How does God act in the world?

[UMSonOfMan7]

Okay, I am asking this question to lay the groundwork for a later discussion, but this is going to be an important aspect of that discussion, so we need to have this one first, or later we will all be on different pages and all be trying to discuss from those different places but most likely doing it largely thinking that we come from the same place.

So, how does God act in the world? Does God control the world? Is he directing our lives, the actions of nations, specific events and ocurrences?

Does God guide the world? Does he only use limited direct intervention? Maybe send an angel to protect someone in a car crash here, cause a miraculous healing there, or cause a something to happen that profoundly changes someone's life over there?

Is God's action limited to having sent Jesus into the world, but is essentially limited other than that? Is Jesus just one example of God's many direct actions and control of history/time/the world?

Did God set things into motion--life, evolution, laws of the universe such as physics--but primarily just sits back and watches now? Perhaps influencing somethings here and there, but not directly controlling?

Did God create everything and set it into motion and now sits back entirely not directly intervening at all or perhaps abandoning this world completely after its creation?

[PastorFreud]

I'm sorry that I had to answer "huh?" because I did not see anything that really matched my thoughts.

When I drive my car, I "control" it. I make it go right or left and I hit the brakes to slow it down, etc. However, the manufacturer and designer of the car exerted some control too. It was designed in such a way that it really works best on paved streets, for example. It can't go faster than about 110. To say the designers and manufacturers "control" the car at this point would be to suggest more influence than they currently have. Still, the control they exerted before is still in effect. If I try to alter my vehicle in a significant way, I have to consult the specs to do it. I can't tow a 10,000 lb. trailer with my car, no matter what I do.

But then sometimes my car has been subject to recall. The manufacturer has wanted to change something in the design and has directly intervened in my world to get me bring the car in for the upgrade. This direct intervention is rare, but usually significant for the history and future of the vehicle.

So, with the analogy in mind, I believe God put certain "controls" in place ages ago. These controls still operate and control. Corn seeds produce corn when planted, watermelon seeds produce watermelons when planted. What goes up, must come down, even if you toss it so far away that it orbits the planet, it still comes down (remember Skylab?) These "controls" are always in effect and I believe that God rarely, if ever, directly intervenes to make watermelon grow when corn has been planted. So I don't think God prevents or causes or failst to prevent car crashes in the sense of manipulating the environment. God may help a person be sensitive to what is happenind and that person might swerve in time to help avoid an accident. That person would rightly thank God for assistance, but that does not mean that the crashes that do happen are God's fault. The person who tries to swerve, doesn't succeed, but yet lives, should also be grateful. Life is always a gift.

But God can change greedy people into givers, selfish people into helpers, and fearful people into people of faith. In these transformations, the world the changed, a bit at a time, though the influence and control of God is less about manipulation, and more about empowerment.

That's what I think. That may match one of your choices, but I couldn't see which one.

[UMSonOfMan7]

PF, to me that sounds like God does not directly control what happens, but he has set the processes/laws in place and he continues to influence things today. That is what I'd intended with the fourth option.

[AliasAgent]

why isn't there an option that says that God works through the hearts of his followers? that's how he works in the world, so which option would that be?

[UMSonOfMan7]

I would call that influence also.

[Christie Lee]

I am going to agree with PF also.

I will elaborate when I can get my thoughts together. I do believe God intervenes... but I think He does that within the spiritual laws established and our own free will (sowing and reaping, etc). I think God has intervened on many occassions in my own life and had an incredible impact on my world, He continues to do so... but He does it through withinme and those around me, and always within those basic principles.

Does that make any sense?

Largely, God works within us and empowers us to do the direct acting. Everything we need from Him, He Has given us already. We have the Spirit of God inside of us!!!

[AliasAgent]

yeah exactly. i agree.

[Life Uncommon]

And I'd like to say that I also agree with Pastor Freud, Mrs Christie Basil and Alias Agent.

God cares too much about His children just to sit back and watch the show.

Stories of God intervening or influencing happen all the way through the Bible.
The main is Jesus' birth, life and death, of course.

But just some examples from the top of my head -
*God destroyed the sinners of the early world with the Flood, and saved Noah, his family and the animals.
*God freed the Israelities by sending the plagues into Egypt and by parting the Red Sea.
*God gave Abraham's wife, Rebecca, a child even though she wasn't biologically able to.
*Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, healed the lepers, calmed the winds on the Lake etc...

Not only do these prove that God is very involved in our world, but also the personal stories of change within people, which Alias Agent, Christie and Pastor Freud alluded to. I've known God to change things in my life - see the Health and Sexuality> Suicidal? There is HOPE thread to see a major example of this - He saved my life.

I agree with Pastor Freud, God doesn't stop every bad thing from happening because that is the destiny of sin, and we as human beings with our freedom of choice are free to rain destruction down on ourselves, or salvation if we chose it. It's a gift from God that is abused, just as God Himself was abused on this Earth.

However, I don't think it's wise to rule God out of any equation. Can we limit God's power? Can we draw boundaries as to where God can and can't go? Can we put God in a neat little box and close the lid? God is the Alpha and the Omega, and I have faith that He knows the best and most wise things to intervene in, and those which He must not.

For this reason I don't see a choice in the poll which serves my belief. Sorry to criticise it with everyone else, my friend UM Son of Man 7...

Life Uncommon

[Scan]

Cant give an answer as my understanding isn't represented.
I believe God acts in his world though us, yes he trusts his world to me and you! Awesome!

[Christie Lee]

However, I don't think it's wise to rule God out of any equation. Can we limit God's power? Can we draw boundaries as to where God can and can't go? Can we put God in a neat little box and close the lid? God is the Alpha and the Omega, and I have faith that He knows the best and most wise things to intervene in, and those which He must not.

I am going to agree with you, but I am also going to affirm my strong beliefs in certain spiritual laws. God is a God of order.... He would not, IMO, go against the natural laws He has set in place from the foundations of the world (ie, sowing and reaping). Instead, He works within them.

This question really bothered me because while I agreed with the other posts here, I was forced to question my strong beliefs in miraculous healing and other such seemingly direct intervention. While I do believe God can and does intervene (even miraculously) I have had to come back to my conclusions in the first post... that He does it from/through His Spirit within us.

[Basil_oz]

Well I gave an answer to the poll, and then held my breath as I looked at the posts because I was sure that I was going to want to change my mind! But I actually didn't!

I think that PF's analogy is excellent (I love a good analogy) but I went with the vote of "limited control, indirect intervention". Realising that any kind of poll, particularly in light of this topic, will never cover all options, I went with one that seemed to fit best on first impression.

The comments made in the post all hold an amount of truth in them for me. In some way, my view blends a few of the poll options together!

You see... in some ways the options are limited to a linear perception (here we go... Baz is hitting that linear theme again!) when God's actions may not be. But I'm heading toward that in another thread.

I'm intrigued to what you are using this thread to prepare for UM! Looking forward to it.

[LoveEndures]

You would call me out on this UM, my thoughts on Gods influence and control are not fully formed as of yet so "Huh" was my answer. The problem with my thoughts have to do with Gods sovereignty and our free will. All things are according to Gods will and His will maintains all things, the laws of nature I look at as Gods hand upon the universe (a continuous action) keeping it in order. Our free will is also according to Gods will, yet with it we can transgress (sin) against His purpose for us. So though I feel God is in total control of the universe and everything in it, man is an exception yet that is also due to His will.

As for God intervening in the world; Before the Holy Spirit was sent to dwell in believers I believe God acted upon His creation with direct intervention frequently. Now that we have the Holy Spirit I feel He influences things through the body of the Church and those willing to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Hopefully this all makes some sense.

[UMSonOfMan7]

You would call me out on this UM,

Hopefully this all makes some sense.

Makes perfect sense and sounds pretty well thought-out to me. In fact, it's an intriguing way of explaining the direct acts of intervention described in the Bible yet a lack of said actions today.

[grant]

Of course there's always the Gnostic option: God exists from afar, influencing things, but the influence keeps getting distorted by earthly forces.

[Lavis Knight]

I think you would first have to reconcile God's actions with the known laws of thermaldynamics, whether or not the universe is an open or closed system ect..

I wonder how much sovereignty one really has over his own actions?

Hi guys ^_^! Finally back.

[LoveEndures]

It's good to have you back Lavis, I'd been wondering when we could once again enjoy your company.

What you wrote seems interesting, can you expand your thoughts a little in the area of reconciling Gods actions and the known laws of thermodynamics. Do you see that they are not compatible?

[Lavis Knight]

Well if the Universe is a closed system and energy cannot be created and destroyed, then it would seem that it would come into direct conflict with intervention.

Although God's causes would be Metaphysical ones, the results of such causes would be physical (Multipying of the loaves and fishes, the ressurection ect..)

In order for such events to occur energy would be added to the system, even if the events used energy that was already existant in the system itself it would still require energy to manipulate the factors in the first place. Even the most minute disturbance would violate this principle. However if the Universe is an open system it would not matter how deterministic it was as this problem of a violation would not occur.

The Deist model in this case would fit well as God programed everything in, like a perfect machine without maintenance would run indefinetly without need of a tuneup and there would be no violations.

However it depends on the metaphor you use.. what if i were to compare creation not to a machine but rather a musical instrument.. as a musical instrument fulfills it's purpose as it is being played..

[LoveEndures]

Thanks for clarifying your thoughts on this.

In order for such events to occur energy would be added to the system, even if the events used energy that was already existant in the system itself it would still require energy to manipulate the factors in the first place. Even the most minute disturbance would violate this principle. However if the Universe is an open system it would not matter how deterministic it was as this problem of a violation would not occur.

On this part I do not really understand what you mean by the use of existing energy would still require energy. The universe itself is considered to be closed, but isn't the earth considered to be an open system with energy pouring in from the sun? Wouldn't one be able to manipulate this incoming energy to perform tasks?

[Lavis Knight]

Yes but the universe as a whole is considered a closed system to even manipulate the energy within the universe to effect various systems within our universe would require energy, thus would remain in violation.

As it would become insistent that for any action to occur there must be a precedent physical action and one which follows. If one could give the total number of physical actions within our reality a number at any given second in time, then at another given second measure again and the numbers were different or if they were not infinite in nature, then the only recourse is to say at one time something came out of nothing. As at such a point one could reduce things to a single action.

As in such a physicalist universe such a number would have to forever remain indiscernable in all periods of time, and at no point would a measure be able to be taken. As well as it would forever in itself remain a gap in our knowledge to hold such a view.

However it also makes me wonder as i am not so sure if it would be so indiscernable at all periods in time, as there is the theoretical possibility to reduce our entire universe to a single wave function.

However it would not be plausible for a naturalist to say such a thing (Anything else but being indiscernable) . As it would go against his own philosophy to do so.

Hope that wasn't too jumbled ^_^;;

[UMSonOfMan7]

Hope that wasn't too jumbled ^_^;;

Nah, I think I'm still following it all. Very interesting.

[UMSonOfMan7]

Okay, so I have finally finished my semester, and I am ready to dive back into this discussion now. Very soon (within the next couple of days), I'll take it on to the next level as well.

Personally, I believe that God does not directly intervene in the world. I believe that he does work in the world, but that he does so by influencing us, such as by speaking to our hearts, working in our lives. I do not believe that God controls the world. I certainly believe that it is within God's power to do so, but I do not believe that he does.

I believe that God refrains from directly controlling and intervening in the world. To do so, would limit our free will and limit our ability to freely choose to worship or not worship God, to be in relationship with him or not be in relationship with him.

I believe that God listens to us, that he hears us, that he cares about us and that he does these things directly, but that when it comes to working in the world, that he does so indirectly--in our hearts, our lives, our spirits, not in our environment.


I like PF's analogy of the car. God created the processes by which the world works and set things in motion, but we are the ones in the driver's seat now. I am the one who makes the decisions for my life, and the decisions I make have implications for the future my life will have. Humans are the ones who make decisions regarding this planet and the decisions that we make affect the future of this planet. As PF said:

These "controls" are always in effect and I believe that God rarely, if ever, directly intervenes to make watermelon grow when corn has been planted. So I don't think God prevents or causes or failst to prevent car crashes in the sense of manipulating the environment. God may help a person be sensitive to what is happenind and that person might swerve in time to help avoid an accident. That person would rightly thank God for assistance, but that does not mean that the crashes that do happen are God's fault. The person who tries to swerve, doesn't succeed, but yet lives, should also be grateful. Life is always a gift.

But God can change greedy people into givers, selfish people into helpers, and fearful people into people of faith. In these transformations, the world the changed, a bit at a time, though the influence and control of God is less about manipulation, and more about empowerment.

[Eeyores Butterfly]

I am tired and a little bit lazy, so I am going to answer this without looking at the responses of others. I'll save that for tomorrow. This was a hard question to answer. I believe that in the past, God had very direct evidence. I believe that the Hebrew people were much more open to God and willing to listen to Him, so He was able to take a much more direct approach. Today (and I am guilty of this as well) if somebody claims to have heard from God personally, we think that they are delusional, so God's sphere of influence, so to speak is different. God gave us free will, so I believe that He nudges us in the right direction, but ultimately it is up to us. The way I see it is like the book I read called The Veritas Conflict. God puts opportunities in our way and frequently tries to tell us what He wants us to do, but we have to make the decision to follow Him. However, being omniscient and omnipresent, ( and I would imagine that time is not linear for Him) He knows ahead of time the choices we make, and so everything we do is part of a larger plan.

[yahwist]

Well I'm gonna give my usual process responses to this issue. I think the God is very active in the universe; however I think that activity is persuasive. God does not coerce events in the universe. The key issue is how the power of God is conceived. If God is thought to have omnipotence in the classical sense of the word then God is the divine tyrant. Classical Philosophical Theology(CPT) give God the power to determine all things. There is really only one conclusion to that line of thinking. There is no free will. Some like Thomas Aquinas have argued that actions are both divinely determined and freely decided. This is simply theological double-speak. I cannot freely choose something that is already determined. If God's power is persuasive, then I can have genuine free will. In face I would posit that ever actuality in the universe has some degree of creative self expression.

[UMSonOfMan7]

I agree, yahwist; I think God's action is persuasive as well.

[SMatthewStolte]

God’s actions differ from those of objects of appearances because, with the possible exception of physical manifestations (i.e. Jesus, Krsna, etc.), all God’s actions are acausal.

Cause and effect are usually thought of in temporal succession, although the most immediate cause always appears to be simultaneous with its effect. In any case, even simultaneity implies temporality. Yet God’s will lies outside the realm of appearances, because God Himself lies outside the realm of appearances. This is not mere quibbling. The physical sciences constantly study the realm of appearances and the causal powers therein but cannot discover anything outside this realm. It is through metaphysical reasoning that we become aware of the existence of something else. The first “something else” of which we may be aware is our own free will. And our will is free in the sense that it is acaual. Any biologist seeking evidence for the will of humanity is destined for failure.

Now, the reason God must be outside appearances (or transcending the physical or transcending space and time) is that, were He in this realm, we would be dependent upon the physical sciences to justify our beliefs in his existence. But these physical sciences never have produced such a Hypothesis.

If this is the true nature of God, then the proper understanding of His creating is not that He created the world at the beginning of time, but rather that He created the world attended with the whole of space and time. Here, I do not contradict the creation story of Genesis, for the first seven days would certainly exist and God’s actions during those could easily be those as accounted in the first book of the Holy Bible. What I mean, however, is that the Deist picture of God is false, because it assumes that God was constrained by, and not the creator of, space and time.

I have also painted a deterministic picture of the universe from God’s perspective, since He has knowledge of the entirity of His creation, past, present, and future. But to call this knowledge “foreknowledge” is to speak very loosely. This deterministic picture does not interfere with the possibility of the free will as I defined it above, nor do I think it precludes the possibility of free will defined in terms of counterfactuals.

Returning to the question of how He acts in the world, I voted that He has total control with frequent and direct intervention. To the universe, God is an underlying reason, and this is not merely to the formal universe, but to our particular universe with all its particular elements. His acts are frequent, because they are constant. And His acts are more direct than any acts we observe, for they are never mediated by time.

If I step back and look at the previous comments, I agree with those who say that God acts through our hearts, but I would call this either the manifestation of the Holy Spirit or the Holy Spirit itself.

UMSoncfMan, I notice that the original post for this thread was back in May of ‘03. If the later discussion to which you alluded has begun, would you please link to it? I am interested.