I throw the red flag on myself.
As satisfied that I am right in my final comment on God's potential infallibility (please read previous post, Is God fallible?, and all the wonderful comments) I realized that I was missing the boat. And perhaps this was something that Randall and Dave and many others were trying to point out, God being infallible suggests that somehow we can judge his actions.
I'm going to go back to my commentary assertion about the coin toss as I think it helps illustrate my NEW point best.
Original argument - If God tosses the coin 100 times and it comes up heads 100 times in a row, He is perfect, but it doesn't negate the idea that the coin could have come up tails. Whether or not God would ever have failed to have it end up heads, the possibility always exists for it to come up tails. I do not think that this argument is incorrect. The potential for infallibility does exist according to this argument.
New argument - My original argument doesn't take into account that the coin, the ability to toss it, heads, tails, edges, and the laws of physics that govern the coin toss were all created by God. The original assumption is rigged. It assumes that 100 coin tosses that end in heads are Perfect. That's a statistical argument. Statistically, that is a perfect number. But what is the ACTUAL perfect number. What if the actual perfect number is 50 heads and 50 tails? What if its 99 heads and 1 tail? What if its 100 edges in a row? Indeed, whatever is the actual perfect number is exactly what God would toss. Every time. Therefore, there is no chicken and egg argument here - God would always be perfect no matter what He did because He would not only be the judge of perfection, but also its creator. God CAN NOT be infallible precisely because HE defines what fallibility is.
Hence, God became Fully Human and therefore defined what it is to be Fully Human. He was perfect as a human - hence, if you wish to be a perfect human you need to do EXACTLY as Jesus did. If that means growing in wisdom, then growing in wisdom makes you perfect. If that means striking out on a wicked Tim Lincecum fastball, then striking out makes you perfect. Because He was perfect, everything He did was perfect. He set the definitive model.
So, once again, I have proven that my limitless intellect has limits. It not only can't come to correct solution every time, but sometimes it has to blather on like a fool in order to come to the solution that everyone else had already arrived at. But I tell you what... growing in wisdom is perfect. Jesus said so.
9 comments:
I've followed the subsequent remarks, but am pondering what, if anything to add. I'll be back later, and if not here, then at my place.
Cheers.
Dear Will,
May I challenge something you've written? I hope so.
Let me first issue this declaration: what follows puts me at serious risk of being accused of heresy. My theology will be duly suspect, at least to some. What can I do about that? As far as I can tell I have the essentials correct. Nowhere is it suggested that I have to be orthodox in this one issue in order to be received into heaven.
You said this, Will:
My original argument doesn't take into account that the coin, the ability to toss it, heads, tails, edges, and the laws of physics that govern the coin toss were all created by God. The original assumption is rigged. It assumes that 100 coin tosses that end in heads are Perfect.
I see a couple of problems here, Will. First, I don't think flipping the coin is at all important. There is no perfection in flipping it repeatedly; it is possible for a person to practice the mechanics of flipping a coin so it always lands on heads. It's not like the coin flips an enormous number of times or that there is an infinite number of possible outcomes. If I start with a heads-up coin and flip in one full flip, it will land heads-up. If I toss it up and it flips any whole number it will always land heads-up. It really one flips a whole time or some half (1.5, 3.5, 6.5 ...).
But I don't understand how having it land 100 times heads-up has anything to do with perfection. It's simply a matter of mechanics. However, if God was standing next to me, blindfolded, and I was flipping a coin while I bounced on a trampoline, and God PREDICTED the outcome every time, that would at least be wildly interesting, and it may speak more closely to your point about infallibility.
Let me put it this way. Watch closely: 2+2=4. See, here's a moment when I am inerrant, even infallible. In fact, humans can be inerrant and infallible in a number of areas. It is conceivable I could write a five-page letter without any errors of execution or fact. In that letter, I would be infallible, inerrant. Does that make me perfect? Hardly.
The point is that perfect infallibility is reserved for God precisely because He is NOT merely a man. Jesus, the perfect man -- in a fallen world -- was ignorant of at least the date and time of the end of the world and His return. We know this because He said so. But no one would think that, AFTER His ascension and His complete exaltation He remains ignorant of such things, or that He remains just plainly human, still capable of making amoral mistakes, like dropping a pencil when He wants to hold it.
[continued below]
But there is a second thing I note about your analogy, and it has to do with your assertion that God created the coin. No, He didn't.
It's my understanding that though God was "done" with creation at the end of the sixth day, He allowed Adam to continue building things in the Garden: He allowed Adam to NAME things, "and that was what they were." Adam, in some small way, was still creating, adding the details, so to speak.
This is also echoed a bit in Jesus' place as the Second Adam. As the Second Adam, He brings a NEW CREATION.
The Christian faith has always held, I believe, that a perfect world was destroyed by sin. That what was perfect became imperfect, corrupted, marred.
Hence, the creation as it now stands is not what God created. It's what we've corrupted, and it's what we've created. Coins have nothing to do with God; and the laws of physics are themselves not even laws, only observed repetitions. But if we say that they are actual LAWS, we have to deal with the law of thermodynamics that intimates the universe is in a state of decay. Did God create a universe that has always been decaying, or did our sin distort the created order to such a point that decay became a fundamental "law" of physics?
What I am asserting is where I get into trouble: that much of what we call "God's creation" is not His. It's ours. God did not create coins or guns or cars or baseballs or mirrors or sutures or cigarettes or nuclear bombs or hockey pucks. Humanity created these things.
Hence, since this is a FALLEN WORLD, it is conceivable that an unfallen, perfect and omniscient God CANNOT DO certain things in that world. Because of the fallenness of things; because the universe is falling apart, it is conceivable that a perfect, always infallible God cannot DO some things in this place.
For instance, if a golf ball is sitting in the fringe just off the fairway 150 yards from the cup, is it NECESSARY to believe that if God was to address that ball, HE COULD AND WOULD hit it into the cup in one shot? Why do we think this? If God is omniscient, He MIGHT say, "You know, I know everything there is about where this ball is sitting. I know the position of the cosmos; I know at this instant the position of the sun and stars and the electromagnetic energy coursing through the solar system; I know the speed at which the grass is growing, the wind is swirling, and every other variable. And you know what? It is not possible to hit this ball into the hole from here. It might be possible if it was three inches to the north, and even then only in 2011. But as it currently stands, the ball can only land in that cup in a minimum of two shots."
God cannot REALLY do the impossible. He can't make a square circle. He can't make a stone too heavy for him to lift. He can't make 2 equal 3. He can't always make the golf ball land in the cup.
But here's the thing: He COULD cheat. He COULD hold back the wind, or stop the grass from growing. He could move the ball in flight. He could slow down the rotation of the galaxy. But that would NOT be hitting the ball into the cup; it would be FORCING the hole into the cup.
The fact is, and this is good news, God does not cheat. He always plays fair. And omniscience only intervenes when it knows the perfect moment, the perfect place, to intervene without cheating, without forcing a thing. THAT'S perfection. THAT'S infallibility.
But, I have one thing to add: Maybe, because the world IS fallen, because it is not His creation anymore, God HAS to cheat once in a while.
I leave you with that for now.
Peace.
Will, like Bill, I've a problem with the coin analogy, because you have defined perfection arbitrarily. A better analogy would be the element gold (or any other, for that matter.) It is what it is. If you add or subtract a single electron or neutron or proton, it ceases to be gold, but something else, i.e. "not gold."
So, God is what He is. We can discern a little of His nature by looking at humans: the ability to create, to love, to imagine, to laugh. But our image is tainted by our own rebellion in the form of Original Sin. Thus, we have to rely on his Word to inform us of His nature.
That's a difficult process obviously.
Your original post suggested God would be "better," if He were fallible, i.e. could lose a fight. My original responses were predicated upon the idea that were God fallible, the entire Gospel becomes unnecessary if not a complete lie.
It seems the discussion veered into other areas, and I wish I had time to address those in greater detail. Let me add a few things however.
We know that God is. "I am" is what he told Moses to call him. His first command to the universe was "fiat lux." "Let there be [light]. John calls Him "the Word." Obviously, He exists outside of His creation, which is to say outside of the Universe and all its physical laws.
As Christ, God subjected himself to the rules/laws he created. Thus, as Bill indicated, I'm sure he made mistakes, i.e. throwing a hanging curve ball with 3-0 count and the bases loaded. The question is, is that "fallibility" such that it leads to spiritual culpability? I should think not.
I interpreted your question to refer to outside the universe in the context of spiritual warfare. In that, He is not and cannot be fallible, by definition. Pondering other outcomes/hypotheticals have no purpose.
Yet within the confines of the Universe and world as we know it, God loses fights all the time. Each time a person dies without heeding His call or who rejects Him, he loses.
I'll be back later.
Cheers.
Perhaps this is a simpler analogy to what I was trying to say.
God walks up to a fork in the road. To the left is death, to the right, salvation. He chooses right.
Old argument: Even though he chose right, it did not negate the left road. It existed. Therefore, the possibility existed that he could go left. Therefore, the possibility exists that God could chose left, but doesn't.
New argument: Even if God goes left, it is the correct decision because God made it. God made both roads knowing full well that at some point he would come to this junction and make his decision and knowing which direction he would go. Therefore, despite the existence of the other road, God can Never be wrong because no matter what path he chooses, it is the correct path.
Any other deep thought or implied philosophy, no matter how well conceived and stated, is just beyond my limited intellect - though I admit to liking all the other comments as they've really made me think.
Bill - you've given me something to think about vis a vis Adam continuing the creation story.
Randall - Does God really lose fights? Or did those fights end exactly as they were supposed to? Its a bit too much to ponder because its trying to put God's thoughts into our minds. I suspect that there are some things we might never know.
Will,
Interesting new argument. How about this:
God walks up to a fork in the road. To the left is evil, to the right, goodness. Since God is perfect, omniscient and infallible, does he still make the correct decision if he chooses to go left?
You said: "God can Never be wrong because no matter what path he chooses, it is the correct path."
Now I don't think we want to go too far with this. But I will point out that your assertion SORT OF echoes the final scenes of the Book of Job in chapter 38:
17 Have the gates of death been shown to you?
Have you seen the gates of the shadow of death?
18 Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
Tell me, if you know all this.
19 What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?
20 Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
And I hear a little bit of Jesus when He asks, "What is that to you?"
In other words, I am hearing an appeal to humility.
But I feel we've sort of left the realm of the meaningful here. Terms seem all confused (I've surely confused them). I don't think we can learn much going down this path. Whenever we take on omniscience, especially where God has been silent, we do what David said he would not do in the silence: "Nor are my eyes fixed on things beyond me."
Wow. Stay offline a few days and suddenly there's all this cool discussion that I've missed.
Bill - I don't think you border on heresy, at least not in the sense of the discussion as related to "ownership" of the creation. I would say that this is still God's creation - however, He has effectively given humans the management responsibilities of said creation.
Genesis 1:28-30 essentially says as much: 28 God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
29 Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food." And it was so. We therefore can do with it as we please - these are our tools.
Where I think we all need to be careful is to avoid placing human constraints on God. I would concur with Randall that while God was incarnate as Jesus that He subjected Himself to the "rules" by which humans are limited - Jesus merely had the ability to bend them (or cheat as Bill suggests) when necessary (see the assorted miracles). But even in the accounts of the miracles - how many of them occurred because those who were healed or saved took the first step of faith in believing that they would be healed? Pretty much all of them...
I think discussing these issues is healthy, because if we as Christians wrestle with them, how much more do those who do not know Jesus wrestle with them?
Ultimately, it is why this is called faith, that we simply have to believe that God has done, can and will do amazing things in our lives.
Will, adding to the fray regarding "fork in the road."
The problem with that is that for God, there is never a fork in the road; there is always a single "straight and narrow" path. We, as fallible humans who do not comprehend His ways, may wonder why the path goes in a particular direction, but that way is God's way. If there is divergence, it's because of us, seeing and wanting to move in a different direction, not God.
Randall - hmm... good point about God never facing a fork in the road. I think that kind of depends on who is doing the observing. To God, I'm sure it is a single path. To the rest of us, we can wonder why He chose one path over another. For instance, God always knew that He would be crucified. He even said so on many occasions. But to His disciples, there was nothing but shock when it happened. I think they all felt that Jesus could have easily avoided death on the cross.
Post a Comment