We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.
Paradigm Shift Questions
A couple that was recently introduced to ReKnew and several of my books recently wrote to tell me that they are in the process of embracing the warfare worldview along with the open view of the future. They said that they “realize that these things aren’t minor adjustments but are rather all-encompassing paradigm shifts in our faith-walk and theology.” And, as is to be expected, this “paradigm shift” has left them with “some startling questions.” Their questions were thoughtful and probing, which is why I decided to share them with you.
QUESTION: It seems like [with your theology] we end up with a God that’s trimmed down in size quite a bit. Is there anything he can still do for us? Can he still protect us or answer our prayers, or are his hands tied and is he saying: “Sorry guys, I’d love to help out but I can’t”. What is there that the Lord can/will do on our behalf apart from what he did on the cross?
ANSWER: You’re correct in surmising that, in a world that God has populated with free agents, there will be times when God has to say, “Sorry, I’d love to help but I can’t.” (The alternative is to believe he says; “Sorry, I could help but I don’t want to.”) And he “can’t” because free will is inherently irrevocable. But what God can do is: a) intervene to protect you and answer prayers insofar as this is possible (viz. insofar as it doesn’t involve revoking free will); and b) while God can’t unilaterally override a free agent’s will, God can influence it. While coercion is inconsistent with free will, influence is not. Look, I’m trying to influence you right now, and I don’t need to interfere with your free will to do it.
QUESTION: If God can’t interfere with evil choices, it seems He can’t dictate/interfere with good choices either. The sword cuts both ways. God only does what He does and people and angels/demons do what they do and never the two can/shall meet/interfere.
ANSWER: It’s true God can’t unilaterally stop an agent’s choice to do evil or to do good. But that doesn’t mean that God is not involved in both. I believe God is always doing the maximum he can do to exert an anti-evil and pro-good influence in the world. Moreover, the picture I get about the world from the New Testament is that, if God were not exerting his good influence, the world would be wholly given over to Satan and there would be no good in it. Hence, “every good and perfect gift comes down from the Father of lights,” James says (1:17). So, when I am blessed by a good thing a person did, I thank them as well as God. All goodness, in other words, originates with God (but requires agents to act in accordance with it if it is to make its way into our experience). Perhaps this is why Jesus says, “there is none good but God”?
QUESTION: Knowing all that we don’t know, knowing the complexity of the interaction of an infinite amount of agents having free choices, knowing that the tiniest change in events (the Butterfly Effect) reshuffles all the cards, what can Jesus do in answer to prayer or otherwise?
ANSWER: a) God can unilaterally respond to prayers, so long as it doesn’t involve revoking the free will he has given to agents; and b) even when he can’t unilaterally intervene, God can influence free wills as well as any other variable within the dynamic system, including the flap of butterfly wings.
Keeping processing!
Greg
Photo Credit: Kachina Lee via Unsplash
Category: General
Tags: Open Theism, Q&A, Spiritual Warfare, Theodicy, Warfare Worldview
Topics: Open Theism
Related Reading
Free Will: Is it a coherent concept?
Greg is going to be spending the next several blogs talking about the idea of free will. In this first reflection, he discusses whether it is coherent to speak of a decision that is not determined or exhaustively caused.
How do you respond to Acts 17:26?
“From one ancestor he made all nations to inhabit the whole earth, and he allotted the times of their existence and the boundaries of the places where they would live.” (cf. Dan. 2:21) In this passage Paul is preaching to Epicurean and Stoic philosophers (17:18). His goal is to show them that, in contrast to…
How do you respond to Galatians 1:15–16?
“…when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me…I did not confer with any human being…” As with Jeremiah (Jer. 1:5), John the Baptist (Luke 1:13–17) and other God-ordained prophets, Paul was aware that God had decided on a…
What is the significance of Jeremiah 32:35?
As in Jeremiah 19:5, the Lord expresses his dismay over Israel’s paganism by saying they did this “though I did not command them, nor did it enter my mind that they should do this abomination.” If this abomination was eternally foreknown to God, it’s impossible to attribute any clear meaning to his confession that this…
What is the significance of 1 Samuel 15:10?
In light of Saul’s sin the Lord says, “I regret that I made Saul king, for he has turned back from following me.” Common sense would suggest that one can only regret a decision one makes if the decision results in an outcome other than what was expected or hoped for. If God foreknows all…
Does your “dispositional” ontology avoid substantival categories?
Question: In Trinity and Process you argue against a “substantival” ontology and instead advocate a “relational,” “process” and/or “dispositional” ontology in which being, being-in-relation and being-in-process are one and the same. In your view, entity x is its relation to entity y (and all other relations) and is the disposition to interact with y (and…