To be free or not to be free... 'That is the question'

[Mudcat]

I dunno. I get the sense that in your beliefs that God can "miss the boat" and cause someone to live a life in a way that they dont have a chance at the gospel.

Reality check, Jade. A lot of people have come and gone and not heard God's word. Molinism in some ways is an alternative view as to why.

Which would make God a failure.

If all have to hear the Gospel before they die, then God is a failure. Because plenty haven't.

But then I tend towards calvinism, and to me, all those whom He will save, will be saved no matter what they do in their lives or how their life is lived. They will still end up believing.

I don't discount your belief. When it comes to how God deals with the lost, we all have to find some sort of comfort.

However, intentional creation for damnation's sake, is somewhat unpalatable to me.

Thats also my objection to armenianism. That someone could lose out on Him through their actions, or the actions of another. Makes it works based and not grace based to me.

Yeah.... I don't really have a problem with that.

Hope that makes marginal sense at least. My sandwich is calling my name and Im never good at posting when Im distracted by lunch.

Makes a lot of sense actually. I just have some difficulties with it is all.

Mudcat

[Mudcat]

Hi! My name is OneLight, and I am a ......

I am a ... ...

ahhhhh ......

hmmmm ......

CHRISTIAN!

Sorry ... couldn't resist toady ... gotta be the rain?

And a good one at that. At least, IMO.

[Mudcat]

Well I do not think Mudcat is saying God did a simulation just that He would know how we would react under different circumstances, which I believe to be feasible. Outside of this belief that God knows all reactions of all people under any circumstance (which God would know, He is God) I think it Molinism sounds identical to Arminianism to me.

There is a subtle difference. It is subtle but it is a difference.

Molinism answers the question of free will and sovereignty, but it opens up a can of worms that relates to perfection.

Why would God, being perfect, conceive of anything less than perfect, or at the least less perfect than what is most perfect?

It sounds like I am arguing against myself, but I am hashing this out in my head....no sense in being secretive about that.

I do not think there need to be a separation between free will and sovereignty. God is sovereign, He is able to do what ever He wants to do, and out of that sovereignty, He decided to give mankind free will.

Sure he did.

and I worked the rest of it out...so far.

God is perfect. Thus there should be only one possibility. However, man is not perfect and the possibility of multiple possibilities is still open.

These possibilities are not the product of his perfection, rather our imperfection.

At the end of this conclusion, I can only derive holding a Molinisitic view, which I have. That sin was designed (or chosen).... and there is the Arminian clash.

edit add

*please insert an Inigo Montoya accent from The Princess Bride when you read this*

Edited September 28, 2008 by Mudcat

[Larry 2]

name='Mudcat' date='Sep 27 2008, 08:58 AM' post='1261621']

So the question is, do you find anything problematic in the Molinistic view? If so what?

Quote -Is that God being aware of all possibilities, would also be aware of what decisions those, to whom the Gospel has not been preached, would make had it been given to them.

Response - Colossians 1:23. "the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven" Does it continue in this day? I would think so.

Quote - God created us with the ability to choose for ourselves. However, God being all knowing is aware of all choices we will make.

Response - It appears that God is at work in our free will then.

Philippians 2:13. "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

Ephesians 2:10. "For we are his workmanship."

John 15:16. "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you"

[Mudcat]

Sure he did.

and I worked the rest of it out...so far.

God is perfect. Thus there should be only one possibility. However, man is not perfect and the possibility of multiple possibilities is still open.

These possibilities are not the product of his perfection, rather our imperfection.

At the end of this conclusion, I can only derive holding a Molinisitic view, which I have. That sin was designed (or chosen).... and there is the Arminian clash.

we are not talking about multiple possibilities, we are talking about basically a infinite number of possibilities for each and every person every, be it those that lived to 100 or those that never made it out of the womb.

If I was an unbeliever I would have to ask how God could come to the conclusion, after looking at all those infinite number of possibilities, it was the best thing for a baby to die of cancer.

Yeah, an infinite number of possibilities and we exist in the best one of all of them. Given the horrors of reality, it is hard to fathom that this is the best.

I would suggest that it is the best, given the circumstances.

I also submit, I am glad I don't live in a world where the Axis powers developed the A-bomb first....or any other multiplicity of historic 'could have gone the other way if' scenarios.

[Mudcat]

name='Mudcat' date='Sep 27 2008, 08:58 AM' post='1261621']

So the question is, do you find anything problematic in the Molinistic view? If so what?

Quote -Is that God being aware of all possibilities, would also be aware of what decisions those, to whom the Gospel has not been preached, would make had it been given to them.

Response - Colossians 1:23. "the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven" Does it continue in this day? I would think so.

Larry,

Are you suggesting that every creature 'under heaven' has heard the Gospel of Christ?

If so, why? Do you really think everyone that has died on the face of this planet knew about Jesus?

[speckles]

If all those possibilities of middle knowledge exist in all times and places it is definitely a contradiction to Calvinism, or at least High Calvinism, as I believe.

However, if God is in complete control over all of these, having an end worked out for all of them before they happen, then I see, so far, nothing that makes it heretical. If they move toward the thought that there would be things He cannot control, know, or cause, then you move into Open Theism which is wrong. But so far in my short studies on it, I have not found anything unorthodox about it.

The concepts play with your mind a bit though, like quantum physics.

Sounds like you've done some homework

I am actually having some trouble distinguishing the difference between Molinism and Historical Arminianism. But then again I can't tell the difference between Amyraldianism and Calvinism either.

I went on a search and it seems to be more of a philosophy than a theology, it's based on, I believe, a fairly Arminian system but it's more like a "ok, if we all have free will then how can God actually be sovereign, how can He change His mind?" thing taken and stretched to where you say...just before your mind snaps...

well,,, if God created all possibilities and then just lets man choose one of them and goes from there, the God still caused it all, but man is still in total free will. It does leave a lot of work on God's part, whew I wouldn't want to have to worry about all the possibilities for all of the lives of all of the people that ever would be and then create realities around them all...but then again I have trouble baking a cake.

I haven't seen anything troubling, though, other than I'm a 4 point Calvinist and disagree with it.

[speckles]

Well I do not think Mudcat is saying God did a simulation just that He would know how we would react under different circumstances, which I believe to be feasible. Outside of this belief that God knows all reactions of all people under any circumstance (which God would know, He is God) I think it Molinism sounds identical to Arminianism to me.

There is a subtle difference. It is subtle but it is a difference.

Molinism answers the question of free will and sovereignty, but it opens up a can of worms that relates to perfection.

Why would God, being perfect, conceive of anything less than perfect, or at the least less perfect than what is most perfect?

It sounds like I am arguing against myself, but I am hashing this out in my head....no sense in being secretive about that.

Well...

If God is completely sovereign, He created Satan...

And if man has complete free will, how can some things be decreed?

If man is predestined, how can a genuine offer of grace be given to all (though we know it is)

If God foreknew some things but gave man the ability to do them anyway...WHY?

See, the other systems have questions too. That touch on the notion of perfection if you think over them.

[Mudcat]

Why would God, being perfect, conceive of anything less than perfect, or at the least less perfect than what is most perfect?

It sounds like I am arguing against myself, but I am hashing this out in my head....no sense in being secretive about that.

Well...

If God is completely sovereign, He created Satan...

Agreed, I suppose I have had to come to grips with that fact. Not only did God create Satan, he created Satan knowing full well what impact that fallen angel would have. It would be difficult to say that Satan was created without intent, anymore than saying you or I were created without intent. When you approach an infinitude of possibilities it is obviously impossible to fully comprehend it. However, I believe we were created in a situation where the greatest possible good would come of it.

....as an afterthought, could it have been possible that the wickedness of the world would be increased if say Michael or Gabriel had fallen instead of Lucifer?

And if man has complete free will, how can some things be decreed?

I would simply say that God knew the end, at the beginning. I don't think that the Creator knowing what I or anyone else would do, before it was done, removes the fact that it is what I chose to do.

If man is predestined, how can a genuine offer of grace be given to all (though we know it is)

You see, I am not so sure that all are a given a genuine offer of grace. It is my hope that all are given such an offer.

But we have to come to grips with the fact that there are billions of people who have died without hearing God's word.

How can they have an opportunity to come to the Father, without hearing of Jesus?

If God foreknew some things but gave man the ability to do them anyway...WHY?

I suppose that is one of the reasons I like the Molinistic view. We are the best possibility verses any other alternative possibility.

See, the other systems have questions too. That touch on the notion of perfection if you think over them.

I agree here too. Though it sounds a little terse, I remember a pastor once saying, "We are doing the best we can, until Christ comes back."

None of these philosophies have all the answers, they are simply efforts of man trying to understand God.

[OneLight]

- Its humbling to think how awesome a God we have

God bless

Yes, He is and this is why I can not label myself one way or another. Until we stand before Him will we ever know which is right. Our finite minds are always trying to understand an infinite God, where the end result brings division. Until we are truly humbled and realize that we can not put God in a box, we will allow our understanding to cause harm to others.

Believe in the Word fully and follow the wisdom found in Proverbs 3:5-6.

OneLight