God: The Micromanager

This conversation puts me in mind of a movie I once viewed called "The Devil's Advocate" .... here is a memorable quote:

Kevin Lomax (young Lawyer): "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven", is that it?

John Milton aka Satan: Why not? I'm here on the ground with my nose in it since the whole thing began. I've nurtured every sensation man's been inspired to have. I cared about what he wanted and I never judged him. Why? Because I never rejected him. In spite of all his imperfections, I'm a fan of man! I'm a humanist. Maybe the last humanist.

 

Who said anything about "complete freedom." You know how Calvinists always explain how Totally depraved doesn't mean men are as evil as they could be. Well we don't believe men are as "free" as they "could be." They do have limitations, obviously. And of course our morally free choices are under God's permissive sovereign control, so it is not as if my view is somehow negating that aspect of God's "control."

When has anyone ever said such a thing? Why not just deal with our ACTUAL words, there are plenty of them since I tend to be a little long winded, right?

Once again your statements leave no distinction for God's active directives and his permissive decrees, but I've come to expect that.

WHOA!!! Show me one! A thread might close (beyond either of our control) but I've never once, to my knowledge left a discussion. I do recall you not responding to a few, but you just may not have seen them.

So, what I hear you saying is that God is not powerful enough to be able to create a world with free moral agents, even if he wanted to? And you call our view of God small? At lease I admit that God COULD have chosen the Calvinistic model if He wanted to, but you step beyond that saying that God COULD NOT have done it in the Arminian way even if He wanted to because it would be impossible for Him.


BTW, you have still yet to reply to the post regarding Ware's compatibilistic arguments and their dependance on uniquely divine events such as the crucifixion and scriptures inspiration.

 

Well, at least in that movie Satan was "in control" of his own evil desires and resulting ludicrous statements. Some here would have you believe that God causally determined Satan's nature, motives, desires and thus his statements so as to leave no real distinguishing factors between God's desires/actions and Satan's.

 

OK...since your the Theologian....explain the Satan character in Job? Is he totally independent of God?

 

Reign in Hell? :tonofbricks:

This is the way I see hell. To be chained in darkness where the fires of hell will not quench the darkness. The devil has no kingdom. It is a lie of Satan that he has a kingdom that man will reign with him. He hates man with a burning rage, Satan loves himself only.

Satan only needs permission because of God's hedge of protection. God is all powerful and puts a leash on Satan if not we would of already have destroyed ourselves. We have the technology to do so, it is God who holds it back.

One day billions will come to Jesus an amount that cannot be counted and men will not hinder them by saying God will not save all men.

 

You assume that since God causally did determine all about Satan in every aspect, that it "leave no real distinguishing factors between God's desires/actions and Satans."

You would be incorrect in your assumption.

Your concluding remarks upon such who believe as you've described are prevaricatious conclusions that are unwarranted. Furthermore you show much misunderstanding coupled with deficient ability to recognize that Holy God can do, create, determine, allow, will, choose, lead, turn hearts to His purposes and ends, and still remain as He is, the immutable, Holy and Just God.

Just because you cannot distinguish and separate the two, doesn't mean the blame lies upon those who in fact do understand/accept this truth. All you've done is come to a misguided and faulty conclusion that no one believes accept those who can't yet grasp this truth concerning God. Misunderstanding it leads to the absurd conclusion you've given.

 

No, clearly not. I've never claimed any of God's creatures have total independence. They are confined within the perimeters of freedom that God, in his sovereignty, has set forth. Satan, just as any other creature, can only do what God has permitted Him to do. But, those who don't distinguish between God's permissive will and his directives blur these lines leaving no measure of independence and thus distinction between God's desires and his creatures desires. This gives no basis for any rational understanding of accountability, reward, punishment, not to mention relationship and interaction. You ultimately have God rewarding himself and punishing himself and interacting with himself.

 

God has the means and power to "allow/permit' others to decide what they have mind set on doing, and regardless if He directly guides them ti decide what to do, or alows them to decide themselves, isn't it that in both cases God will be determining what happens as per His "master Plan?"

That God being able to BOTH determine directly and by using choices others make in order to have His Will done keeps him fully Soveirgn?

 

With all due respect JF, this question was posed at Aaron....however thank you for your comments. Id like to here his understanding.

 

OK so bottom line you believe in Gods exercising a "Permissive Will" ....got it!

 

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/exposing-permissive-will-god/

From RC Sproul

 

pre·var·i·cate   [pri-var-i-keyt] Show IPA
verb (used without object), -cat·ed, -cat·ing.
to speak falsely or misleadingly; deliberately misstate or create an incorrect impression; lie.

Sounds like you may be attempting to call another brother a liar. Is this so?

 

He is not addressing my view. I know because he writes:

"What is usually meant by divine permission is that God simply lets it happen. That is, He does not directly intervene to prevent its happening. Here is where grave dangers lurk. Some theologies view this drama as if God were impotent to do anything about human sin."

Which is NOT what I believe. God is more than able to do anything He wants to do about human sin. His CHOICE to permit a free moral sin is not equal in any way shape or form to his being "impotent to do anything about it," as RC suggests.

I agree with the rest of what he says regarding that particular view.

This view makes man sovereign, not God. God is reduced to the role of spectator or cheerleader, by which God’s exercise in providence is that of a helpless Father who, having done all He can do, must now sit back and simply hope for the best. He permits what He cannot help but permit because He has no sovereign power over it. This ghastly view is not merely a defective view of theism; it is unvarnished atheism.

Amen! A view which believes God is impotent in the face of human sin certainly warrants this critique.

Now, can you find anything about our actual view of permissive will?

 

Sproul didn't suggest God being impotent whatsoever, he said others theologies suggest this as in opposition to his view.

 

Depends on what you mean by "control" this time...here we go again...please stop the merry-go-round I want to get off.

Yet your view suggests that Satan's motives are causally determined by the nature God determined thus leaving no basis for Satan's independent desire/motive/intent.

I went over this before when I wrote:

I don't remember you replying to this. Do you?

 

You still haven't answered the question about how something (Satan's evil intent) came from nothing (the absence of good). When you do that, I'll proceed...