Exploring the Absence of Tertiary Causes in the Westminster Confession of Faith:

[CCShorts]

Hey everyone! Let's dive into an intriguing aspect of the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) that often goes unnoticed - the absence of any mention of tertiary causes.

The WCF extensively discusses God's primary causality and the role of secondary causes in His providential plan. However, it remains silent on the concept of tertiary causation, which refers to a chain or domino effect of causation where the effects of one cause become the causes of subsequent effects. This omission is quite significant and offers food for thought.

On the one hand, we can infer that the WCF's theological framework implies that all secondary causes are directly linked to the primary cause. Rather than promoting a domino effect, the WCF emphasizes that every secondary cause is ultimately a result of God's primary causality. In this view, God's sovereignty, providence, and control are central, allowing no room for independent or autonomous causes beyond the primary and secondary levels.

So, why might the WCF not address tertiary causation explicitly? What theological implications could this omission have?

Some possible points of discussion:
Divine sovereignty: Does the absence of tertiary causation in the WCF affirm the idea that God's primary causality encompasses and governs all events, leaving no room for independent chains of causation?
Order and providence: Does the omission of tertiary causation imply that God's providential plan operates in a way that ensures order and predictability, rather than being subject to cascading or unpredictable effects?
Creaturely responsibility: How does the absence of tertiary causation relate to human accountability and the consequences of our actions? Does it underscore the importance of understanding our role as secondary causes within God's overarching plan?

Share your perspectives, insights, and questions regarding the absence of tertiary causes in the WCF. Let's explore together how this theological framework influences our understanding of causality and God's providential workings.

…

 

[CCShorts]

Here is a visual that might help explain this understanding:

 

[ReverendRV]

Here is a visual that might help explain this understanding:

Amen; God is Providential...

 

[CCShorts]

Amen; God is Providential...

Which view do you believe is more accurate to scripture: the perspective of a Domino effect or the belief that God is the ultimate cause of all subsequent effects and causes?

The Domino effect view suggests that while God serves as only the initial cause, the subsequent effects and causes are not directly linked to God but rather result from the initial cause independently.

On the other hand, the alternative WCF perspective posits that God is not only responsible for the initial cause but also the ultimate cause of every subsequent effect and cause arising from the initial cause. In this view, every subsequent effect and cause is directly tied to God as a secondary cause, with God being regarded as the primary cause.

These two viewpoints present contrasting interpretations of the relationship between God and the subsequent effects and causes. While one view emphasizes a sense of independence and indirect connection, the other underscores a more direct and intimate connection between God and all subsequent outcomes.

…

 

[ReverendRV]

Which view do you believe is more accurate to scripture: the perspective of a Domino effect or the belief that God is the ultimate cause of all subsequent effects and causes?

The Domino effect view suggests that while God serves as only the initial cause, the subsequent effects and causes are not directly linked to God but rather result from the initial cause independently.

On the other hand, the alternative WCF perspective posits that God is not only responsible for the initial cause but also the ultimate cause of every subsequent effect and cause arising from the initial cause. In this view, every subsequent effect and cause is directly tied to God as a secondary cause, with God being regarded as the primary cause.

These two viewpoints present contrasting interpretations of the relationship between God and the subsequent effects and causes. While one view emphasizes a sense of independence and indirect connection, the other underscores a more direct and intimate connection between God and all subsequent outcomes.

…

I think that because of the Bible, God is not an initial, Deistic First Cause only; who just thumps the first Domino, and from then on it's up to the cascading Dominos. Too many times, the Bible shows God participating in setting Dominos in their position; that as they fall, we can see his design developing an after-image. God walked in the cool of the Morning, and set a Domino. God showed up in the Burning Bush and placed another Domino. God showed up to Captain his Army; and stacked another Domino. And so on and so on. God wins the Domino Contest by Providentially placing Dominos throughout Time, to produce a brilliant design...

I agree that God is always Providential. This means he is the First Cause of Tertiary Causes...

 

[makesends]

Hey everyone! Let's dive into an intriguing aspect of the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) that often goes unnoticed - the absence of any mention of tertiary causes.

The WCF extensively discusses God's primary causality and the role of secondary causes in His providential plan. However, it remains silent on the concept of tertiary causation, which refers to a chain or domino effect of causation where the effects of one cause become the causes of subsequent effects. This omission is quite significant and offers food for thought.

On the one hand, we can infer that the WCF's theological framework implies that all secondary causes are directly linked to the primary cause. Rather than promoting a domino effect, the WCF emphasizes that every secondary cause is ultimately a result of God's primary causality. In this view, God's sovereignty, providence, and control are central, allowing no room for independent or autonomous causes beyond the primary and secondary levels.

So, why might the WCF not address tertiary causation explicitly? What theological implications could this omission have?

Some possible points of discussion:
Divine sovereignty: Does the absence of tertiary causation in the WCF affirm the idea that God's primary causality encompasses and governs all events, leaving no room for independent chains of causation?
Order and providence: Does the omission of tertiary causation imply that God's providential plan operates in a way that ensures order and predictability, rather than being subject to cascading or unpredictable effects?
Creaturely responsibility: How does the absence of tertiary causation relate to human accountability and the consequences of our actions? Does it underscore the importance of understanding our role as secondary causes within God's overarching plan?

Share your perspectives, insights, and questions regarding the absence of tertiary causes in the WCF. Let's explore together how this theological framework influences our understanding of causality and God's providential workings.

…

I disagree. There is no way to number the sequences of cause-and-effect. Thus, ALL causes are secondary, regardless of whether they are really tertiary, etc. There is no implication that what is referred to only as secondary causes are not meant as farther down the line —at least not to my reading of the WCF.

However, as you mention in your second paragraph, one thing I have not found spoken of by the WCF, except for in the immediate context of the mention of secondary causes, that I can barely describe, myself, even TO myself, is in the idea of God's Immanence in this one particular regard. (To be fair, I've never studied the WCF exhaustively, looking for this). But the very simple statement, that God's determining of all things does not remove free will, nor secondary causes, etc, "but, rather, establishes them" —if I remember the wording right— to me, speaks of this very thing: In one sense, (but for first cause Himself), there are only secondary causes, and all is miracle, because apart from him sustaining and actively being involved in some real sense, in every most minute motion, and even the existence, of the smallest particle of matter or energy, there would be only God. HE is not just the creator, but the sustainer of very FACT ITSELF.

This notion also, as a BTW, is a way to see God's universal love for his creation, that answers well the Arminian's notion that God loves everyone and everything.

 

[ReverendRV]

I disagree. There is no way to number the sequences of cause-and-effect. Thus, ALL causes are secondary, regardless of whether they are really tertiary, etc. There is no implication that what is referred to as only secondary causes are not meant as farther down the line —at least not to my reading of the WCF.

However, as you mention in your second paragraph, one thing I have not found spoken of by the WCF, except for in the immediate context of the mention of secondary causes, that I can barely describe, myself, even TO myself, is in the idea of God's immanence in this one particular regard. (To be fair, I've never studied the WCF exhaustively, looking for this). But the very simple statement, that God's determining of all things does not remove free will, nor secondary causes, etc, "but, rather, establishes them", to me, speaks of this very thing: In one sense, but for first cause himself, there are only secondary causes, and all is miracle, because apart from him sustaining and actively being involved in some real sense, in every most minute motion, and even the existence, of the smallest particle of matter or energy, there would be only God. HE is not just the creator, but the sustainer of very FACT ITSELF.

There also, as a BTW, is a way to see God's universal love for his creation, that answers well the Arminian's notion that God loves everyone and everything.

The OP is a smart cookie; but y'all pretty smart too...

 

[CCShorts]

I disagree. There is no way to number the sequences of cause-and-effect. Thus, ALL causes are secondary, regardless of whether they are really tertiary, etc. There is no implication that what is referred to only as secondary causes are not meant as farther down the line —at least not to my reading of the WCF.

I believe it depends on the reference point.

Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Causes in the Context of the Timeline of Creation:

Within the context of the timeline of creation, causes and effects can be categorized as primary, secondary, tertiary, and so on, representing the unfolding of events over time.
Primary causes are those directly responsible for initiating a particular event or effect. They serve as the initial agents within a causal chain.
Secondary causes refer to the intermediate links within the causal order, where one event or entity influences another in a sequential manner, leading to subsequent effects.
Tertiary causes represent further links in the chain, demonstrating the interconnectedness and interdependency of various elements within creation.

Non-Existent Tertiary Causation on the Transcendent Level of God's Metaphysical Relationship:

On the transcendent level of God's metaphysical relationship, tertiary causation does not exist. God's transcendence surpasses the limitations of the temporal and causal order that governs the physical world.
God's sustaining power and metaphysical relationship to all things do not involve a disconnected chain of tertiary causation. Instead, God's involvement is direct, immediate, and continuous, without the need for intermediate causes or intermediaries.
God's sustaining power transcends the concept of tertiary causation, as there is no separation or disconnection between God and His creation. All things derive their existence and continued being from God's continuous upholding.

Primary and Secondary Causes in the Context of God's Transcendent Metaphysical Relationship:

The mention of primary and secondary causes in the WCF primarily pertains to God's transcendent metaphysical relationship to all things, rather than cause and effects within creation.
In this context, primary cause refers to God as the ultimate and primary source of all existence, sustaining everything by His sovereign power and will.
Secondary causes are the roles assigned to created beings and natural processes as instruments through which God accomplishes His purposes and manifests His providential plan.
The distinction between primary and secondary causes emphasizes God's sovereignty and active involvement in the governance of creation, highlighting that everything ultimately depends on and derives its existence from God.

However, as you mention in your second paragraph, one thing I have not found spoken of by the WCF, except for in the immediate context of the mention of secondary causes, that I can barely describe, myself, even TO myself, is in the idea of God's Immanence in this one particular regard. (To be fair, I've never studied the WCF exhaustively, looking for this). But the very simple statement, that God's determining of all things does not remove free will, nor secondary causes, etc, "but, rather, establishes them" —if I remember the wording right— to me, speaks of this very thing:

Here is another part where the reference point is critical. I believe when the WCF uses the term “freewill” it is referring to the relationships between created things within creation not in reference to being “free” from God’s necessary metaphysical relationship to all created things as the primary cause.

In one sense, (but for first cause Himself), there are only secondary causes, and all is miracle, because apart from him sustaining and actively being involved in some real sense, in every most minute motion, and even the existence, of the smallest particle of matter or energy, there would be only God. HE is not just the creator, but the sustainer of very FACT ITSELF.

I agree “In one sense” is the context of God’s Transcendent relationship to all things at all moments and in another sense is the chain of cause and effect links within creation itself.

In summary, within the context of the timeline of creation, causes and effects can be categorized as primary, secondary, tertiary, and so on, representing the unfolding of events over time.

However, on the transcendent level of God's metaphysical relationship, there is no disconnected tertiary causation. Instead, God's sustaining power remains the primary cause, and all causes within creation find their ultimate source and continuity in God's continuous upholding. The distinction between primary and secondary causes, as mentioned in the WCF, underscores God's sovereign governance and active involvement in the unfolding of events in creation.

…

 

[CCShorts]

I think that because of the Bible, God is not an initial, Deistic First Cause only; who just thumps the first Domino, and from then on it's up to the cascading Dominos. Too many times, the Bible shows God participating in setting Dominos in their position;

I can agree with this in the context of God’s predetermined character interactions within creation. God writes himself into his story. However if you elevate this idea to God on the Transcendent level then you have, not a full on Deistic view but, a semi-Deistic view at best. A semi-Deistic view would have God thumping the first domino and from then on its upto the cascading Dominos until God decides to introduce a new line of dominos that may interact with the “first” line…

that as they fall, we can see his design developing an after-image. God walked in the cool of the Morning, and set a Domino. God showed up in the Burning Bush and placed another Domino. God showed up to Captain his Army; and stacked another Domino. And so on and so on. God wins the Domino Contest by Providentially placing Dominos throughout Time, to produce a brilliant design...

… which seems to be what you are implying above.

I agree that God is always Providential. This means he is the First Cause of Tertiary Causes...

Now I could agree if you are mixing categories of Storyline Level cascading with God’s direct outer actions here but not if you are implying a disconnect between the outer actions of God and tertiary Causes within the storyline.

Here is another 2min visual to help explain my understanding:
(The clip is 1.5x speed but you can slow it down using the gear icon in the video.)

 

[ReverendRV]

I can agree with this in the context of God’s predetermined character interactions within creation. God writes himself into his story. However if you elevate this idea to God on the Transcendent level then you have, not a full on Deistic view but, a semi-Deistic view at best. A semi-Deistic view would have God thumping the first domino and from then on its upto the cascading Dominos until God decides to introduce a new line of dominos that may interact with the “first” line…



… which seems to be what you are implying above.



Now I could agree if you are mixing categories of Storyline Level cascading with God’s direct outer actions here but not if you are implying a disconnect between the outer actions of God and tertiary Causes.

Here is another 2min visual to help explain my understanding:
(The clip is 1.5x speed but you can slow it down using the gear icon in the video.)

I'll watch it later. I understand you, and you understand me. I would just say a little more. Because God is Providential, he participates in setting every Domino; even every Domino in let's say, the Inter-Testimonial Period. In the God-Vacuum of the Inter-Testimonial Period, and the apparent God-Vacuum we live in now; God is STILL Providential. Our time period appears to be Semi-Deistic; but it's not. God sets the Dominoes revealed by Scripture, and the Dominoes not revealed by Scripture...

I watched it. I agree with it. I also agree that God is Providential in All things; even in Tertiary things. His involvement in the Tertiary, reduces the Tertiary to the Lowest Common Denominator; which is God as the First Cause of the Tertiary. In that sense, the Tertiary doesn't exist on a Meta Narrative level. The Tertiary can only exist on a Narrative level...

The 2nd LBCF says that the Liberty of the Will of Dominos is established as a Secondary Cause...

 

[ReverendRV]

The 2nd LBCF says that the Liberty of the Will of Dominos is established as a Secondary Cause...

I told someone on Clubhouse today, the answer to Free Will is well stated in the Westminster Confession of Faith chapter 3 paragraph 1. The Liberty of the Will is established as a Secondary Cause; without God offering Violence to get his way. This means that God is the First Cause; without even thumping the first Domino; that would be offering Violence...

I told the person on Clubhouse, that whenever it is true we're a Secondary Causation; our Will can't be free from the First Causation. Whether or not God is the First Cause, or your Wife is ; your Will is only at Liberty as a Secondary Cause...

Our Will can only truly be Free if it were a real First Cause...

The Person had nothing to say; except to change the subject. Rabbit Trails are the shields of those who embrace Cognitive Dissonance. Have your CCShorts friend, develop an Apology aginst Free Will; by getting people to admit their Will "can be/is" a Secondary Cause. When they realize Secondary Causation HAS to be induced like Labor, the Free Will Argument will be over. Think about it; those who hold to Libertarian Free Will, believe the Will is at Liberty as a First Causation. Right? The War will be won by proving they believe their Will has at least ONCE been Secondary. When they know this has been true of their life, that their Will has been Reactive; maybe they can see that their Will is always only a Secondary Cause...

If their Will can be established to be Free as a First Cause; the Serpent was right; they are like God...

 

[makesends]

I believe it depends on the reference point.

Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Causes in the Context of the Timeline of Creation:

Within the context of the timeline of creation, causes and effects can be categorized as primary, secondary, tertiary, and so on, representing the unfolding of events over time.
Primary causes are those directly responsible for initiating a particular event or effect. They serve as the initial agents within a causal chain.
Secondary causes refer to the intermediate links within the causal order, where one event or entity influences another in a sequential manner, leading to subsequent effects.
Tertiary causes represent further links in the chain, demonstrating the interconnectedness and interdependency of various elements within creation.

Here, it seems to me, you have simply substituted 'tertiary' for the WCF's 'secondary'. You haven't shown them in error.

Non-Existent Tertiary Causation on the Transcendent Level of God's Metaphysical Relationship:

On the transcendent level of God's metaphysical relationship, tertiary causation does not exist. God's transcendence surpasses the limitations of the temporal and causal order that governs the physical world.
God's sustaining power and metaphysical relationship to all things do not involve a disconnected chain of tertiary causation. Instead, God's involvement is direct, immediate, and continuous, without the need for intermediate causes or intermediaries.

I can go with that. Lol, it reminds me of a certain worldview I have heard of, that some believed that there was no reality, and certainly no real cause-and-effect, except "the gods" themselves, and us, with the god's response to our expectations, creating the "effect" to what we conceived of as "cause" which was also "effect". Not necessarily that it was illusion, you understand, but that all that has happened, happened that way, and all that will happen, is yet to be created. —Or something to that effect, as I understood it to say.

God's sustaining power transcends the concept of tertiary causation, as there is no separation or disconnection between God and His creation. All things derive their existence and continued being from God's continuous upholding.

Primary and Secondary Causes in the Context of God's Transcendent Metaphysical Relationship:

The mention of primary and secondary causes in the WCF primarily pertains to God's transcendent metaphysical relationship to all things, rather than cause and effects within creation.

I'm not sure I'd divide metaphysical so completely from physical —certainly, any form, motion or place in reality is by God's causation—only God himself is "brute fact", and everything else is creation— but ok, I get your point.

In this context, primary cause refers to God as the ultimate and primary source of all existence, sustaining everything by His sovereign power and will.
Secondary causes are the roles assigned to created beings and natural processes as instruments through which God accomplishes His purposes and manifests His providential plan.
The distinction between primary and secondary causes emphasizes God's sovereignty and active involvement in the governance of creation, highlighting that everything ultimately depends on and derives its existence from God.



Here is another part where the reference point is critical. I believe when the WCF uses the term “freewill” it is referring to the relationships between created things within creation not in reference to being “free” from God’s necessary metaphysical relationship to all created things as the primary cause.

I agree with that, and I often use that with a translation for the use of Arminianistic believers, to point to the fact that the decisions of creatures, including humans, are indeed real, with real, even eternal (for humans), consequences ("effects"). What I have as yet been unable to get across to them, is the very fact that the reality of human choices is ESTABLISHED and SUSTAINED by God —not by "natural fact".

At the risk of going off-topic here, another BTW —and this deals with the essence of the Gospel: This (above) also deals with the need for GOD only, in and of himself, to regenerate the fallen, and for the Spirit of God to generate our faith. NOBODY BUT GOD HIMSELF has the integrity, the willpower, the constancy, the commitment, the strength, not to mention the wisdom, knowledge and understanding of what the person is committing to, to see it through. To me it is outrageous to think that fickle, selfish, self-important, rebellious, foolish, not to mention spiritually dead, enemies of God can make such a decision. No matter what decision they make, it is not capable of what needs done, contrary to the claims of many. (But then, I'm speaking from my own experience and from my own use of Scripture).

I agree “In one sense” is the context of God’s Transcendent relationship to all things at all moments and in another sense is the chain of cause and effect links within creation itself.

In summary, within the context of the timeline of creation, causes and effects can be categorized as primary, secondary, tertiary, and so on, representing the unfolding of events over time.

My defense of the WCF's use of 'secondary' was only that the "and so on" is impossible for us to put numbers to.

However, on the transcendent level of God's metaphysical relationship, there is no disconnected tertiary causation. Instead, God's sustaining power remains the primary cause, and all causes within creation find their ultimate source and continuity in God's continuous upholding. The distinction between primary and secondary causes, as mentioned in the WCF, underscores God's sovereign governance and active involvement in the unfolding of events in creation.

…

Agreed completely. In fact, there is reason to believe that to him it 'was' even [all of it] completed fact, upon his speaking it into existence.

 

[makesends]

I told someone on Clubhouse today, the answer to Free Will is well stated in the Westminster Confession of Faith chapter 3 paragraph 1. The Liberty of the Will is established as a Secondary Cause; without God offering Violence to get his way. This means that God is the First Cause; without even thumping the first Domino; that would be offering Violence...

I told the person on Clubhouse, that whenever it is true we're a Secondary Causation; our Will can't be free from the First Causation. Whether or not God is the First Cause, or your Wife is ; your Will is only at Liberty as a Secondary Cause...

Our Will can only truly be Free if it were a real First Cause...

The Person had nothing to say; except to change the subject. Rabbit Trails are the shields of those who embrace Cognitive Dissonance. Have your CCShorts friend, develop an Apology aginst Free Will; by getting people to admit their Will "can be/is" a Secondary Cause. When they realize Secondary Causation HAS to be induced like Labor, the Free Will Argument will be over. Think about it; those who hold to Libertarian Free Will, believe the Will is at Liberty as a First Causation. Right? The War will be won by proving they believe their Will has at least ONCE been Secondary. When they know this has been true of their life, that their Will has been Reactive; maybe they can see that their Will is always only a Secondary Cause...

If their Will can be established to be Free as a First Cause; the Serpent was right; they are like God...

I have even had them admit to their 'free will' being, or implying they they are, a small 'first cause', and, LOL, that fact being caused, (ok, they say, 'granted', by God). Sounds like not just sloppy logic, but like words, and a worldview, are pushing their minds around. I call it the insistence on self-determinism.

 

[ReverendRV]

I have even had them admit to their 'free will' being, or implying they they are, a small 'first cause', and, LOL, that fact being caused, (ok, they say, 'granted', by God). Sounds like not just sloppy logic, but like words, and a worldview, are pushing their minds around. I call it the insistence on self-determinism.

You will notice over time, that my method of Debate is to use "Shared Beliefs" against someone. If the person who holds to Free Will, also holds to Primary and Secondary Causes; my Argument SHOULD work. It would cause the two Beliefs to start battling, because they can't both be true at the same time...

I'm a Fundamentalist; now more than I have ever been in my Christian Life. Use a person's Fundamentals against them, and you can't lose; unless the person chooses Cognitive Dissonance, in order to keep their private interpretation...

Fundamentals are not a Private Interpretation; they're Corporate Interpretation...

 

[makesends]

I told someone on Clubhouse today, the answer to Free Will is well stated in the Westminster Confession of Faith chapter 3 paragraph 1. The Liberty of the Will is established as a Secondary Cause; without God offering Violence to get his way. This means that God is the First Cause; without even thumping the first Domino; that would be offering Violence...

I told the person on Clubhouse, that whenever it is true we're a Secondary Causation; our Will can't be free from the First Causation. Whether or not God is the First Cause, or your Wife is ; your Will is only at Liberty as a Secondary Cause...

Our Will can only truly be Free if it were a real First Cause...

The Person had nothing to say; except to change the subject. Rabbit Trails are the shields of those who embrace Cognitive Dissonance. Have your CCShorts friend, develop an Apology aginst Free Will; by getting people to admit their Will "can be/is" a Secondary Cause. When they realize Secondary Causation HAS to be induced like Labor, the Free Will Argument will be over. Think about it; those who hold to Libertarian Free Will, believe the Will is at Liberty as a First Causation. Right? The War will be won by proving they believe their Will has at least ONCE been Secondary. When they know this has been true of their life, that their Will has been Reactive; maybe they can see that their Will is always only a Secondary Cause...

If their Will can be established to be Free as a First Cause; the Serpent was right; they are like God...

I agree completely. But you may have noticed that they don't look at the matter from this end. They argue from the false notions, asserted as, "Choice is puppetry if God determines our choices", and "The command implies the ability to obey", and such. Their whole worldview, (as I see it), is built on the false assumption of a humancentric self-determinism. I thank God that they are not judged by the assumption, because I love and am related to many of them. Their doctrines do not represent them.

Often I find it necessary to say, though, that we, too, fall short in our understanding of doctrinal truth. Thank God for his forbearance of us.

 

[makesends]

You will notice over time, that my method of Debate is to use "Shared Beliefs" against someone. If the person who holds to Free Will, also holds to Primary and Secondary Causes; my Argument SHOULD work. It would cause the two Beliefs to start battling, because they can't both be true at the same time...

I'm a Fundamentalist; now more than I have ever been in my Christian Life. Use a person's Fundamentals against them, and you can't lose; unless the person chooses Cognitive Dissonance, in order to keep their private interpretation...

Fundamentals are not a Private Interpretation...

True that. But like arguing with Liberals, logic does not always (usually?) take the day.

 

[ReverendRV]

I agree completely. But you may have noticed that they don't look at the matter from this end. They argue from the false notions, asserted as, "Choice is puppetry if God determines our choices", and "The command implies the ability to obey", and such. Their whole worldview, (as I see it), is built on the false assumption of a humancentric self-determinism. I thank God that they are not judged by the assumption, because I love and am related to many of them. Their doctrines do not represent them.

Often I find it necessary to say, though, that we, too, fall short in our understanding of doctrinal truth. Thank God for his forbearance of us.

Yeah; it's like it's almost a waste of time...

But if someone like you hears it, and agrees with it; it's worth my time...

 

[Arial]

I think that because of the Bible, God is not an initial, Deistic First Cause only; who just thumps the first Domino, and from then on it's up to the cascading Dominos. Too many times, the Bible shows God participating in setting Dominos in their position; that as they fall, we can see his design developing an after-image. God walked in the cool of the Morning, and set a Domino. God showed up in the Burning Bush and placed another Domino. God showed up to Captain his Army; and stacked another Domino. And so on and so on. God wins the Domino Contest by Providentially placing Dominos throughout Time, to produce a brilliant design...

I agree that God is always Providential. This means he is the First Cause of Tertiary Causes...

My own view is similar, in that I think that God is a first cause but sometimes in an active way and sometimes in a passive way It is a very dense concept---this trying to probe the subject of the OP. We can only look so far into the infinite and we can never fully understand or explain what lies beyond that. I also think it is fluid and must take into consideration that God as omniscient already knows all things, and sees all things all at once. In His economy there is no past present or future, yet His plans take place within those boundaries and with finite beings.

I see it more as God governing His creation. He did not create humans as automatons or puppets, nor do they become such at salvation as Calvinism is accused of teaching. We as created by God have responsibility to Him. He tells us in His word what those responsibilities are, and it applies to every man, woman, and child ever born, believers and unbelievers alike, whether they have ever read His word or not. This naturally involves choices that result in actions, which result in other actions and the consequences of our choices and actions. God does not make us do anything, but He governs what we do in a way that brings about His purposes. And since there is no past, present, or future that restrict Him, the whole picture is always there with Him, and He knows all things, from His perspective there is a sense that everything that happens in our realm has already happened in His.

 

[Josheb]

Hey everyone! Let's dive into an intriguing aspect of the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) that often goes unnoticed - the absence of any mention of tertiary causes.

The WCF extensively discusses God's primary causality and the role of secondary causes in His providential plan. However, it remains silent on the concept of tertiary causation, which refers to a chain or domino effect of causation where the effects of one cause become the causes of subsequent effects. This omission is quite significant and offers food for thought..................

Would not those be the contingencies of secondary causes?

 

[CCShorts]

Would not those be the contingencies of secondary causes?

To demonstrate the logical connection between tertiary causation within the finite realm of creation and the role of God as the creator and sustainer of all things in the infinite realm, let's break down the argument step by step:

Tertiary Causation in the Finite Realm of Creation:
Tertiary causation refers to a chain of causality where a secondary cause produces an effect, which then becomes the cause of a subsequent effect. In the finite realm of creation, we can observe numerous instances of tertiary causation. For example:

- Primary Cause: A potter creates a clay pot.
- Secondary Cause: The pot, once created, is filled with water.
- Tertiary Cause: The pot with water is placed on a stove.
- Resulting Effect: The water in the pot boils.

In this scenario, the boiling of the water is the tertiary effect, which relies on the secondary cause (the pot with water) and the primary cause (the pot's creation).

Transition to the Infinite Realm - Acknowledging God as Creator and Sustainer:
Now, let's transition the discussion to the infinite realm (the context of the OP) and consider the concept of God as the creator and sustainer of all things at all moments. This means that God is not only the originator of the primary causes (e.g., creating the universe) but also the sustainer of every subsequent effect at all times.

God's Concurrent Sustenance:
In the infinite realm with God as the sustainer, there is no disconnect between God and the results of secondary causes. God must sustain both the cause and the resulting effect to maintain their concurrent interaction. Here's how it works:

- Primary Cause (Creation): God creates the universe, setting the laws of physics and natural processes into motion.
- Secondary Cause: Natural processes, operating within the framework set by God, lead to various events and phenomena (e.g., the water being heated in the pot).
- Tertiary Cause: Each tertiary effect that occurs (e.g., the boiling water) is sustained by God's continuous presence and involvement in the ongoing process.

In this infinite context, there is no room for the idea that once God creates the universe, He withdraws and leaves it to operate independently. Rather, God's sustaining causative power is necessary for every subsequent effect, which ensures the coherence and continuity of existence.

Conclusion:
In the finite realm of creation, we can observe tertiary causation, where one effect becomes the cause of another. However, when we move the discussion to the infinite realm and acknowledge God as the creator and sustainer of all things, there is no disconnect between God and the results of secondary causes. God's continuous sustenance is required to make the interaction of tertiary causation possible, ensuring that everything remains interconnected and coherent within the universe. This perspective aligns with the concept of God's omnipresence and omnipotence as the fundamental force behind all existence.