Jeremiah 5:21"Hear this, O foolish and senseless people, who have eyes, but see not, who have ears, but hear not.
This passage implies the Israelites were able to see and hear but refused to do so. God gave them the ability but they didn’t use it. Not only could they do otherwise, but they should have. We are accountable to God for how we use the freedom and ability He gave us.
http://www.arminianchronicles.com/2011/12/god-blames-us-when-we-dont-use-our.html
Let's grant Dan's inference for the sake of argument. How does that mesh with Molinism? Libertarian free agents have the freedom to pursue alternate possibilities in different possible worlds. But this passage is addressed to agents residing in just one world–the actual world. They lack the freedom to do otherwise in the actual world, for the actual world instantiates one possibility to the exclusion of others. These are not compossible possibilities in the actual world.
This is amazing. Having properly functioning ears and eyes is now incompatible with determinism! On determinism, all humans would be (physically) deaf and blind!
ReplyDeletePaul,
ReplyDeleteThat would explain a lot. :-)
Do you really think this is talking about the physical functioning of their eyes without saying anything about their willingness or refusal to use them?
God be with you,
Dan
Steve,
ReplyDeleteI am not quite sure what to make of your objection but I think the core issue here is that God's decree determines some things and permits us to determine others. Alternative possibilities don't close off until events happen (not back in eternity past when He decrees).
God be with you,
Dan
GODISMYJUDGE SAID:
ReplyDelete"I am not quite sure what to make of your objection but I think the core issue here is that God's decree determines some things and permits us to determine others."
Wrong.
"Alternative possibilities don't close off until events happen (not back in eternity past when He decrees)."
Alternate possibilities are a relation *between* possible worlds, not *within* possible worlds. A possible world, or actualized possible world, contains one possible timeline. An alternate timeline is indexed to a different possible world. One possible world doesn't contain other possible worlds. Each possible world is a maximal set.
Jeremiah isn't simultaneously addressing the Israelites in the actual world along with their counterparts in a possible world.
ReplyDeleteSteve,
ReplyDeleteI am still not quite sure what your objection is, but you might be taking possible world lingo farther than it can go.
God be with you,
Dan
Dan, Jeremiah's using a well-known proverb. The people are able to hear and see, their senses work fine; but, they are unable to see and hear, with their heart and mind. It's like when Wesley Snipes' character tells Woody Harrelson's character in White Men Can't Jump, "Look man, you can listen to Jimi, but you can't hear him. There's a difference man. Just because you're listening to him doesn't mean you're hearing him." The unwillingness and obtuseness of the people is highlighted. What explained it? Not their lack of physical ability. Thus the old tradition of distinguishing between moral and physical ability could be applied here with ease, and that's consistent with determinism. We can see this proverb employed in Isa 43:8, for instance, "Bring forth the blind people that have eyes, and the deaf that have ears." It's overreaching and a little desperate for you to be finding indeterminist boogeymen hiding in all of these passages. You're trying to squeeze blood from a turnip. In fact, on your view, brass idols must have libertarian free will since the same proverb was also used by the psalmist to say: 115:5They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not: 6They have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not: 7They have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat. Did God give statuesque idols the ability to do otherwise? Are they accountable to God for how they use their libertarian freedom?
ReplyDeleteGODISMYJUDGE SAID:
ReplyDelete"I am still not quite sure what your objection is, but you might be taking possible world lingo farther than it can go."
You speak as if an actual world is incrementally realized. Where multiple possibilities are successfully collapsed into one actualized possibility at a time. The world is growing. How else can you speak of the actual world containing alternate possible outcomes?
If that's your view, then in what sense does the Molinist God instantiate an incrementally realized world?
If that's not your view, then it what sense do alternate possibilities inhere in the actual world?
Paul, the idols are different because they actually don’t have functioning eyes so clearly God is mocking them (and by extension those who trust them) rather than rebuking them. As for moral vs. physical ability:
ReplyDelete1) I can hardly be accused of getting blood from a turnip if you take the passage as saying they were unable to choose to see
2) I thought semi-compatiblism gave up on moral ability as part of the difference between them and compatiblists.
3) this makes the removal of object of site (Matthew 13) unneeded and a sort of double-hardening.
God be with you,
Dan
Steve,
ReplyDelete"If that's your view, then in what sense does the Molinist God instantiate an incrementally realized world?"
He has a plan regarding the whole timeline. But His actualization of various parts and permitting us to actualize various parts happens bit by bit over time.
God be with you,
Dan