From: "gordon brown" <gbrown@euclid.Colorado.EDU>
To: "glenn morton" <mortongr@flash.net>
Cc: "American Scientific Affliation (E-mail)" <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Saturday, April 08, 2000 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: Preprogrammed?
> Glenn,
>
> There is a very common Arminian caricature of Calvinism in which certain
> events (such as conversion) are independent of all other events, and so
> all human attempts to influence the outcome are futile. It would appear
> that the authors of the Westminster Confession were well aware of this
> misconception when they wrote, "God did...freely and unchangeably ordain
> whatsoever comes to pass;...nor is the liberty or contingency of second
> causes taken away, but rather established." (See also Eph. 1:11 and Matt.
> 10:29,30.) In other words, the means are as sure as the ends. Therefore it
> seems ironic to me that you in one of your posts portrayed the
> Sierpinski's gasket analogy as being supportive of Calvinism. Since it
> determines the end independent of the means, it seems to support the
> caricature that I mentioned rather than true Calvinism or Arminianism.
Let me try to clarify some things. First, I am obviously, not a
theologian--so my knowledge of the finer points in the argument between
Calvinism and Arminianism are limited. Secondly, I used to be much more
Arminian than I am now. The reason I think the Gasket supports Calvinism, is
that the result is assured. Seeing that randomness and determinism were
joined in single mathematical objects, and being an Arminian, obviously, I
had to move towards Cavlinism--more determinism. So in that sense, I do feel
that the gasket supports Calvinism more. As to trying to use a caricature,
I didn't know such a thing existed until you described it.
And in some sense the Gasket does support the idea that God can create
someone who has absolutely free will yet will either be one of the elect or
not one of the elect--regardless of their choices.
>
> Many of the posts on this thread appear to assume that there is a
> contradiction between God's foreknowledge and man's freedom. Even I can
> know people's *past* decisions without taking their power to decide for
> themselves away from them. Since God is outside space-time, it shouldn't
> be surprising that He can do the same for future decisions and can
> therefore plan accordingly.
Yes but you can't be positive that your inferences based on past behavior
are real. I was best friends with a guy years ago. We went fishing
together, our families got together regularly, we were in a Bible study
together. I would have inferred that this guy was above reproach. This is,
until he was caught sexually abusing his daughter. His ghastly behavior was
free precisely because it was unpredictable.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
Adam, Apes and Anthropology
http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
Lots of information on creation/evolution
----- Original Message -----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Apr 08 2000 - 17:39:01 EDT