Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
But we don't say that he is evil because he sovereignly decrees it. There is a major degree of separation between this particular action and his attributes. This puts the statement:Dennis
His attributes are not exactly what God does, but his characteristics and traits. There is some necessity to distinguish God's actions from his being, especially when one considers God's sovereign decreeing of evil in the world, which does not accord indistinguishably with his benevolent essence.
All that God does accords with who He is. He does not act "out of character" when we understand what He is doing.
His sovereign decree that there should be evil accords with His wisdom, holiness, righteousness, goodness (including love) and truth.into question, does it not?How do you distinguish who God is from what God does?
I guess then for Arminians or other similar groups it depends on whether their denials ultimately equate to a denial of the fact. But that's another thread. Thank you too!py3ak said:But there are confusions about the manner that do ultimately equate to a denial of the fact, which is why in post 13 I was careful to qualify that not all disagreements about the manner are irrelevant to the affirmation of the fact.
With respect, no, as this is a category error. There is nothing analogous between a physical object and God.How do you distinguish who God is from what God does? God is his attributes.
I don't think you can separate the two, but I think you can distinguish between the two. You can't separate the heads from the tails of a coin, but you can still distinguish between the two.
AMR
My response was clearly stating "physical object", no? God's hands, eyes, breath, feet, sword, etc., are not analogous to that which we know as these objects. These physical objects are accommodations to our finitude.With respect, no, as this is a category error. There is nothing analogous between a physical object and God.How do you distinguish who God is from what God does? God is his attributes.
I don't think you can separate the two, but I think you can distinguish between the two. You can't separate the heads from the tails of a coin, but you can still distinguish between the two.
AMR
That isn't true. Throughout Scripture God gives anthropomorphic analogies between Himself and creation. He doesn't use a coin for those but you can't say there is "nothing analogous".
My response was clearly stating "physical object", no? God's hands, eyes, breath, feet, sword, etc., are not analogous to that which we know as these objects. These physical objects are accommodations to our finitude.
AMR
Brother, I am trying to be precise, as in "are not analogous to that which we know as these objects." Yes, they are anologies, but we know them for what they are, as I alluded to previously. This alone should help you come to understanding the distinction between "the fact and the manner" that you seek. The facts lie behind these accommodations in Scripture, that should lead us to understanding the manner. All God's attributes inhere one another. We cannot separate them, nor give one preeminence over the other, when we speak of the essence of God. We must be careful to avoid separating the divine essence and the divine attributes. We must also guard against false conceptions of the relation in which these attributes stand with each other.My response was clearly stating "physical object", no? God's hands, eyes, breath, feet, sword, etc., are not analogous to that which we know as these objects. These physical objects are accommodations to our finitude.
AMR
Psalms 84:11
"For the LORD God is a sun and shield;the LORD bestows favor and honor. No good thing does he withhold from those who walk uprightly."
Isaiah 26:4
"Trust in the LORD forever, for the LORD GOD is an everlasting rock."
Psalm 18:2
"The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer,
my God, my rock, in whom I take refuge,
my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold."
These are analogies, are they not?
Brother, I am trying to be precise, as in "are not analogous to that which we know as these objects." Yes, they are anologies, but we know them for what they are, as I alluded to previously. This alone should help you come to understanding the distinction between "the fact and the manner" that you seek. The facts lie behind these accommodations in Scripture, that should lead us to understanding the manner. All God's attributes inhere one another. We cannot separate them, nor give one preeminence over the other, when we speak of the essence of God. We must be careful to avoid separating the divine essence and the divine attributes. We must also guard against false conceptions of the relation in which these attributes stand with each other.My response was clearly stating "physical object", no? God's hands, eyes, breath, feet, sword, etc., are not analogous to that which we know as these objects. These physical objects are accommodations to our finitude.
AMR
Psalms 84:11
"For the LORD God is a sun and shield;the LORD bestows favor and honor. No good thing does he withhold from those who walk uprightly."
Isaiah 26:4
"Trust in the LORD forever, for the LORD GOD is an everlasting rock."
Psalm 18:2
"The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer,
my God, my rock, in whom I take refuge,
my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold."
These are analogies, are they not?
For example, unsettled theism (open theism) would have us believe that unless God acts then God is not this or that, e.g., loving or just. Yet, when we consider the simplicity of God (that He is without constituent parts), we find that God and His attributes are a unified wholeness. God’s attributes are not so many parts that comprise the composition of God, as God is not composed of different parts (as are His creatures). Nor can God’s attributes be thought as something that is added to God’s being, for God is eternally perfect. God’s attributes are very real determinations of His Divine Being, that is, qualities that inhere in the being of God. God’s perfections are God Himself as He has revealed Himself to mankind. God’s attributes are not parts composing the Divine Essence. The whole essence is in each attribute, and the attribute in the essence. We should not conceive of the divine essence as existing by itself, and prior to the attributes. God is not essence and attributes, but in attributes. Indeed, knowledge of the attributes carries with it knowledge of the essence.
AMR
Feel free to help out a poor struggling college student.
I'm not grasping your distinction between analogies, sorry. I understand your comments about separating God's essence or His attributes. Are you saying that He is not analogous to anything we experience in that respect?
I am only drawing the distinction between the notion of the use of physical analogies and God. We know that these physical analogies are clear accommodations. God is not a physical being.Brother, I am trying to be precise, as in "are not analogous to that which we know as these objects." Yes, they are anologies, but we know them for what they are, as I alluded to previously. This alone should help you come to understanding the distinction between "the fact and the manner" that you seek. The facts lie behind these accommodations in Scripture, that should lead us to understanding the manner. All God's attributes inhere one another. We cannot separate them, nor give one preeminence over the other, when we speak of the essence of God. We must be careful to avoid separating the divine essence and the divine attributes. We must also guard against false conceptions of the relation in which these attributes stand with each other.My response was clearly stating "physical object", no? God's hands, eyes, breath, feet, sword, etc., are not analogous to that which we know as these objects. These physical objects are accommodations to our finitude.
AMR
Psalms 84:11
"For the LORD God is a sun and shield;the LORD bestows favor and honor. No good thing does he withhold from those who walk uprightly."
Isaiah 26:4
"Trust in the LORD forever, for the LORD GOD is an everlasting rock."
Psalm 18:2
"The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer,
my God, my rock, in whom I take refuge,
my shield, and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold."
These are analogies, are they not?
For example, unsettled theism (open theism) would have us believe that unless God acts then God is not this or that, e.g., loving or just. Yet, when we consider the simplicity of God (that He is without constituent parts), we find that God and His attributes are a unified wholeness. God’s attributes are not so many parts that comprise the composition of God, as God is not composed of different parts (as are His creatures). Nor can God’s attributes be thought as something that is added to God’s being, for God is eternally perfect. God’s attributes are very real determinations of His Divine Being, that is, qualities that inhere in the being of God. God’s perfections are God Himself as He has revealed Himself to mankind. God’s attributes are not parts composing the Divine Essence. The whole essence is in each attribute, and the attribute in the essence. We should not conceive of the divine essence as existing by itself, and prior to the attributes. God is not essence and attributes, but in attributes. Indeed, knowledge of the attributes carries with it knowledge of the essence.
AMR
So, are you arguing that WE can't make analogies of God but that he can? I could see that but not that there are no analogies in human language to equate with God.