That statement by
@Josheb runs very close to the Open Theists view of the omniscience of God. The only difference is that he defines what he means more precisely than the Open Theist to be restricted to He has no knowledge of things that are impossible, whereas they expand it to mean He does not know things that have not happened yet. However I say God made cubes and spheres so He does have knowledge of what they are and what they are not, so the argument really has no relevance to the discussion.
@Josheb has implied elsewhere, or so I took it, that it is more than just Open-Theistic-style ignoring or logically self-contradicting notions, but that God is causally 'hands-off' (my phrase) about our choosing. I simply find no need for that construction, and it seems to me also logically self-contradictory —one of those things that "God doesn't bother to entertain", so to speak.
"In Him we live and move and have our being." to me is relevant to the WCF's "...establishes them." (WCF chapter 3.1)
Here is what I have been thinking about the OP this morning, and what we have found in the debate as to what happens in these discussions and why it is never really resolved. It cannot be resolved entirely by the finite human mind trying to define and pin down the otherness of God, who is eternal, self created, and therefore logically the cause of all that is. We can only know what is knowable to us, and when it comes to God and the way in which He governs His creation, we can only know what He tells us. And in what He tells us we know who He is and who we are in relation to Him. Created beings under the rulership of Him.
So, we often lose sight of the otherness of God as we attempt to solve questions we naturally have. We do not forget that He is outside of time and we are bound by it; or that we can only see things in the perspective of time; but we end up in a somewhat tangled philosophical rather than a theological debate. We can do nothing less. The otherness of God is beyond the reach of anything we have experienced, and will not fit into our words, our ideas, our minds.
And yet, He does show us frequently in the Scriptures, and I would say in all of them, but sometimes very specifically, that no matter what we see here within our boundaries of space and time, there is something God is doing that we cannot see, but we need to learn to trust. After all, faith in Him, which is trust in Him, is the issue from the Garden of Eden on.
We have the story of Joseph that actually began within time long before Joseph was ever born, with Abraham. Gen 15:13-15 Then the Lord said to Abram, "Know for certain that your offspring will be sojourners in the land that is not theirs and will be servants there, and they will be afflicted for four hundred years. But I will bring judgement on the nation that they serve, and afterward they shall come out with great possessions. As for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you shall be buried in a good old age And they shall come back here in the fourth generation for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete." God is not only doing something there but over there with the Amorites.
We are told of Joseph being sold into slavery in Egypt and it was through this that Israel came into bondage in that land. We are told that after four hundred years of this bondage the king of Egypt died, and one might suppose they hoped this would be the cause of things getting better for them but things got worse. But at the right time---time being from our perspective only---God came to their rescue. I could go on and on through this all the way to Christ being born in Bethlehem. It all connects and we see it played out in time. God is the One governing it. And not bit by bit, piece by piece, but because being outside of time as He is, He planned it before any of it entered time. It was complete before creation and He brought it to pass. Contingencies exist within time and among the actions of finite beings, but they do not exist with God. And they do not affect His plan or purpose. We are allowed to see who He is through what He tells us, but we cannot see, and certainly not tell Him, how He goes about doing it in the infinite and eternal. We see the results, not the cause or causes, in a theological sense.
And then we come to our responsibility in light of all this. All creatures that He created from His own self existence are automatically responsible to the One who made them. It can be said, and without taking the anomalies that our fall has rent on the natural world, the only thing in His creation that does not do what it was created to do is mankind, and that only in the area of responsibility to his Maker, and the way in which we were created to be in relationship with our God. Nevertheless, all of mankind still has that responsibility.
Bottom line, we have no idea what is going on "behind the scene" in the otherness of God. We are told to trust and obey Him.
As to the whole post, thanks, and well said, apt and appropriate. I particularly like the sentence,
"All creatures that He created from His own self existence are automatically responsible to the One who made them." That's something that applies directly to the fact that it is TO HIM we are responsible, and not to our notion of morality: Thus, he is not under obligation to treat us according to OUR notions, but has every right, and is just, to do as he pleases with us. I call it ownership.
I agree with all as I first read it, except for near the very end, where you say that mankind does not do what it was created to do. But I think I know what you meant — I just wanted to point out that ALL things fall out how God intended. Mankind is able to rebel against God, (and apparently even angels, too, though that's not relevant to the point), as moral agents. Thus choice is implied, but not Libertarian Free Will (and yes,
@Josheb , I admit that is merely an assertion, since I do not support it here.)
There is something I so often want to say, but don't know how. I wish I could find succinct statements of it and copy them down somewhere. They run in several lines, here overlapping somewhat, since (I think) they are really all that one thing I don't know how to say:
1) That causation from a single beginning 'first cause' (God himself) logically implies that ALL subsequent causes and effects are
caused, to include every principle and reality down to the most minute particle of matter and energy. The law of causation is comprehensively pervasive. (And for a quick answer to the protest that God's existence violates the law of causation: No, it doesn't. God is not an effect. The law of causation reads: All effects have a cause.")
"Every effect must have a cause, for an effect, by definition, is some-thing that is caused. Thus, for anything to exist, an uncaused some-thing—or someone—must exist." https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/first-and-primary-cause
2) That we have a mindset that assumes that any'thing' we can think of is a valid consideration, ontologically "a thing". The same mindset wants to put degree and category to God's abilities and attributes, ignoring (as you said) his complete "otherness". But it gets worse:
3) That God does not see things how we do, to delineate them in his thinking in terms of 'the original 6 days' as different from 'inserting himself into our timeline'. (Poorly stated, that, but I hope you get the point.) Thus, his omnipotent creating includes his immanence.
4) WE are the ones who keep thinking we have to arrange things according to category. It's true we must, to discuss them —maybe even to think about them— but that doesn't mean categorization as a principle is "the way of things".
5) That there is no "sort of", such as (for example), "limited autonomy" in the sense that we argue here. There is no partial causation. There is no ... —There is, or there is not. It is, or it is not.
6) While it is good to hold one's logical processes loosely and to not entirely trust one's conclusions, to suppose the 'possibility' of the illogical is intellectual 'dispersion'. Our minds don't work that way. One has to ignore all the "buts" to maintain the notions thus produced. (It can become as much a habit to do so as to ignore one's conscience.) And so we "force God" into these places he can't fit.
7) And I hope it isn't just my 'dispersion' talking: That God's Grace is pervasive, in fact, it the way this world continues though fallen. Grace is the means by which even we believers are ever forgiven for our post-regeneration sins. Grace is not just the means to the faith by which we are saved, but is the means to the faith by which we continue to live for God (whatsoever is not of faith is sin). I don't think, when God says, "Well done, good and faithful servant", that when the crowns are laid at his feet he will say, "No no, really, thank you, but really, I didn't do this —YOU did!
8) This is GOD'S making.
), especially not with anyone who acknowledges not specifically studying or understanding Calvin and the ~ism he begat.
And I mean that in a good way. I am pretty sure I understand what you are saying and if I do I agree with it.
