Having It Both Ways
Saturday, October 17, 2009 at 9:52AM
rebecca in God omnipotence, God's omniscience, God's sovereignty, attributes of God, free will, giving reason for the hope, theology

The conversation with Godlessons goes on.

You can’t have it both ways. You can’t say that our decisions matter since they really aren’t our decisions. God intended for us to make them, so they are God’s decisions.

It depends on what you mean by “matter”. You seem to define decisions that matter as “decisions that can change the future.” I define decisions that matter as “decisions that bring about the future God has planned.” God intended for us to make them, so yes, they are God’s decisions. And based on God’s decisions, we decide. We look at the alternatives, weigh them, choose as seems best or most desirable to us, and our decisions bring God’s plan to fruition.

The idea that we are responsible for our decisions when we have no free will to do otherwise is ludicrous. You don’t punish a machine for functioning exactly as it was designed to function. That would make no sense.

Machines don’t have motives or desires. Machines don’t have wills. Machines don’t consider alternatives.

Let’s cut to the chase: You are willing to see God as a God without omniscience or omnipotence in order to preserve autonomous human choice—in order to have our choices determine the future. You are willing to make God smaller so that we can be bigger.

In your conception of God, human beings rule the future rather than God. Or you might say that human beings rule God rather than him ruling us.

I’m not willing to go there, because that’s not the way God reveals himself in scripture.

Article originally appeared on Rebecca Writes (http://rebecca-writes.com/).
See website for complete article licensing information.