Giving Calvinism a ... longer glance

Dale · August 30, 2020, 7:35pm

Thank you.

mitchellmckain · August 30, 2020, 10:29pm

Sure He is. Saying that He is outside of time just doesn’t mean that He is not also inside of time. The point is that He is not confined either way.

God is not time-less no more than He is lifeless, changeless, or loveless. God is not less but more – and I am not saying that you cannot play word-games such as calling Him less-less, which of course is incoherent nonsense. The point is that there is nothing which God cannot do. God is NOT a slave of human theology. God’s will is the ONLY thing which dictate anything to Him. What about logical coherence? That is only a limit on what things you can say about God which have any meaning – so claiming God can do such things or claiming that He cannot is equally incoherent.

The Trinity foundation puts forward a couple of definitions

“Time is the medium in which change occurs”
Omnitemporality affirms that God is never and always in time in the same way He is nowhere and everywhere according to omnipresence.

That is good so far. But the claim that these answer all the questions put forward in this thread is quite dubious if not silly.

As for talking about the age of God, it depends on how you define it. God certainly isn’t confined to some measure of time and so has no age in that sense. But defining age as what portion of the past God was participating in will give you an age equal to that of the universe.

Yes in Malachi 3:6, it has God saying, “For I am the LORD, I do not change; therefore you are not consumed." But that does not mean that God incapable of change. That is a misuse of the passage and out of context. There is indeed many ways in which God does not change. But whole of the Bible makes it crystal clear that God IS capable of change. The examples are legion. One off the top of my head is the argument God has with Abraham over the destruction of Sodom. Another is found in the book of Jonah. Another in Genesis chapter 6. God CAN change just as He can do all the same activities we can do that require time. But rather than being inside some external measure of time, God simply uses whatever time as He chooses.

Dale · August 30, 2020, 10:30pm

The word omnitemporal means ‘timeful’, he is present at all times, simultaneously. He is not outside of time.

Repeating, Jesus said “…before Abraham was born, I AM!”*

mitchellmckain · August 31, 2020, 1:44am

That is incoherent. It is like saying, omnipresent means ‘spaceful’, present in all places at the same place. Furthermore it shows a rather naive understanding of time outdated because of the discoveries of relativity in which simultaneity is shown to be highly relative. It is like supposing that you can say two stars had solar flares simultaneously and think that this actually fixes the time of one solar flare when you know the time of the other. It is forcing the universe into the naive picture of space-time as composed of a series of snapshots like a motion picture. But we now know that the universe isn’t like that at all.

Also there is the implication that God does all things at once and thus cannot give his thoughts and action a temporal ordering. Another thing that human theologians think they can say God cannot do – in particular that He cannot have an interactive relationship with us. Wrong! God can. And according to the Bible, God does. But this certainly agrees with the way the Trinity foundation ends up equating omnitemporality with being timeless. Making God into a thing which only is and cannot actually do anything – no more conscious or alive than the characters in a novel – just like the rest of us in the time-annihilating picture they no doubt advocate.

Of course He is. He created time therefore He exists where there was none of this time He created – and thus outside of time.

But He is free to interact and participate in the time He created as well. So the correct way of saying it is that God is not excluded from time… or that God is both inside and outside of time.

Dale · August 31, 2020, 2:10am

I was merely contrasting it with your “time-less”. Omnipresent means he is present in all places simultaneously. Omnitemporal means he is present in all times simultaneously. He is not constrained to sequential time – he orders it.

The implication is, rather, that we cannot understand how he directs providence. Do you have a favorite account of God’s providence? I would like you to explain how God accomplished it.

mitchellmckain · August 31, 2020, 2:37am

I simply say God is not time-less. So you are equating omnitemporal with being time-less in some other way?

Like I explained that is incoherent in the light of modern physics. Better to say, omnipresent means He is present at all times in all places. You go overboard when you presume to dictate how God must participate by using the word “simultaneously.” He can do so as He chooses, and not as any of us care to dictate.

Better… But not being constrained to time doesn’t mean He cannot use time (a temporal ordering in His own thoughts and actions).

Sure. God created us and the physical universe for a relationship with us and not simply to grant religion mongers greater the authority to dictate God’s actions in some “providence” they make up. But of course a relationship doesn’t preclude making plans in order to solve problems that arise in that relationship. So as each human being makes a choice that demolishes hope, God makes plans for restoring hope once again.

Dale · August 31, 2020, 2:42am

You have no accounts of God’s providence you can report. Hmm. Do you accept Maggie’s?

Dale · August 31, 2020, 2:54am

The reason I’m interested is because an example will allow us to look at how God relates to us in time and place, timing and placing, and sequences. I mentioned Rich Stearns before. Do you remember seeing his account?

mitchellmckain · August 31, 2020, 3:08am

I had to look up the word “providence” because that was a usage I was not familiar with. Clearly it is not how I was using the word.

Either I am not grasping your meaning or it sounds too ambitious for me. I only seek to tackle the general principles.

I could only look up the name to find out who He was.

Dale · August 31, 2020, 4:19am

The “coincidences” in Maggie’s account were examples of God’s providential (and miraculous) interactions in the sequences of her life… the nurse in grocery checkout line, the bank error in her favor, the offer of a place to stay, the busy loan officer and the president of the bank. Someone (who will remain untagged ) dismisses such events and calls them cognitive bias (or magic), not realizing that God’s ‘technology’ is beyond our grasp.

The Rich Stearns sequence was mentioned in another conversation before, and it also lists miracles of providential timing and placing, but I will include it here again:

I think you underestimate the capacity of God, to act not only in individual instances, but in sets or series of otherwise unrelated events that taken one at a time may not seem compelling, but taken collectively impart unmistakable meaning, way beyond believability as mere naturally occurring random ‘coincidences’.

A notable present day example would be that of Rich Stearns and the events that led to his resigning as CEO of Lenox Corporation, maker of high-end dinnerware and other luxurious merchandise, to become the president of World Vision, a large Christian NGO serving to promote the welfare of children around the globe. He elucidates them in his book, The Hole in Our Gospel , winner of the ECPA 2010 Christian Book of the Year Award.

After a nine-month month search, the World Vision board of directors had selected me and offered me the opportunity to become World Vision’s U.S.-based president.

…
I had prayed that God would send someone else to do it-anyone but me. Yet the board (and presumably God) had inexplicably called me…
…
I was sitting in my rather posh corner office one day in 1997 when the phone rang. My good friend Bill Bryce was calling from Massachusetts…
…
Vision’s U.S. president, Bob Seiple had told the board of directors that he wished to leave within the next year and that they should begin the search for a successor. “Wow!” I said. “Now what is World Vision going to do? How do you replace a guy like Bob Seiple?”

Bill paused a moment, then said, “That’s the reason I called.” What he said next was somewhat stunning. He told me that since he first heard of Bob’s decision a couple of weeks earlier, he had been praying that God would lead the right person to take his place. And then he just blurted it out: “Don’t ask me to explain it, but God told me that you are going to be the next president of World Vision.” He went on to say that God didn’t make a habit of speaking to him…

I laughed out loud.
…
About six months after Bill’s “prophecy,” I was again sitting at my desk, this time going through some mail, when I found a handwritten note from one of my Lenox VPs, who worked about twenty minutes down the road, in the collectibles division. The note said:

Rich, I was reading the Wall Street Journal today and looking at the employment section. When I saw this ad, it made me think of you. I have always thought that someday you’d do something like this. So here it is. Didn’t know if you had seen it.
– Bob

P.S. This was kind of a dumb thing to do. Don’t get the wrong idea. You’re a great CEO and we wouldn’t want to lose you!

I turned the page to see a copy of a small ad that read, PRESIDENT, WORLD VISION, and went on to describe the job. I learned much later that the search firm had run the ad just once in the Wall Street, Journal, to cast a wider net and see if any “business types” might see it and apply. I will admit: reading that note sent a bit of a shiver up my spine. Bob had no idea about my conversations with my friend Bill. It was kind of eerie. But I thought I’d have a little fun with Bill, so I picked up the phone and called him.

When he heard what had happened, he was quite excited. “See, I told you so. If that isn’t a message from God, I don’t know what is. Now do you believe me?” I told him I doubted it was any message from God and that it was now in my wastebasket; it was just a crazy coincidence. God would have to speak a little more clearly than that.

It was January 1998, about seven months after Bill’s first call to me, when the next life-changing phone call came. Again, as I sat at my battleship-sized sized desk, my assistant indicated that a recruiter was on the line and asked if I wanted to speak with him.

“Sure,” I said. I always spoke with recruiters, because, well, you never know. The conversation went something like this:

“Hello, Rich. My name is Rob Stevenson, and I have been retained by World Vision’s board to help find their next president. Do you have a few minutes to talk?” The minute he said, “World Vision,” a shiver went down my spine. The series of coincidences were beginning to get a little creepy.

“How did you get my name?” I asked. “Did Bill Bryce put you up to this?”

The recruiter said he didn’t know any Bill Bryce and that he had gotten my name from a donor list.

There are a lot more details about how Stearns resisted and his reflections on scripture and introspections on who he was, but finally he agreed to fly to Seattle to do some more investigation, “a series of fact-finding meetings and discussions before I made a final decision.”

…one more amazing thing that happened – the same day as our flight to Seattle. I had gone to the office early because, months earlier, I had invited an industry colleague who lived in London to visit and tour our Lenox offices. His name was Keith, and he was a wealthy investor who owned one of the prestigious British tableware companies. With so much on my mind, and the flight later that day to Seattle, I was distracted as I showed Keith around Lenox and then brought him back to my office for coffee. That’s when he got up and closed the door, telling me he had a private matter to discuss with me.

With growing amazement I listened as Keith explained that he was planning to buy another large British tableware company and combine the two companies. The new company would be the largest of its kind in the world. And then he dropped the bombshell: he wanted me to join him as CEO. He said that he didn’t want to bother hiring a recruiting firm because he knew that I was the best candidate for the job. I started to speak, but he stopped me and said that I needed to know one more thing: he would make me rich. He said he would offer me 10 percent ownership in this new enterprise, prise, a stake easily worth $25 to $50 million, if I would agree to leave Lenox and serve as his CEO.

As you might imagine, events like this didn’t happen every day in my life. I immediately remembered something Renee had said to me about two months earlier, just as I had begun talking with World Vision. She said she believed that at the moment of decision, a great temptation would be put in my path – a financial lure – that would threaten to prevent me from going to World Vision. Now, remember, just six hours later I was going to be on a plane to Seattle to make my final decision.

I told Keith that I was stunned by his offer but that there was a complication. Even though no one at Lenox was aware of my discussions with World Vision, I decided to share my dilemma with Keith. Without naming the organization, I told him that my wife and I were committed Christians and that over the past few weeks I had been in discussions with a large charitable organization about becoming their president. I said that if I accepted the offer, it would be an opportunity for my wife and me to put our faith into action in a more direct way. And I told him that later that day I was flying out for my final interviews. Then I told him that if it didn’t work out with the charity, I would be incredibly interested in his offer, but I had to finish the process with them first.

Keith seemed a bit taken aback and said that he was amazed that I would actually consider leaving my career at Lenox to work for a charity but that he admired me for considering such a move. And then he told me a story that became a direct message from God to Rich Stearns.

He confided that decades earlier, he and his wife were unable to have children, and they finally adopted a little girl from India. They raised her as their own until very suddenly, they lost her at the age of ten. He never told me how she died. The grief tore them apart, he lost interest in his businesses, nesses, and ultimately he and his wife separated. But then he told me that one day as he was going through his mail, he found an appeal from an organization called World Vision, which invited him to sponsor a child for twenty pounds a month. (I felt that shiver go up my spine again.) With excitement he wrote them a letter explaining the loss of his daughter and asking if it would be possible to sponsor a ten-year-old girl from the same region of India where his daughter had been born. Two weeks later he received a photo of his new “daughter,” and for the next few years, he wrote to her and sent her presents regularly.

“Rich,” he said, “somehow, by sponsoring that little girl, I was finally able to let go of my grief.” Then he told me that the point of his story was that over the years he had become so impressed with this World Vision organization-that it wasn’t easy to help the poor, but that he could see that they had solid experience, a thoughtful strategy, and people with the right skills to do it effectively. “So,” he said, “I can see why a big charity like that might benefit from someone like you, Rich. But selfishly I hope you decide to come work with me.”

Perhaps you can imagine my shock about what had just happened. This could be no coincidence. God was speaking to me through this amazing temptation, saying, Do you see, Rich? Through World Vision I can touch the poorest of the poor, but also the richest of the rich. Are you willing to be open to My will for your life? Somewhat hesitantly I told Keith that it was World Vision who wanted me to be their next U.S. president. The color seemed to drain from his face as we both realized what a bizarre happenstance this was. We ended our meeting, and I promised to call him in a few weeks, after my decision had been made. And then I left for the airport.

mitchellmckain · August 31, 2020, 5:24am

I don’t think any of this implies absolute foreknowledge. Sinful human beings are very predictable because sin enslaves our free will. One of the most well known Biblical example is when Jesus told Peter, "before the cock crows, you will deny me three times.” Jesus knew very well what Peter was capable of under stress. So when I deny absolute foreknowledge I am not denying prophecy or that God knows a great deal of what will happen. But I think that is a matter of His determination to accomplish things and how predictable we are in our sins. And when I affirm free will I am not saying that our every action is free – most are not, for we are very much creatures of habit. And that brings us to another Biblical story… that of Pharoah. God knew his character and habits very well and would not hesitate to push his button in order to write that story which is such an important part of the founding of Israel. God is a participant in our lives as a shepherd who will at times manipulate His sheep for their own well being. It is not control and we do have free will, but God can still do astounding things – miracles.

EricMH · August 31, 2020, 3:26pm

the reason for strong omniscience is because the Bible seems to clearly state this

once upon a time theologians thought the clear sense of scripture meant what it said, and tried their best to deconflict cutting edge philosophy from scriptural claims

Mervin_Bitikofer · August 31, 2020, 4:16pm

I suspect this may be a modern myth … that there exists or existed some “plain reading” that functions as some sort of objective baseline or “default”. Even in Jesus’ day, (and from Jesus’ own lips, and Paul’s own pen) we find writings saturated with metaphor, levels of meaning, subtle and complex references - deeper meanings to be explored. Theologians down the ages were more than just people “who happened to be literate enough to read”. They did scholarly work and wrote commentaries … commentaries that shouldn’t have to exist at all if your conjecture were true that scriptures have an obviously plain baseline reading. That isn’t to say that plain-thinking children can never find anything about it accessible; or conversely that other readers never try to hide behind unnecessary sophistry. It is only to say that there never was a time when everything could be settled just with the belief that “scripture meant what it said.”

EricMH · August 31, 2020, 4:19pm

ancient theologians thought there were multiple levels of interpretation, all built upon the plain, literal reading of scripture

fundamentalist rural baptists have more in common with ancient theologians than modern academic readings of scripture

Mervin_Bitikofer · August 31, 2020, 4:21pm

What you refer to as “the plain literal reading of scripture” is itself an interpretation (and one in need of further clarification, no less). It comes with its own interpretive baggage (especially so today) - but I’m reasonably sure it was always so.

EricMH · August 31, 2020, 4:22pm

i have been surprised how luterally church fathers read the bible, even more literally than today’s ardent literalists

Mervin_Bitikofer · August 31, 2020, 4:27pm

Which makes it interesting that they did not then reach all the same conclusions about things that some of today’s “literalists” cling to. E.g. Augustine’s “plain reading” did not lead him to insist on 24 hour long creation days … he was fine with them being much shorter moments of time; which flies in the face of today’s literalists who think it important for those days to match the exact workweek given later in Exodus and other places (all references that Augustine himself would have been well aware of as well.)

EricMH · August 31, 2020, 4:29pm

i looked into augustine’s interpretation recently, and it is a lot more subtle than you portray

my take is he is using a both/and, literal 24 hours and platonic metaphysical

those seeking to use church fathers as support for OEC are not doing a very careful scholarly job of it, FWICT

mitchellmckain · August 31, 2020, 4:45pm

Wrong. The reason why people push things like this to the extreme is that they ignore everything in the Bible which disagrees with them.

EricMH · August 31, 2020, 4:46pm

No I am right! nyah