Links and Reading

Just recently I have begun a serious reading of Newman's work Idea of a University. It is a serious reflection of what a university is and how various disciplines are related to one another. It was written in the 1850's, so a lot of his starting points are quite different from ours. It clearly shows how different modern thought is now from the thought of his time.

William Lane Craig also has his own website. He is a Christian philosopher who works in the areas of time, uniqueness of Christ and Molinism. He also does apologetics work related to the Christian faith.

There are also a few links that I have found to be particularly good recently. One is on three different ways of professing a creedal claim. Another is on the claim that evil people are annihilated instead of being eternally punished. There is a good post on the knowability paradox.

Open Theism: Reasons for Libertarian Freedom

We can understand some of the philosophical undercurrents in open theism by examining their arguments for libertarian freedom. In order to do that we first have to be aware of what these arguments are. So here are the arguments presented in this outline.

One reason, presented by Sanders, is that certain biblical language is nullified unless libertarian freedom is true. This includes God's grief over sin, changing his mind, responding to our prayers, entering into genuine dialog and reciprocal relations with human beings. Since the biblical language is not nullified (the Bible is our authority), libertarian freedom exists.

Another reason is that libertarian freedom is necessary for genuine, loving relationships. We cannot enter into them unless we are capable of doing other than what the other person intends (even if that person is God). Not only this, but loving another is not possible unless we have libertarian freedom.

A third reason is that libertarian freedom is necessary for our thought to be rational. This reason is pulled from philosophical reasons. Open theists endorse it, but they did not originate it.

A fourth reason is that libertarian freedom is necessary for us to be held morally responsible in a way that makes a difference. It is also key to understanding sin. Without libertarian freedom we could not have sinned, nor could we have rebelled against God's plan.

A fifth reason is that libertarian freedom is necessary to maintain the Biblical belief that God has always stood in opposition to sin. This is particularly apparent in the case of Adam and Eve. Under compatibilism, God could have prevented Adam from sinning without removing his freedom, but that option is not open under libertarian freedom.

There may be more reasons, but it is useful to note that open theists place a special emphasis on loving relationships, biblical language and God's opposition to sin. So these particular arguments for libertarian freedom need closer examination. It would also be prudent to examine the place of libertarian freedom in open theism as well as their beliefs on freedom in heaven. But that is for another time.

Open Theism: Resources

One of the topics I have been thinking about recently is open theism (also known as free will theism). Since it is unwise to critique a position without providing their beliefs, here are some resources on that position. That should provide anyone with enough information to accurately portray the openness view when critiquing it.

Why I Believe in Libertarian Freedom

I have been thinking that giving my reasons for believing in the libertarian theory of free will can only help in the dialog on this topic. From the comments that I have read, many compatibilist Christians do not really know why libertarian Christians believe as they do. I do not claim to represent the majority in all respects, but I think my reasons are characteristic of those Christians who are libertarians. I have (as far as I can remember) alway held to these beliefs. My reasons have changed as I have matured, so I am only going to give the reasons I have now.

My first reason comes directly from Christian belief. Adam and Eve fell from a state of innocence by their own choice. This is referred to as the "original sin". They were created good by God, had a sinful condition after and fell by their own free choice. These are all points of orthodox Christianity. Since this is true, we must find an explanation of freedom that does not violate them when it is consistent. Libertarianism is the only option. I am not proving anything here, I am merely stating my opinion. This same dilemma for other forms of freedom is also found in the fall of Satan.

My second reason also comes from Christian belief. Libertarianism is a consistent and meaningful theory at least in the case of God. We believe that God could have created nothing, could have not send redemption, and could have decided not to give any other grace to human beings. Since these are also points of orthodox Christianity, denying them is not an option. Libertarian freedom for God is required for orthodox Christianity.

My third reason is the connection between moral responsibility and freedom. This is a reason I share with non-Christian adherents of libertarianism. If I am responsible, then I am the source of that act. But if I am its source, then the act is free in a libertarian sense. Once again, I am merely stating my opinion, I am not giving an argument.

My fourth reason has to do with information. I do not believe that any combination of law and chance is capable of generating information. I believe this on the basis of the work of William Dembski. If true, then every case of information generation is also a case of the exercise of libertarian freedom. I find it quite implausible to account for all information in the world by God's direct intervention, so this is also an argument for libertarian freedom in human beings.

These are basically my reasons. My reasons do NOT start of as arguments for freedom and then further arguments for having a libertarian freedom. I believe in freedom because I believe in libertarian freedom. These reasons are not all philosophical: two are theological and one is mathematical/philosophical. It would be helpful to note that these reasons are not feelings, nor are they based on feelings. I have not given my arguments, but only a very brief summary of the arguments. I do not mention such arguments as 'freedom to choose God' because I believe they do not fit with the Bible as a whole and suffer other problems as well. Other than that, these arguments are independent. You would have to refute all of them in order to change my mind on this issue. No one I have read has come close to refuting one of them (and I have read Calvin).