mls@mhuxu.att.com (Michael L Siemon) (08/12/89)
I'm picking up on the moderator's comment, rather than on Lance Beckner's questions: > The classic answer to 1 is that in predestination God uses secondary > causes. That is, when God decides that someone is going to be saved, > he also sets up the way that this will happen. I'm afraid my mind goes into a state of dissociation at about this point in the development. Assuming that God works through "secondary causes" it becomes totally unclear to me what sense "cause" has in the discussion. At that point, the doctrine of predestination seems to have as its only content an affirmation that there is no other (ultimate) power but God and that subsidiary causes must all be viewed as deriving from God's will. Which I don't dispute, but I don't see much point to it in that case. In other words, I can vaguely understand predestination as a sort of backhanded way to deny Manichean dualism. But I am at a loss to understand any positive signficance for the doctrine. Would anyone care to explain? (This is an open invitation to the moderator or anyone else who wants to take a stab at it.) -- Michael L. Siemon I say "You are gods, sons of the cucard!dasys1!mls Most High, all of you; nevertheless att!sfbat!mls you shall die like men, and fall standard disclaimer like any prince." Psalm 82:6-7 [I have a feeling this issue has already come up before, but maybe I'm remembering something in talk.religion.misc. I object to predestination when it is presented as intellectual speculation. So I am quite sympathetic with your concern to give it a positive significance. I think there are several. For Luther, the main importance of election seems to be its connection with grace. For him, it was good news because it means that his salvation is based, not on anything he did, but on a decision by God. Another concern, which I think is more evident in Calvin, is the connection with providence. Christians are asked to believe that everything that happens is under God's control. Thus we are to have confidence that whatever happens to us is meant by God for our good. (I admit that in many cases this is hard to see.) In order for this to be true, we must believe that every human action is part of God's plan. --clh]
stg@ihlpl.att.com (Scott T Grant) (08/14/89)
In article <Aug.11.21.42.39.1989.6919@athos.rutgers.edu>, mls@mhuxu.att.com (Michael L Siemon) writes:
[Stuff about pre-destination deleted for space]
Sorry, I just can't buy into this bit about God. I also don't believe
he can be the kind and loving God you portray. Given that God is omnipotent
and knows everything that has/is/will happen in the universe we can then
take it one step further. God knows, from the time of a persons birth, even
before, where that soul is bound. Yet he lets them be born, live and die only
to go to hell and thus give him greater glory.....don't sound like the kind
of God I would be abasing myself to in servitude.
"Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law!" Scott Grant
-Aleister Crowley AT&T Bell Laboratories
"What be the difference if I remain the same?
The mind is it's own place and in itself
Can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven.
In my view, to reign is worth ambition, though in Hell.
Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven."
-Satan from Milton's "Paradise Lost"
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are my own and are not the views of AT&T,
my employer or:
"The Establishment"
mls@mhuxu.att.com (Michael L Siemon) (08/17/89)
In article <Aug.13.23.49.20.1989.26703@athos.rutgers.edu>, stg@ihlpl.att.com (Scott T Grant) writes: > In article <Aug.11.21.42.39.1989.6919@athos.rutgers.edu>, mls@mhuxu.att.com (Michael L Siemon) writes: > [Stuff about pre-destination deleted for space] > Sorry, I just can't buy into this bit about God. I also don't believe > he can be the kind and loving God you portray. Given that God is omnipotent > and knows everything that has/is/will happen in the universe we can then > take it one step further. God knows, from the time of a persons birth, even > before, where that soul is bound. Yet he lets them be born, live and die only > to go to hell and thus give him greater glory.....don't sound like the kind > of God I would be abasing myself to in servitude. I'm not sure why my note elicited this diatribe. For one thing, I was questioning the point of predestinarian doctrines, not supporting them. Scott seems to be projecting an image *he* has about Christian belief -- not an uncommon one for children "raised Christian" (but ineptly so) to have, but that only confirms my suspicions about "religious education" forced on the young. For the record, I do say that God is loving, but I have never described God as "kind" -- nor as "gentle" "meek" or "mild" except (under some protest) in singing Christmas carols. I do not "abase" myself before God; and insofar as I am in servitude to God, that is glorification and not abasement. To give God glory is to be an (adoptive) child of God and no longer a forced servant (which describes rather those who *will* not accept God's offer of love; *they* are reduced to being vehicles of God's -- often very *un*kind -- will.) The dove descending breaks the air with flame of incandescent terror ... Love, Love is the unfamiliar Name that weaves the intolerable shirt of flame ... -- Michael L. Siemon I find it important in philosophizing to cucard!dasys1!mls keep changing my posture, not to stand att!sfbat!mls for too long on _one_ leg, so as not to standard disclaimer get stiff. -- Ludwig Wittgenstein
zach@drutx.att.com (Zach Lewis) (08/17/89)
In article <Aug.13.23.49.20.1989.26703@athos.rutgers.edu>, stg@ihlpl.att.com (Scott T Grant) writes: > In article <Aug.11.21.42.39.1989.6919@athos.rutgers.edu>, mls@mhuxu.att.com (Michael L Siemon) writes: > > [Stuff about pre-destination deleted for space] > Sorry, I just can't buy into this bit about God. I also don't believe > he can be the kind and loving God you portray. Given that God is omnipotent > and knows everything that has/is/will happen in the universe we can then > take it one step further. God knows, from the time of a persons birth, even > before, where that soul is bound. Yet he lets them be born, live and die only > to go to hell and thus give him greater glory.....don't sound like the kind > of God I would be abasing myself to in servitude. > I am confused by the fact that God knows that my life should not exist because God knows the end. Don't I have a right to live my life ? Or should God live it in His mind only ? If I saw a football game and taped it on my VCR and then showed it to you could I change the game ? Should the game be played because I know the end and you don't ? Don't you have a right to see the game for yourself ? Why is it so hard to see that knowledge does not cause or prevent things from happening to someone else. If I know that when you jump off a building you will break your leg and you don't believe me, does my knowledge cause your broken leg when you jump ? Why is knowledege a problem to some people ? Example if I say that the use of alcohol will have a negative effect on society and you disagree would I cause the problems of drunk driving, destroyed families, etc. You decide to say there is no God which implies I can live without the knowledge that God will give me, does God have the right to say because he knows that in the End you will try to destroy yourself with weapons of war rather than try to feed the hungry that I know what will happen so I want let them be born ? I couldn't serve a God who didn't believe in choice and consequences ! Maybe you want a God who make decisions for you rather than you choosing the right course ? REMEMBER: It is always a Choice and I can't make a choice for you ! Zac
crowe@sci.ccny.cuny.edu (Daniel Crowe) (08/24/89)
In article <Aug.13.23.49.20.1989.26703@athos.rutgers.edu> stg@ihlpl.att.com (Scott T Grant) writes: > Sorry, I just can't buy into this bit about God. I also don't believe > he can be the kind and loving God you portray. Given that God is omnipotent > and knows everything that has/is/will happen in the universe we can then > take it one step further. God knows, from the time of a persons birth, even > before, where that soul is bound. Yet he lets them be born, live and die only > to go to hell and thus give him greater glory.....don't sound like the kind > of God I would be abasing myself to in servitude. Personally, I believe that God knows all the possibilities for the future, but that He doesn't know which of the many possibilities will actually occur until it does. Given that man is a free moral agent, that God did not create him to sin but that sin is the result of free will choice, at any point where man might sin, at least two possible futures exist. Given that many such points exist, the number of possible futures grows rapidly with time. Of course, the number of such points is finite for any human (before the resurrection), and the range of possible types of futures is bounded by restraints of God. To get back to my original statement, God knows all the possible futures and is prepared to respond to whichever one actually occurs (thereby affecting its course) but He does not know beforehand which choice will be made in any free will decision (by definition). He could have created the universe such that only one predetermined future could evolve, but he chose not to do so, so that men might serve Him out of love rather than because they could not do otherwise. For example, I believe that God did not know that Satan would rebel and drag down Adam and Eve and the whole human race, but He knew that it was a possibility, and prepared the plan of salvation just in case he did. In fact, the Bible states that the plan of salvation was prepared before the creation of the world. I do not believe that God knows who will be saved or lost until they die or the Second Advent, as appropriate; therefore, Scott's objection does not apply. I realize that I hold a minority opinion regarding God's omniscience and foreknowledge, but I have come to that conclusion after long and prayerful consideration of the issue. I would be willing to discuss the issue in more detail if anyone is interested, either in this group or through email. Scott's comment that the judgment of the wicked brings glory to God is true and deserves comment, but I will refrain from doing so in this article since it is already to long. Perhaps some other time if anyone is interested. Shalom. -- Daniel (God is my judge) * "Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to physics graduate student * speak and slow to become angry, for man's City College of New York * anger does not bring about the righteous crowe@sci.ccny.cuny.edu * life that God desires." (James 1:19-20)