Response to Tyson James on Psalm 33
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 21 дек 2021
- In the second part of today’s program I dove into a response Tyson James wrote (freethinkingministries.com/li... James works for Reasonable Faith) more than three years ago to comments I made from Psalm 33 relating to Molinism way back in May of 2014. So we dove back into the topic, and will finish off our response on Thursday’s program.
All Dividing Line Highlights' video productions and credit belong to Alpha and Omega Ministries®. If this video interested you, please visit aomin.org/ or www.sermonaudio.com/solo/aomi... for more of A&O ministry's content.
It's so clear... Dr. White has a brilliant God-given gift of explaining the details for us lay-folk. God bless him.
My Redeemer lives !
Jesus Christ is risen !
I think White’s key point from the last highlight was that we are created beings (clay) and that our “choices” flow from our hearts (also clay) which are formed BY GOD (Potter). God’s heart was never “formed” so He necessarily cannot fit into that category. God and man both have wills. We could even say our will is “free” if “free” does not necessarily imply an absence of boundaries (although for most people it always seems to imply that). After all, we have boundaries in ability. But God does not. It’s actually not that far out of an idea. Understanding it helps to reinforce a spirit of dependence.
Agreed. Just to add, our minds are also molded by our parents' influence (as well as their genes), our culture, and the circumstances of our lives. Many of our responses and outlooks are conditioned responses. I think people have a much loftier view of their own cognitive abilities than they should actually have.
You cannot deny that before being saved, we were slaves of sin, and of our passions, that is the reason that we needed to be freed, rescued, redeemed from that slavery, this is what the bible says; according to this scenario; where is the free will? ... because according to the bible, it was our fallen nature that controlled us, and on top of that we have Satan, who through that fallen nature, controlled us ... that is why the bible calls us children of wrath, and children of Satan, because we followed the prince of the air that reigned in the children of DISOBEDIENCE, and notice that he says, children of DISOBEDIENCE, he speaks of the elect, who would be saved, because for that they were chosen, that’s why God called us children ....there is no free Will any more, Adan Eve lost it, they had it, but no more...comprende amigo ?
@@stevemateuszow exactly....you got it
Adam had no sin, he was not a slave to sin, he could disobey God, the same with the Angels in heaven who sinned, they had free will; But that is another issue, Adam lost his free will, because as I have already given him passage that in the fall, human beings became slaves of sin, and puppets of Satan, and were at the mercy of God; Man loves sin, and only has will in the realm of his fallen nature, and even so, that nature is restricted by God, so that it does not become like demons, in conclusion, man does not have free freedom, man thinks he has a free will, it is not Sovereign, he cannot do what he wants, so man is under condemnation all the time, he hears the Gospel, but rejects it, and that makes him guilty, because he still reasons, and he knows that there is God, but what He takes it out of his mind, he does not want it, because he senses that God is holy, and that makes him feel bad, because it entails leaving him and turning to God, but without God's help, man can never leave sin, because it is part of his nature, unless God gives him a new one, that is why God told Nicodemus, in John 3: 3 if you are not born again Nicodemus you will not enter or see the kingdom ...( Note: if you read chapter 7 of Romans, you will see the struggle, to do good) that's the reason we Christiana know that there is no free will...
RUclips is getting really comfortable with these two unskippable ads before videos.
17:30 this is where Molinism fails and Calvinism excels. Old testament prophecy being fulfilled in the New Testament demonstrates that God is sovereign over even the decisions of people in order for His will to be accomplished. This is what happens when you don’t allow the Creator and His word (Scripture), but rather His creation (Molina), to dictate your theology.
I don't think Molinism in theory should have much of a problem with prophecy coming true, but it gets really weird. On the one hand, they really want to claim that man has libertarian free will, but on the other, it is only potential man that has this free will, then God sorts through and filters out the possible universes he doesn't want and eventually decides on this one, and in instantiating this universe he makes certain the "free" choices potential humans made. Actual real humans are on a fatalistic rail their potential forms and God co-decided for them.
I've heard some Molinist waffle on this and allow for libertarian free will even for realized humans, but that creates this very problem with prophecy and makes me wonder how God was deceived about what he would get when he decided on this universe.
Molinists put up walls and barriers to protect God from what he says about himself. Calvinists have the obviously superior position as they just affirm what the Bible says directly without trying to explain it away or massage it into something more pleasing to man.
UnReasonable Strawman ministries.
At 13:19 - Dr. White says, '...Well if God can create free creatures... and of course I would say that doesn't mean Libertarianly free in the sense of autonomous, that means creaturely free, responsible in the creaturely realm. That's all God holds us accountable for. That's very different than God's freedom which is absolutely divine and based upon His nature which is unlimited versus our nature which is derivative. All these things are, I thought basic, but...Anyways. "
This is the clearest statement I have seen from Dr. White about the difference between human will and God's will. But to me it's still not clear enough to make a judgement about what he is saying and how it would relate to God's eternal decrees. Let's analyze:
Man -> Creaturely Free, responsible to God for the things they do, nature is limited and derived from God
God -> Autonomously Free, nature is unlimited and derived from nothing else
I think what needs to be explained now, is how or if God factors in human will into His eternal decrees or if their will is being designed by God, not factored in to the decree but rather defined by the decree and how humans would be responsible in the creaturely realm on that type of Decree system. Again, I think the Molinist has an actual working explanation with the Middle Knowledge concept because God could then factor in human will into His decree instead of defining human will with His decree. and on the Molinist system, it's then easy to see how humans are still responsible in the creaturely realm. Plus it's clear that God is not the creator, designer, author, and intention-er of each and every sin that would come to pass.
Why do you presume God (the Potter) has to give you (a pot) an explanation?
Nevertheless, White does not have to answer the "how" question in order to disprove libertarian free will and affirm God's role in creation.
The Bible is very clear when it comes to God being the ultimate free agent and former or men and yet men are responsible.
Now, when it comes to how it works, it seems God intentionally didn't elaborate on this subject. Job, Isaiah 54, Romans 9 are all examples of the Bible saying that an explanation to why evil happens is out of limits and the only answer give is an argument of authority. God knows best. Both old and new testament agree that God is the former of hearts and that God choses his people, it's not men that chose God.
A true believer would just accept those facts and be much more careful with speculation, never imposing any speculation on the Word of God.
@@Luiz__Silva - “true believer” move along Pharisee. I’m here for a discussion not pointing fingers about who is saved and who isn’t. I’m not sure why people like you see all these things as signs of regeneration. Seems to me like circular logic anyways and it’s part of what keeps you not wanting to explore any other alternative explanations. It’s as if you don’t think any truth can be garnished from anything outside of the Bible. Which is just plain dumb.
I wonder if molinists believe in providence or even the reality of Jesus miracles .
According to Tim of Freethinking ministries, he’s accepted two invitations to a formal debate with you Dr. White so he said the ball is in your court now. We look forward to it 🙏🏾
Autonomous Volition is precisely the IMAGE of God which man is created in. It's sentience - the awareness of transcendent potential and the ability to choose how to define one's self within it.
Prove it from Scripture.
@@douglasmcnay644
It's obvious. Stop being blind.
Volition is self evident but not autonomous. And that's exactly the issue here.
If you think God did not form your heart and that you are not restricted by God from evil, then you are just misleading yourself.
@@Luiz__Silva
I'm not restricted by God from evil, I'm totally free to choose evil.
So I don't know what are you talking about.
@@Geronimo_Jehoshaphat _"Autonomous Volition is precisely the IMAGE of God which man is created in."_
I think spelling out what you mean would be helpful. I'm not sure if you meant it as some sort of refutation, but as a Reformed Christian, I can agree with this as written. A photograph of my mom is an *image* of a flesh and blood human being, but the photograph does not have any flesh or blood in it. Human free will is an *image* of God's autonomous free will, but human free will is not autonomous.
I find it frustrating that Dr. White doesn't define his terms. What exactly does he mean by 'autonomous' freedom versus 'creaturely' freedom? Or that God's nature is 'unlimited' whereas as ours is 'limited'? Any Molinist would admit that our human nature and freedom are derived from God but that doesn't undermine that humans have some measure of libertarian freedom. Why couldn't God create human beings that have at least some measure of libertarian freedom? If he couldn't, wouldn't that be a pretty major limitation on God's creative will?
His point at 14:40 that if God knew what a human being with libertarian freedom would do in some circumstance then it is not free is just a philosophical assumption he has. God's simply knowing what I would freely do doesn't place some kind of restraint on me, such that I could not do otherwise. I know that Dr. White wants to maintain that all his theological categories and arguments are all coming from scripture but it is painfully clear that that is not the case. Ideas like logical moments in God's decree, the grounding objection to middle knowledge, or that if God knows that I would freely do x in circumstance y, then I'm not free, are all full of extra-biblical philosophical ideas and assumptions.
Finally, around 4:50, every Christian believes that God created space and time in which all the events of history play out, but how in the world does that fact of time give the Reformed person the basis to rebut the charge that if God exhaustively and unilaterally decreed/determined every event in creation throughout all time, then that implicates God in all of the wicked and blasphemous desires, wills, inclinations, thoughts, and deeds of every person? No Molinist or any other non-Calvinist/determinist believes that human beings are "little autonomous gods". A lot of White's comments here honestly just seem like pious posturing to me.
White is using 'autonomous' in a pretty standard definitional sense:
"existing or acting separately from other things or people : independent"
"undertaken or carried on without outside control : self-contained"
We are talking about the ultimate sense of our freedom as we are comparing our nature to God's nature.
A creature is not ultimately independent like God is. Our will is affected by what we ate, age, stress levels, culture, environment, hormones, and plenty of other things found in creation. God is the only independent, self-contained entity, so much so that he created this universe.
_"Why couldn't God create human beings that have at least some measure of libertarian freedom?"_
What is "some measure"? Is it just compatiblism, a.k.a. the Calvinist position that allows for liberty and contingency of our choices? If so, he does. If not, defining terms would be helpful.
_"If he couldn't, wouldn't that be a pretty major limitation on God's creative will?"_
I realize people use philosophical terms pretty loosely on the internet, but I think God creating truly libertarian free creatures is logically contradictory, on the order of "Can an all powerful God make a stone he can't lift?" It is asking, "Can an all knowing God make a creatures who's choices he can't know?" I answer "no" to both of those questions because God is truth and he is rational, so he can't do illogical things or lie. If God could, we have to deny omniscience.
_"...if God knew what a human being with libertarian freedom would do in some circumstance then it is not free is just a philosophical assumption he has. God's simply knowing what I would freely do doesn't place some kind of restraint on me, such that I could not do otherwise."_
It's part of libertarian theory. It you truly do have the power of contrary choice, God can't know exactly what you will do, just the probability of all possible choices you might possibly make. If God knows exactly what you will do given the prior causes to making your choice with no possible contrary choice, you have left libertarian theory and are affirming a form of compatiblism.
_"...if God exhaustively and unilaterally decreed/determined every event in creation throughout all time..."_
Do Reformed Christians claim this? We don't use this terminology in our confessions, so I'm not sure what you mean to imply by this exactly. And I really only hear anti-Calvinists talk this way, so it always sounds a bit strawman-y.
We use "decree" and "ordain" in a pretty standard dictionary definition governance sense, not as a synonym for philosophical determinism. I'm not sure what you meant to say with "unilateral", but God's will isn't the only will out there. He is the sole creator of all things though, but I don't think that's quite what you are getting at.
_"No Molinist or any other non-Calvinist/determinist believes that human beings are "little autonomous gods"."_
Honestly, I think most solid Christians who claim to hold to "libertarian" free will do so because they like the sound of that word rather than because they understand the philosophical theory and it's implications. They pray and live like compatiblists.
As for the rest,.. that was the first temptation and I would say it is at the root of all sin. All of us are sinners, and when we sin we are telling God that we hate his law and want to be a law unto ourselves. I agree that probably no one _says_ that, but I think libertarian theory has its root in rebellion against God being God and man being man.
"Parallelism means that everything and every detail every thought is exactly the same! that's how interpretation works!" lolol
Tyson James the rapper?
Didnt think the day would come when Tyson James would argue with dr James White, hah.
retracted.
The ORTHODOX Church is the only true Church. When will James White debate Jay Dyer?
Jay Dryer would NEVER debate James White. I would pay good money to see that. Jay Dryer is scared to debate any scholarly reformed believer. Jay just lowers himself to name calling in debates. If your god is different than the God of the bible, well, Mathew 7....
You pray to dead humans, bow down to statues of dead humans, you believe Christ's work on the cross is only potential and has the ability to save no one, you believe you yourself have the ability to gain and lose saving-faith, and you believe sinful men have equal authority to God's infallible word. You perform rituals and believe they produce sanctification. You don't believe justification comes from God alone. You read apocryphal books and don't look into the reliability, accuracy and transmissibility.
Drop your human pride and submit to God's word, not your favorite youtuber.
@@SolaScriptura94 LOL...You literally just committed the sin of lying by the way. Jay Dyer debated Scholars many times before. .Jeff Durbin chickened out from a debate with Jay Dyer. James White knows he will lose as well.
@@alt-monarchist So you defend Jay Dyer instead of your faith? Or maybe Jay Dyer is your faith. Again: You pray to dead humans, bow down to statues of dead humans, you believe Christ's work on the cross is only potential and has the ability to save no one, you believe you yourself have the ability to gain and lose saving-faith, and you believe sinful men have equal authority to God's infallible word. You perform rituals and believe they produce sanctification. You don't believe justification comes from God alone. You read apocryphal books and don't look into the reliability, accuracy and transmissibility.
Drop your human pride and submit to God's word, not your favorite youtuber. Unless you're gonna try to defend the all the anti-biblical accusations of Eastern Orthodoxy that I presented.
@19:00 White -----> The *ONLY* way we can love the Calvinist God is if the Calvinist God changes our heart by Vulcan mind-melding us when he enters our mind, against our will, and alters our brains irrevocably in such a way so as to make us little mindless robots, since we can never *NOT* believe. Unfortunately, the Calvinist God is so puny he can’t love everybody or Vulcan mind-meld everyone. This alone is what proves Reformed Theology false.
Right now God himself is doing it, The Lord told the Pharisees, you do not understand why you are not my sheep, John 10:26 SIMPLE GOD LEAVES YOU TO YOUR REPROVED MIND
But you do not believe because you are not of my sheep
I see you do not fear the Lord who made some pots for honor and some for dishonor.
You presume you are good enough and that the God who created everything cannot choose to accomplish his good will the way things are described in the Bible. You presume God ought to love everybody with equality and, as God "fails" to your standard, you pass judgment on God Himself.
There's no "calvinistic god". If you had a new heart you would never refer to God this way. Despite if reformed theology or Calvinism got something wrong, it errs trying to be biblical and not seeking after wisdom of men.
I'm afraid by you sir, by your proud attitude. You should know what comes with pride.
@John Q. Public
Talk about strawmanning an argument...
@@Luiz__Silva --- My GOD is in possession of all the omni's; your god is too puny, he's so puny he is incapable of loving everybody, i.e. he's *NOT* omnibenevolent. *ERGO,* the Reformed Theology god *IS NOT* the *Greatest Possible GOD.!* That's how we know Calvinism is false. Run along now.
@@JohnQPublic11 The way we know is by studying the bible, without preconceived ideas of what God is like; God is sovereign, do you understand what this word means ?; If you haven't noticed, it is one of two attributes, you would do well to study it...
What I do not understand is why God loves me, God is not in the obligation to love anyone, who was the one who sinned? you forget that God is justice, and that he must punish sin, have you forgotten this?