GOD’S PROVIDENTIAL RULE: RISK-TAKING OR RISK-FREE?
There are many times we as Believers are asked questions regarding our faith and beliefs on the Doctrine of God. Whether we have studied them to such length or if it has been a mere thought in our minds, it is important to have a response and willingness to come to a more complete understanding. At times we find ourselves caught in the unknown of why something is the way it is, knowing after some research that we may never fully know and be able to articulate an answer. We also know that our opinions, understandings, assumptions, even our research will not give a total answer. It is our duty as Christians to grow in wisdom and discernment of God and His call on our lives to bring glory and
…show more content…
The first view I would like to point out is Augustine’s theory. This view shouldn’t come as a surprise, but at times it has been understood that Augustine had varying opinions that he voices that some may consider a contradiction. Referencing an article from a student at Anslem College, Brown states, “Augustine’s strategy in terms of natural reason or philosophy is to refute the twin claims that God’s activity puts freedom at risk and that our free choices (our good one’s at any rate) are free from God’s activity. That is, Augustine exercises a negative philosophy here, showing that God’s activity does not threaten freedom of choice and that freedom of choice does not escape God’s activity…There are two truths here that Augustine considers irrefutable. On the one hand, from any exercise of our reason thinking about the world, we come to the knowledge of the existence of God the creator, source of all that is. On the other hand, it is self-evident that we have free choice. This is, as it were, a first principle of practical reason: without it “we” cannot act. “We are in no way compelled either to preserve God’s prescience by abolishing our free will, or to safeguard our free will by denying (blasphemously) the divine foreknowledge. We embrace both truths, and acknowledge them in faith and sincerity, the one for a right belief, the other for a right life.
St. Augustine of Hippo, Boethius, and Anselm all address the concept of free will and God’s foreknowledge in their works “The City of God”, “The Consolation of Philosophy”, and “De Concordia”. While each work was written during a different time period, each of their approaches consists of a solution comprised of both unifying and unique points and arguments. While there is no clear contesting between one work and another, it is clear that free will is a complex and critical idea in Christian theology that has long since been debated. '
At first glance, I was immediatly inclined to argue in epictetus' favor, because it pains
This topic is one that has had my curiosity piqued for the last few years and is one I have made a point of discussing with many people over the course of that time. I have heard many different viewpoints, some who have been adamant for God's omniscience and knowledge of the future and others who have presented compelling arguments for free will. Most, however are of a third category who have come to grips with the fact that our mere brains cannot understand the workings of God and are content to wait for an answer until they are able to ask them themselves if/when they get to Heaven. I myself hold this latter idea to be a good fallback, but am restless in my pursuit for an answer. For neither the deterministic nor the liberalist perspective seem to have me convinced for it seems to me like both of these beliefs leave you in a dire catch-22: if you insist on complete freedom, you limit God's knowledge; but if you insist on God's knowledge, then you limit humanity's freedom; neither of which leave my mind at rest in who I know God to be and what His scripture has revealed to us in His creation of humanity.
As a matter of fact, Augustine does not realize that if it is as he argues that God foreknows every event in the world, then God created determined creatures that have no knowledge of being determined. Augustine points out that, “…although God foreknows our future wills, it does not follow from this that we do not will something by our own will.” (3.3.7.27). Augustine’s argument here supports my criticism. Namely, what follows from this argument is that humans in reality are not free because every action that they will is necessary, thus already pre-determined by God. What Augustine does not realize is that his argument actually proves that humans have no knowledge of being determined—but they are determined! Therefore, as I shall point out, God could have created a determined world, without evil, where beings act freely not knowing that they in fact are determined.
Morality of Lying The morality of lying has been the topic of interest of many ethicists and philosophers for centuries. Subsequently, various opinions concerning the essence of the notion as well as concerning its permissibility were expressed. As a result, today, it is possible to regard the morality of lying from quite different perspectives, applying to different theories or moral beliefs. In this context, St. Augustine should be regarded as one of the key figures in the discussions dedicated to the issue of the morality of lying since his persuasions both played an important role in maintaining Christian morality and were often objected and criticized and, thus, encouraged more discussions of the issue under consideration. In order to better understand St. Augustine’s views on the morality of lying, it is essential to first define what was actually understood about the notion of lying by the prominent theologian and philosopher.
In the Confessions, Augustine wrote about his struggle with understanding how evil exists in a world created by God. He questioned how it was possible and why God allows evil in his creations because God is supremely good. After delving into finding a solution, Augustine concluded that evil does not exist, and the things deemed as evil are caused by free will. This paper will argue that Augustine has successfully proven that evil does not exist by explaining his earlier explanation of the origin of evil taught by the Manicheans, explaining Augustine’s teachings, and finally, using the textual descriptions of Augustine’s unwillingness to convert as support for his conclusion.
A foundational belief in Christianity is the idea that God is perfectly good. God is unable to do anything evil and all his actions are motives are completely pure. This principle, however, leads to many questions concerning the apparent suffering and wrong-doing that is prevalent in the world that this perfect being created. Where did evil come from? Also, how can evil exist when the only eternal entity is the perfect, sinless, ultimately good God? This question with the principle of God's sovereignty leads to even more difficult problems, including human responsibility and free will. These problems are not limited to our setting, as church fathers and Christian philosophers are the ones who proposed some of the solutions people believe today. As Christianity begins to spread and establish itself across Europe in the centuries after Jesus' resurrection, Augustine and Boethius provide answers, although wordy and complex, to this problem of evil and exactly how humans are responsible in the midst of God's sovereignty and Providence.
Keep in mind that different religions interpret the presence of God in a distinctive manner. In this essay, we explore the views of Saint Augustine, who lived in the Roman Empire. He served as a notable figure in the world of the philosophical discussion. The conversation expands the views of Saint Augustine about the existence of God. Further, it studies how St. Augustine uses “reason” as a tool to second his thoughts and ideologies about the very existence of God.
In St. Augustine’s Confessions, Augustine details his life’s journey up to the point of conversion. Along the way he navigates the world largely by imitating others which in some instances brings him closer to conversion while in others leads him further from God. Augustine is seen struggling over whom to trust as a model of imitation, and initially relies on his intelligence in the form of logic to distinguish between good and bad models. He identified bad models by exposing contradictions, or by noticing that they are pretending to be something they are not. Good models, since they are close to god will not exhibit any contradiction or pretend to be something they are not. Although intelligence is useful to Augustine in his struggle to distinguish
In the beginning, God created the world. He created the earth, air, stars, trees and mortal animals, heaven above, the angels, every spiritual being. God looked at these things and said that they were good. However, if all that God created was good, from where does un-good come? How did evil creep into the universal picture? In Book VII of his Confessions, St. Augustine reflects on the existence of evil and the theological problem it poses. For evil to exist, the Creator God must have granted it existence. This fundamentally contradicts the Christian confession that God is Good. Logically, this leads one to conclude evil does not exist in a created sense. Augustine arrives at the conclusion that evil itself is not a formal thing, but the result of corruption away from the Supreme Good. (Augustine, Confessions 7.12.1.) This shift in understanding offers a solution to the problem of evil, but is not fully defended within Augustine’s text. This essay will illustrate how Augustine’s solution might stand up to other arguments within the context of Christian theology.
‘Gods gift of free will is in no way an excuse for the existence of
Why do we believe what we believe? This question is rarely asked of anyone directly. We live in a culture where the “why” is superseded by the “what”. “What do you believe?” has always been a popular topic for discussion. However, when a believer is no longer faced with the ‘what’ and instead challenged by a ‘why,’ lines begin to blur and minds start to blank. What can we possibly offer in response and from where can we derive our answers? Isaiah 6 gives us the solution: we must gaze into the face of God. This journey of seeking His face exposes us, exposes our culture, and turns us into world changers. This quest is only for those brave enough to explore the wondrous depths and layers of the Most High. It is the search for truth-- the most life-changing discovery an individual will ever uncover.
To conclude, theology has many aspects that are confusing and debatable with many Christians. Personally I am still confused or uncertain about many theological doctrines and still do not comprehend many of them. However God has instituted all of these doctrines for a reason. He has a purpose and plan for all that he does. He continues to work in fellowship with us and shows His grace and mercy daily. Although we do not agree on everything as Christians it can be said that we all agree that the Lord is a savior and are sole purpose for life.
If we turn to God and ask him to instruct us in the truth and to lead us to salvation, we will surely receive that which we ask because our prayer will be in line with God’s desire for us. The word truth is mentioned in the Bible 235 times. Philosopher’s proposed four main theories to answer the “What is Truth?” question. They are correspondence, pragmatic, coherence, and deflationary theories of truth.... ...
From a determinism perspective, there is a order called the casual chain, where at the time that a choice is made, the state of mind and or characteristic of a person may have is the cause of a previous condition and eventually links back before the person’s life. Augustine does not believe that our choices are determined by internal factors because the responsibility of those choices are beyond our control and alleviates us from such a thing. Therefore freedom no longer exists because the choice was made from within. This is compatibilism; determinism is compatible with “human freedom and moral responsibility,” and Augustine rejects this.