ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 3

[Nang]

Food for thought on the two wills of God discussion:

The usual way they are distinguished without introducing contrariety into the will of God is to acknowledge the simple point that the word "will" is used in two different ways. In one sense He is said to will something volitionally. This is God's will properly speaking. "God works all things after the counsel of His own will." There is also the extended use of the word "will" when a certain course of action is said to be the will of God. "This is the will of God concerning you, even your sanctification." In this latter sense the word "will" is being used morally, not volitionally. The two words may be used without contradiction or confusion if we keep in mind that the secret will refers to what shall be and the revealed will concerns what should be.
The moral will is not God’s will in a proper sense as He doesn’t will it to happen, but demands it of us.

I have long lost the original source of this, but it resonates with me.

AMR

Yes indeed.

" . . . the simple point that the word "will" is used in two different ways."

I quote John Owen who confirms this view:

"A master requires of His servant to do what He commands; not to accomplish what He intends. . .For instance, God commandeth us to believe; here His revealed will is that we should so do; withal, He intendeth we shall do; and therefore ingenerateth faith in our hearts that we may believe. Here His secret will and revealed will are coincident; the former being His precept that we should believe, the latter His purpose that we shall believe."

There are differences between how the the will of God is revealed and differences and degrees of to whom the will of God is disclosed. No question.

But this does not mean God has two wills.

Again, from John Owen:

"The essence of God, then, being a most absolute, pure, simple act or substance, His will consequently can be but simply one; whereof we ought to make neither division nor distinction."

(J.O. quoting St. Austen):

"He illustrates the example of a sick parent having two children; the one wicked, who desires his father's death; the other Godly, and he prays for his life. But the will of God is that he shall die, agreeably to the desire of the wicked child; and yet it is the other who hath performed his duty, and done what is pleasing to God."

This little quote describes in principle how Abraham pleased God with his willingness to sacrifice Isaac, even while knowing and being assured God's intent was to give all covenant promises to Isaac and Isaac's spiritual seed. Abraham followed God's preceptive will in obedience, by having faith that God's will and good purposes (decrees) would assuredly work good according to promise.

No conflict in Abraham about whether God demonstrated two wills . . .Abraham did his duty and trusted God to do well according to His will revealed in the covenant promises. As reward, God provided a substitute animal for the faithful and obedient offerings of Abraham and Isaac.

We are not discussing God being double-minded. We are discussing creaturely obligation to live according to the will of God, according to the Word of God . . . and trusting that all God's will be accomplished through Jesus Christ on our behalf.

At least, I hope that is what is being discussed . . .

Nang

 

[Hilston]

Have you been hanging around Dan Oronato again?

If I could convince Drink-Tax Dan to take a walk with me on the North Shore River Trail, I'd like to show him a gaggle of geese that is attacking trail walkers and bicyclists. Just yesterday a Bull Goose saw me as a threat to his fuzzy chicks, hissed at me, went airborne and attacked my head. I barely escaped with my life. Had I been packing my Bersa Thunder .380, I don't even think I would have gotten it out in time to protect myself.

Victim of fascist geese,
Hilston

 

[Nang]

If I could convince Drink-Tax Dan to take a walk with me on the North Shore River Trail, I'd like to show him a gaggle of geese that is attacking trail walkers and bicyclists. Just yesterday a Bull Goose saw me as a threat to his fuzzy chicks, hissed at me, went airborne and attacked my head. I barely escaped with my life. Had I been packing my Bersa Thunder .380, I don't even think I would have gotten it out in time to protect myself.

Victim of fascist geese,
Hilston

Poor Victim,

Since you were not packing your .380, how indeed did you protect and save your life from the so-called "Bull Goose?" (Which I have only heard used as a military term; not as an aviary term!)

And who exactly determined it to be "facist" for a species to protect its young?

I think you are just funning people around here, yes?

Nang

 

[tetelestai]

I think you are just funning people around here, yes?

From one of our local liberal websites:

This past weekend, at least 272 adult Canada geese and their young were rounded up, vocalizing and resisting as best they could, shoved into crates and trucked to a slaughterhouse to be brutally killed. The rounding up and killing began Thursday and ended Saturday.

 

[Nang]

From one of our local liberal websites:
This past weekend, at least 272 adult Canada geese and their young were rounded up, vocalizing and resisting as best they could, shoved into crates and trucked to a slaughterhouse to be brutally killed. The rounding up and killing began Thursday and ended Saturday.

Why?

Is this a liberal spin on facts, or are you "funning us" too?

Nang

 

[godrulz]

You do know that depending on the number of posts a person has set to view per page it often makes sense to quote someone in entirety so that the reader does not have to go hunting for the original post? It is a matter of convenience. About the only time it would be odd is to quote a long post when your post is the very next post to the one so quoted.

AMR

He was not commenting at all about the post, but saying hi to the poster. He could say 'Hi, joe' instead of making us scroll through a redundant post that has zip to do with the greeting.

 

[godrulz]

Have you been hanging around Dan Onorato again?

I was within feet of Canada Geese the other day with my dogs. These beautiful creatures hang out by a neighbourhood lake by my house. They are amazing when the fly and honk overhead in spring/fall.

 

[godrulz]

From one of our local liberal websites:

Watch for our F-18 jets. This is an act of war against our geese (I suspect our military would not last long against yours).

 

[tetelestai]

Why?

Is this a liberal spin on facts, or are you "funning us" too?

Nang

No it is true.

Last year there was a huge problem with Canada geese in a local park. Our local government rounded them up and killed hundreds of them without telling anyone before hand.

The local animal rights people went nuts.

Now over a year later, the geese have returned, and nobody knows what to do.

Hilston is correct, the geese are everywhere, and they are mean. Especially near lakes and rivers.

C'mon Godrulz, get your geese out of here.

 

[themuzicman]

I can tell you from the geese at a local park that they are poop machines.

We had to run them off from the part because there were no clean patches of grass to play on.

Muz

 

[themuzicman]

Regarding two wills in God: The Calvinist must embrace two wills in God as they are so often in contradiction to one other.

Think about it. Anytime someone sins, that is God's will, because all that happens in is God's will, yet, anytime someone sins, that violates God's will, because God's will is for all to live righteously.

It's schizophrenic.

Muz

 

[Nang]

Regarding two wills in God: The Calvinist must embrace two wills in God as they are so often in contradiction to one other.

This Calvinist does not embrace two wills in God, for this Calvinist does not believe God ever contradicts Himself or changes in His essence (will).

Think about it. Anytime someone sins, that is God's will,

No it isn't. The very definition of sin is acting in opposition and in defiance of God's will.

because all that happens in is God's will,

All that happens is in God's sovereign control, working to achieve His purposes and good pleasure. God brings good out of creaturely sins and glorifies His name, thereby.

yet, anytime someone sins, that violates God's will,

Correct.

because God's will is for all to live righteously.

In this creation, it was God's will to make man with moral agency and give him secondary cause and effect. Through this process, sin is manifest and overcome by God's righteousness. Which is the ONLY righteousness that can provide everlasting life.

Placing man under the Law has proven that no man can achieve everlasting life by a righteousness achieved according to the Law. Righteousness in men only comes by the grace of God.

God chose to descend from heaven, conquering sin, death and the devil, once for all, and imputing divine righteousness to men, reconciling them with God and giving them access to the Kingdom of Heaven; promising them everlasting life in Himself.

In other words, God wills and God works all His will. God does for mankind what man could never do for himself. To the glory of God alone. Sola Deo Gloria!

Nang

 

[themuzicman]

This Calvinist does not embrace two wills in God, for this Calvinist does not believe God ever contradicts Himself or changes in His essence (will).



No it isn't. The very definition of sin is acting in opposition and in defiance of God's will.




All that happens is in God's sovereign control, working to achieve His purposes and good pleasure. God brings good out of creaturely sins and glorifies His name, thereby.






Correct.



In this creation, it was God's will to make man with moral agency and give him secondary cause and effect. Through this process, sin is manifest and overcome by God's righteousness. Which is the ONLY righteousness that can provide everlasting life.

Placing man under the Law has proven that no man can achieve everlasting life by a righteousness achieved according to the Law. Righteousness in men only comes by the grace of God.

God chose to descend from heaven, conquering sin, death and the devil, once for all, and imputing divine righteousness to men, reconciling them with God and giving them access to the Kingdom of Heaven; promising them everlasting life in Himself.

In other words, God wills and God works all His will. God does for mankind what man could never do for himself. To the glory of God alone. Sola Deo Gloria!

Nang

I realize that this is the special pleading dance you must do, but with the other side of your mouth, you claim that God's decretive will is always brought about, including the sins of men. The problem you have is that your theology concludes that God is the cause of all things, and yet you somehow have to separate Him from sin, so this is how you try.

Muz

 

[Nang]

I realize that this is the special pleading dance you must do, but with the other side of your mouth, you claim that God's decretive will is always brought about, including the sins of men. The problem you have is that your theology concludes that God is the cause of all things, and yet you somehow have to separate Him from sin, so this is how you try.

Muz

God is not the author of sin.

God decreed and caused the existence of man.
Man caused sin.
God decreed to control that sin and to overcome sin.

All these things have been worked to His glory.

 

[themuzicman]

God is not the author of sin.

God decreed and caused the existence of man.
Man caused sin.
God decreed to control that sin and to overcome sin.

All these things have been worked to His glory.

So, man has free will, and God does not have EDF. Welcome to OVT.

Muz

 

[Nang]

So, man has free will, and God does not have EDF. Welcome to OVT.

Muz

That is the OVT spin . . .

Man was made in God's image and given moral agency under the Law. The Law prohibits "free" will, in that man was made responsible and accountable to submit his will to the sovereign will of God.

Man did not submit, and threw his limited will into total bondage to another master; the Liar; Satan.

God had full foreknowledge of all this, but created man anyway, in order to once and for all destroy Satan, eliminate sin and death, bringing glory to His name through the Person who would achieve such wonders . . . Jesus Christ.

The silly teachings of OVT about man possessing sovereign freedom and God lacking knowledge of all things, is a devilish attempt to suppress the above truths and take away from the glory of God.

So there.

Nang

 

[themuzicman]

That is the OVT spin . . .

Man was made in God's image and given moral agency under the Law. The Law prohibits "free" will, in that man was made responsible and accountable to submit his will to the sovereign will of God.

You really need to get a better idea of what "free will" means. One can have free will and still be subject to God's law. It just maens that man is able to choose to obey or not to obey, with Adam having done the latter, as you said here:

Man did not submit, and threw his limited will into total bondage to another master; the Liar; Satan.

God had full foreknowledge of all this, but created man anyway, in order to once and for all destroy Satan, eliminate sin and death, bringing glory to His name through the Person who would achieve such wonders . . . Jesus Christ.

The silly teachings of OVT about man possessing sovereign freedom and God lacking knowledge of all things, is a devilish attempt to suppress the above truths and take away from the glory of God.

So there.

Nang

Oh, so you believe that God doesn't control all things?

Muz

 

[Nang]

You really need to get a better idea of what "free will" means. One can have free will and still be subject to God's law. It just maens that man is able to choose to obey or not to obey, with Adam having done the latter, as you said here:

God NEVER gave Adam the freedom to disobey His commands. It was disobedience that killed Adam and the entire human race.

It was the lie of the devil, telling Adam he could freely do what was forbidden, and get away with it . . . and the devil still lies to men telling them they are free in will. LFW was the original lie that is perpetuated to this day.

Oh, so you believe that God doesn't control all things?

Muz

God controls all things; even the sins of men and angels; bringing good out of their wickedness and evil acts.

 

[themuzicman]

God NEVER gave Adam the freedom to disobey His commands. It was disobedience that killed Adam and the entire human race.

Umm... If Adam wasn't able to to disobey, then how did he accomplish it? You're contradicting yourself.

Freedom doesn't mean that someone has God's permission, but rather that they were created with the ability to choose to obey or disobey. Since Adam disobeyed, either that's what God programmed him to do, or Adam had a free choice.

It was the lie of the devil, telling Adam he could freely do what was forbidden, and get away with it . . . and the devil still lies to men telling them they are free in will. LFW was the original lie that is perpetuated to this day.

Umm... LFW doesn't speak to the rightness or wrongness of an action.

God controls all things; even the sins of men and angels; bringing good out of their wickedness and evil acts.

Ah, so God was in control of Adam when Adam sinned?

Muz

 

[Nang]

Umm... If Adam wasn't able to to disobey, then how did he accomplish it? You're contradicting yourself.

Ability does not equate with freedom.

Freedom doesn't mean that someone has God's permission, but rather that they were created with the ability to choose to obey or disobey.

Is God able to do all things? Does God sin or violate His natural and moral laws?

Since Adam disobeyed, either that's what God programmed him to do, or Adam had a free choice.

False premises.

God did not "program" Adam to sin.
Adam was given no free choices.

God made Adam in His image, under the law, possessing ability to obey natural law and Godly commands, and make right moral choices.

Adam, being finite and therefore subject to mutability and sin, listened to a lie and acted on it, in direct opposition to God's commands. Adam caused death for himself and the entire human race.

Committing sin is not a definition of freedom at all.

Only if you define committing suicide to be "freedom," was Adam "free."

But that is what the devil told Adam. Adam believed the lie that he could sin freely and thereby be like God, while opposing God's commands.

Unrepentant, unregenerated sinners still believe this lie; thinking they can oppose God, but freely choose to get right with Him any time they want, thereby reversing their death sentence according to an existing freedom of will, alone.

But it is not true. The devil is still lying to them. They remain dead in their sins, because dead men cannot "choose" anything other than to physically and spiritually rot away.

Umm... LFW doesn't speak to the rightness or wrongness of an action.

Umm. . . maybe that is because LFW does not exist. It certainly does not describe the moral agency and conscience that exists in every man, to know right from wrong.

Ah, so God was in control of Adam when Adam sinned?

Muz

Of course God controlled Adam when Adam sinned. God controls you and I when we sin.

Spiritual principle:

"But as for you (and as for Adam too), you meant it for evil against me; but God meant it for good, in order to bring it about as it is this day, to save many people." Genesis 50:20

The sin of the first Adam was necessary in God's purposes to reveal the grace provided by the last "Adam," Jesus Christ.

It is a BIG picture, Michael . . . try to wrap your brain around God's purposes, rather than getting stuck in the beginnings with Adam and the devil. The fall of mankind only reveals sin and death.

Look to the last Adam, the Lord from heaven; Jesus Christ, and His grace for answers providing forgiveness and everlasting life.

Nang