What had happen' was.....: Apr 1, 2010

Brennon recently posted a great post about "Necessary and Sufficient". I am putting my comments in bold. Brennon's words are not bolded. In discussing these matters with Brennon I am crystallizing my understanding. Let's see if we can force it further.

One particularly notorious determinist and I are discussing our different views on God's relation to the events in creation. He thinks that God has made any and every even that happens necessary by divine decree. I hold to libertarianism and think that God created free creatures whose actions are causally distinct from God in some circumstances.

I agree that our actions are causally distinct from God. I don't understand where does the Bible say we are free creatures while we are are dead in sin - slaves to sin. We are not free. If we were free the we could say that we can choose never to sin.

I claim his view seems to implicate God in all sin. He asserts that I don't escape this problem because since I believe that God foreknows all things, He foreknew that the only way sin would happen would be to create free creatures, and that implicates God in their sin. As I argued in my response to James Swan (found here) this is not the case. It is logically inappropriate to transfer the responsibility for the sins of independent creatures to God simply because He foreknows them.

It's not just not that God foreknows everything that can and does happen. God does not stop certain acts. If he can stop an action but doesn't, then how is it inappropriate to ascribe some responsibility to God. We also know that God takes credit for some of the bad things that befall people for judgment.

⁵ I am the LORD, and there is no other;
       apart from me there is no God.
       I will strengthen you,
       though you have not acknowledged me,
⁶ so that from the rising of the sun
       to the place of its setting
       men may know there is none besides me.
       I am the LORD, and there is no other.
⁷ I form the light and create darkness,
       I bring prosperity and create disaster;
       I, the LORD, do all these things. -Isaiah 45:5-7

And God takes no responsibility for other events.

³⁰ " 'The people of Judah have done evil in my eyes, declares the LORD. They have set up their detestable idols in the house that bears my Name and have defiled it. ³¹ They have built the high places of Topheth in the Valley of Ben Hinnom to burn their sons and daughters in the fire—something I did not command, nor did it enter my mind. ³² So beware, the days are coming, declares the LORD, when people will no longer call it Topheth or the Valley of Ben Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter, for they will bury the dead in Topheth until there is no more room. - Jeremiah 7:30-32

Therefore I don't think we can make a hard fast rule about what God is responsible for and what God isn't responsible for.

Consider this example that I used in response to this: If no one invented the airplane, then 9/11 wouldn't have occurred. Hence: 9/11 causally depends on the invention of the airplane. Therefore Wilbur and Orville Wright caused 9/11.

The problem with this example is the Wilbur and Orville had no way to stop 9/11 and God could have. therefore how could God not be responsible? God had a purpose. We don't know what all of that purpose is and therefore we can't blame him or charge Him with error because we don't know all God had in mind. We need to trust God..

Or consider this example: The inventor of the automobile probably foresaw the potential tragedies that could come about from smashing a couple tons of steel into someone, but he obviously thought that the greater good that would come from having such a convenient form of transportation was worth it. He likewise can't be blamed for the negative future consequences that occurred because of the automobile's invention, even though he knew they most likely would occur.

Again the inventor of the automobile could not stop any of those consequences because he has no control over what people do with his invention. However God can and sometimes does intervene. God is under no obligation to intervene when and how we think he should. God is good and everything He does is good because all things work together for the good of God's people. (Romans 8:28-29).

I think a better example is Iron Man (although fictional). Tony Stark invents amazing and powerful weapons and takes it upon himself to make sure his creation are stopped from being misused to hurt other people. I think that is what God does. When there is suffering and pain, God allows it, although he has the power to stop it, to bring about purposes out of the council of his own will.

⁷In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God's grace ⁸that he lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding. ⁹And he made known to us the mystery of his will according to his good pleasure, which he purposed in Christ, ¹⁰to be put into effect when the times will have reached their fulfillment—to bring all things in heaven and on earth together under one head, even Christ.
¹¹In him we were also chosen having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, ¹²in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory. - Ephesians 1:7-12

This is where recognizing the difference between necessary and sufficient conditions come in. The creation of free creatures is only a necessary condition for evil. Those free creatures did not have to sin, but in order for them to sin they would have to be free. On the determinist end, however, God's decrees become the sufficient condition for sin. All that is needed for necessitated creatures to sin is the simple decree made by the determiner. The determiner is therefore the responsible party, since they are the one who has made all these events necessary, even sin.

Again, where in the Bible does it say that we are free? It says we are only free in Christ (Romans 5;6;7;8). Adam did not have to sin. But that is not true for us. Added to the fact that we have scripture pointing out that sins and events are necessary in order for God's will to be fulfilled.

²⁶From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. ²⁷God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. ²⁸'For in him we live and move and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring.' - Acts 17: 26-28

This does not mean that we don't do things against God's will, only that God's will ultimately be the reality that we experience because all things will conform to his will. I would say that make everything that God has determined necessary and sufficient.

But he said to me, "My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness." Therefore I will boast all the more gladly about my weaknesses, so that Christ's power may rest on me.- 2 Corinthians 2:9

Brennon's Thoughts: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions vis a vis God and the Human Will

This was an interesting debate. William Lane Craig was a great as always. I like his Resurrection arguments. I have to admit that Richard Carrier is completely wrong. My only criticism of Craig is that I wish that he would spend more time defending the Bible when his opponent challenges the Bible's validity. Carrier spends his time arguing that the Gospels are merely symbolic fiction. I can't see how he is making a solid case at all. The most egregious to me is equating the Lazarus in the parable of "Lazarus and the rich man" in Luke with the Lazarus Jesus raised from the dead in John. He says the man in the parable is a fiction to prove a point: that dead person coming back from the dead would not be believed. Then Carrier argues that John made up Lazarus so that a man can come back from the dead negating Luke. Many problems with this. "Lazarus" was a common name...why assume that they were supposed to be the same person? Why assume that the Lazarus in the parable was made up? A parable does not presuppose a fictional story. The two men were very different. Lazarus in the parable was poor. The Lazarus who was in John was well-to-do...he had money and influence. Another point is we have no idea what Lazarus said or talked about when he came back. Ib did a post on this before but now I will post the video to go along.

Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Craig vs Carrier - Part 1

What had happen' was.....

Thursday, April 1, 2010

Brennon's Thoughts: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions vis a vis God and the Human Will

Monergism vs. Synergism Debate Part II

Gary Habermas on Jesus of Nazareth

Danielle Belton's The Black Snob - The Snob Blog - President Obama: Gettin' Stuff Done Whether You Like Or Not!

Apologetics 315: Is Christianity True? Essay Series Foreword by Chris Reese

Apologetics 315: Essay Series: Is Christianity True?

Did Jesus Rise from the Dead? Craig vs Carrier - Redux