yourself. But don't be surprised if this totally illogical, completely contradictory, silly-assed dogma you're so desperately trying in vain to defend is worth the trouble.

*yawn*

[erowe1]

It means that God failed in His effort to create man in His image. That is unless God is a sock puppet too.

Being in the image of God doesn't mean being like him in all respects.

But let's say it did.

I don't accept the view that having our decisions be predetermined makes us sock puppets, but if it does, then yes, of course that would apply to God as well. All of his decisions are predetermined by his own nature. They don't just come about causelessly by random chance and then overcome him.

[pcosmar]

Those were not my words.

They were before you edited the post.

[PaulConventionWV]

Fail.

We can't act until He does. So? He acted before we were conceived. How can we make a decision He didn't make us do if He created us? The same way a child can do something his or her parents don't approve of. Can we do something He couldn't predict? Doubtful. So? So? So?

That's precisely my point? You say it's "doubtful" (I would use the word "impossible") that we can do some He can't predict. That's my whole point. There is nothing we do that is not dependent on the fact that God created us and knew what we would do. There is no difference between that and God making us do them. Keep in mind, though, when God "makes" us do things, it's not like another person making us do them, which implies that the one "making" us do things is equal to us and thus should not have that power.

If you try to micromanage any kids you might have the way you claim God micromanages you, your kids will never grow, will never learn, and will never, ever develop a sense of responsibility. They will never make this society better, and if they can't do that, they'll never be allowed in heaven either.

God, I hope you never have kids.

Once again, I did not create the kid. God did. I do not have complete sovereignty over my children because I did not create the children. There is nothing, however, that God did NOT create.

[PaulConventionWV]

They were before you edited the post.

No, they never were. I simply forgot to wrap quotes around them.

[PaulConventionWV]

How can God "choose not to act" if you claim that every action is actually done by God all along? You're tripping over yourself.

I fail to see the inconsistency. If God chooses not to act, then you do not act.

[PaulConventionWV]

I believe that God created all possible realities and allows them to unfold with certain restrictions.

So it's like a machine? How is that different from what I'm saying?

[PaulConventionWV]

As long as whatever it is that you mean by "free will" is compatible with the truth that God predestined all things that happen, I have no problem with it.

Exactly. I'm glad somebody agrees with me.

[Sonny Tufts]

Why is it so important for us not to be "puppets"? Why are Christians so hung up on the idea of Free Will? Might it have something to do with the idea of eternal damnation? I reject that, and so it's not hard for me to accept that we might be puppets after all. I mean, what's the actual problem with being a puppet? What's so wrong about that?

What's wrong with it is that if man is a puppet, there is no such thing as moral responsibility.

[acptulsa]

I fail to see the inconsistency. If God chooses not to act, then you do not act.

That does not follow.

Why is it the more Calvinists contradict themselves, the more energetically they post these contradictions, and the less attention they pay not only to the quote boxes in their own posts, but to the people who are trying to converse with them?

Sticking your fingers in your ears doesn't work on an internet forum.

Exactly. I'm glad somebody agrees with me.

LOL

It don't mean a thing, but it matches my dogma, so it's right.

[jmdrake]

So it's like a machine? How is that different from what I'm saying?

What you are saying in which post? You've been contradicting yourself quite a bit. On the one hand you say that God micromanages every action even to the point of making man sin. Then you turn around and say God "delegates" ability to man a "free agents". Basically when your faulty arguments are shot down you try to borrow what you just argued against from someone else.

[PaulConventionWV]

You say man has no free will, then you say we do. Then you claim you don't understand how we could consider that the least bit contradictory.

I never said man had free will. It really depends on what you mean by "free will", but I am saying there is no action man can take that is "free" of God. God is the cause of everything that exists, so He must be the cause of whatever we do.

One second God can't let us decide whether or not to tie our shoes without sacrificing His sovereignty, the next our sin has to be our own free will because God is perfect. Then God can sin without being a hypocrite because no rule--and no principle--applies to Him, not even His own.

There is no "let" in my view. God does not "let" things happen because that means that they could happen without Him. God causes us to make our decisions not because He can't stand the idea of letting us do otherwise, but because the whole reason we exist is because of Him. It logically follows that everything we do depends on Him.

Do you agree that God can take anyone's life at any time in any way He sees fit? Or would that be wrong?

When you get through tying yourself in a knot, wake us up if you need help untangling yourself. But don't be surprised if this totally illogical, completely contradictory, silly-assed dogma you're so desperately trying in vain to defend is worth the trouble.

*yawn*

I'm not saying anything contradictory.

[jmdrake]

Being in the image of God doesn't mean being like him in all respects.

In what respects do you believe man to be in God's image?

But let's say it did.

I don't accept the view that having our decisions be predetermined makes us sock puppets, but if it does, then yes, of course that would apply to God as well. All of his decisions are predetermined by his own nature. They don't just come about causelessly by random chance and then overcome him.

So then God isn't really sovereign either. Okay. Seriously the problem with your view and PCWV's view and SF's view and FF's view is that you've all built up your own personal definition of what "sovereignty" means and then you attack others views of God based on the false notion that it denies His sovereignty when it only denies your adopted definitions of the word sovereignty.

[PaulConventionWV]

What's wrong with it is that if man is a puppet, there is no such thing as moral responsibility.

That's a non sequitur. God can impose "right" and "wrong" on us, but that doesn't mean the same rules apply for Him because if they did, then that would mean the rule was being handed down to Him from some greater being than Him. God is maximally great. He is the absolute arbiter of morality, not just a servant of it.