“Wrong, Hays, you said ‘that scarcely relieves the mad scientist of responsibility for creating a homicidal monster’.
Try not to be obtuse. It’s clear from what I said that the mad scientist endowed the creature with libertarian freewill, knowing that the creature would exercise that freedom in homicidal ways. The mad scientist is responsible for the final outcome.
“So, to stay within the bounds of your analogy, Frankenstein created a good monster. The monster used it's will to sin.”
Beside the point. The mad scientist would be culpable for creating him in full knowledge of the evil outcome.
You continue to obtusely act as if, in a transaction involving to parties, only one can be culpable. Since I assume you’re not quite that dense, you’re being evasive because you can’t defend your position.
“God allows this for the reason I stated, relational. A true relationship requires two agents, not one agent and his marionette.”
Aside from begging the question in favor of libertarianism, your conclusion doesn’t even follow from libertarianism. There’s no requirement that God made free agents who choose evil. If they were truly free (as you define it), they are also free to choose good. You constantly fail to explain how libertarian freedom forces God to create sinful agents.
“William Lane Craig makes pretty much the same argument. ”
i) Craig rejects the freedom to do otherwise as a necessary condition of libertarian freedom.
ii) Craig is also a Molinist. But in that event, God chooses which possible world to instantiate, not the human agent. And the human agent has no freedom to do otherwise within the actual world, since the actual world represents one possible choice to the exclusion of others.
“As Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell put it: ‘The same freedom that makes it possible to enter a genuinely trusting and obedient relationship with God also makes it possible for us to go our own way and disobey him. God allows the latter in order to enable the former’.”
i) That doesn’t require God to create sinners. He’s at liberty to create the subset of free agents to freely choose good over evil.
ii) Is God also free to do either good or evil? If not, then, by your definition, God can’t enter into a “genuine relationship” with us.
If, however, God is free to do either good or evil, then he’s untrustworthy–in which case you can’t entering into a genuinely trusting relationship with him.
“No, he did not bring it to pass because He knew it would happen, He knew it would happen because it actually was going to happen.”
That’s a red herring. I didn’t say he brought it to pass because he knew it would happen. Try to pay attention. I said he foresaw the evil outcome. He was in a position to prevent the evil outcome. But he went right ahead and made it happen by creating the world where he foresaw that outcome.
At a minimum, that makes him responsible for the outcome. It didn’t happen all by itself.
“God not stopping the consequences of sin is, again, because of the genuine relationship He desires and the just judgement for sin.”
You keep falling back on this false dichotomy. Is there some reason you’re so obtuse?
Even if we stipulate to libertarian freedom, that doesn’t mean sin is inevitable. It could go either way, remember? You act as though the dice are loaded to result in a sinful combination every time they’re rolled. That’s hardly consistent libertarianism. If libertarianism were true, then rolling the dice would sometimes result in a sinful combination, and sometimes not. So God is free to instantiate the sinless outcomes rather than the sinful outcomes. And selecting that subset of possible outcomes does nothing to infringe on the libertarian freedom which you ascribe to human beings. If libertarianism were true, then the odds are that some outcomes would be sinless. If every outcome results in evil, then the dice were loaded.
Try to think through the implications of your position.
“No the question is: How is God not culpable for evil He knows will happen? The answer is, it is part of the curse humanity brought on itself. God created us good.”
Appealing to the curse is hardly sufficient to explain why the Arminian God created a world with a curse in the first place. You have yet to explain the necessity of the given. The curse was not a given. Why did God create a world which he would then have to curse? Appealing to the curse takes his decision to create the world for granted. As such, it fails to explain the decision to create such a world.
Try to be logical, even if it hurts.
“Sounds like moral relativism to me.”
It’s a mark of your superficiality that you think motives are irrelevant to morality.
“No, because the surgeon and mugger will do two completely different things with the scalpel. The surgeon will heal with it, the mugger will kill with it. Two different actions.”
Which confirms my point. Both use knives to cut someone open, but for different reasons. One has a good reason, the other has a bad reason.
“Just like killing 6 million innocent Jews is always wrong even if your motives are good.”
Which assumes there are good motives for killing the Jews. Are you a skinhead?
“Uh, yes it is. James 1:13-17. So, in your reply, you’re propping up one tendentious assertion with another tendentious assertion.”
Since I recently did a post on the correct interpretation of that verse, your reply is maladroit. Try again.
“Funny, me being an Arminian and all. The difference is I don't think God determined anyone to sin or be damned in any logical order.”
According to Arminianism, God knowingly creates hellbound sinners although he was free to spare them that fate by never making them in the first place. So how does that make Arminianism more loving than Calvinism?
“God determining what we do is like a puppeteer determining what a puppet does. That argument seems pretty straighforward to me, Steve. I guess I thought someone with your amazing skillz would be able to deduce that.”
i) Since puppets are inanimate objects, I “deduce” some fatal equivocations in your comparison. Try again.
ii) Moreover, if Arminianism is true, then you’re must a puppet (as you define it) since God determined what you would do by creating the world he foresaw. In the world he made, everything has to unfold as he foresaw it. Nothing can be otherwise.