Restrained Power Model of the Incarnation

The mystery of the Incarnation is that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, remained fully divine while becoming fully human. Almighty divinity became a human.[1] Many philosophers say that such an incarnation is "impossible, self-contradictory, incoherent, absurd, and unintelligible" because the divinity that supposedly created the universe with almighty power cannot also be a human with finite power.[2] This brief introduction of the "restrained power model of the Incarnation" proposes an analogy of how an almighty deity can temporarily restrain himself to use only finite power.

As stated above, many philosophers claim that an almighty deity is incapable of temporarily limiting himself to human finiteness. However, there are many examples of power with temporary restraints. For example, a particular power ratchet wrench has a maximum torque of seventy foot-pound force while the wrench torque adjusts from one to seventy foot-pound force. In some uses of the wrench, the seventy foot-pound force would destroy the bolt so the wrench is sometimes set to a lesser torque such as ten foot-pound force. Likewise, for a particular job, the wrench operates at no more than ten foot-pound force while the wrench was fully compatible with working at seventy foot-pound force. The wrench never lost its full power, but temporarily used a setting of a lesser power. Also, when the wrench goes back to it full power, it never loses its ability to operate at lesser powers.

The example of the adjustable power ratchet wrench is a powerful analogy for the Incarnation. The Son of God, the Almighty, temporarily limited his power to human limits on earth while remaining fully capable of creating new universes and knowing all possibilities. There is no impossibility, self-contradiction, incoherency, absurdity, or unintelligibly in this analogy of the incarnation. In fact, it appears absurd to insist that a maximally powerful deity could not temporarily limit himself to a finite human life on earth.
__________


1. The term almighty requires a caveat. Almighty means "all power within the context of consistency." For example, an almighty deity cannot make an unbending rod that he cannot bend because this scenario is logically impossible and physically inconsistent. In other words, an almighty deity has maximal power, all possible power.

2. Murray, Michael and Rea, Michael, "Philosophy and Christian Theology", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/christiantheology-philosophy/.

3. Murray, Michael and Rea, Michael, "Philosophy and Christian Theology."


Copyright © 2011 James Edward Goetz

I Believe

Revision:

I believe in one God, the only uncreated. God always enjoys inexhaustible love, perfect power, and knowledge of all possibilities. God is three persons who share identical indivisible original nature. God made the substance of all creation and revealed the three divine persons as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, remained fully divine while becoming fully human. He ministered teaching, prophecy, and miracles. He died on a cross for our salvation from sin, resurrected from the dead, ascended to the heavenly dimensions, and poured out the Holy Spirit while establishing the church of saints. Christ will return, judge the living and the dead, and fully establish his glorious kingdom on earth.



First version:

I believe in one God, the only uncreated, always existing with perfect power, knowledge of all possibilities, unlimited love, justice, and as three persons of one indivisible divine nature. The three divine persons eternally and equally share the same indivisible glory, honor, and ability.

I believe God made the substance of all creation. And God revealed the three divine persons as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

I believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God. Christ remained fully divine while becoming fully human. He ministered teaching, prophecy, and miracles. He died on a cross for our salvation from sin, resurrected from the dead, ascended to the heavenly dimensions, and poured out the Holy Spirit while establishing the church of saints. Christ will return, judge the living and the dead, and fully establish his glorious kingdom on earth.



major revision 9/5/14, minor update 9/7/14

Copyright © 2011–2014 James Edward Goetz

Divine Omniscience and Probabilistic Events

I submitted a question to William Lane Craig (http://www.reasonablefaith.org):

Dear Dr. Craig,

I'm a trinitarian and assume Molinist divine omniscience (middle knowledge [MK]) and exhaustive definite foreknowledge [EDF]). My Molinist assumption recently included that EDF in a universe (spacetime continuum plus possible hyper-dimensions for the heavenly realms and perhaps gravity) with probabilistic mechanics is possible for an omniscient deity when the deity creates the universe with static time, but EDF is not possible when the deity creates the universe with dynamic time. For example, I suppose that God could foreknow the outcome of a fair coin toss only if the fair coin toss occurred in static time. Moreover, if God doesn't know the outcome of probabilistic events such as a fair coin toss, then God doesn't know what circumstances his free will creatures would face unless God actually determines the outcome of most probabilistic events. Additionally, I assume that there is no middle ground between EDF and open theism. Given these assumptions, I felt surprised when I read your God, Time, and Eternity (2002) speech and saw that you're a Molinist who holds to a dynamic theory of time. Could you help to explain how God knows the outcome of probabilistic events in a universe with dynamic time?

I will clarify that I hope to find a better answer than saying that the Bible clearly teaches that God knows all truth about the future while philosophical evidence points to a dynamic theory of time. Perhaps somebody might argue that God knowing all truth about future events doesn't necessitate EDF, but I would need an explanation of that. I will also clarify that until I recently reread your 2002 article, I supposed that a dynamic theory of time necessitated open theism while a static theory of time necessitated closed theism, while Molinist closed theism appears to me as the best description of divine omniscience. However, I agree that there are major problems with static time according to your critique and the critiques of others. Likewise, I will try to humbly broaden my imagination of divine omniscience and time.

I suppose that I would reject Molinism if it insisted that most apparently probabilistic events are actually determined. (Hey, I made a counter factual prediction about myself.:) For example, Molinism implies that that God knows the truth about all future probabilistic events. Perhaps we should merely accept this mystery, but I suppose that the cat is out of the bag and the paradox needs an attempt of an explanation.

On my part, I'm contemplating a model that combines MK, EDF, and a dynamic theory of time. I also suppose that since the creation decision, God exists both transcendent to and immanent in the universe. I additionally suppose that God's decision to create the universe included foreordination of all divine intervention during the literal endless temporal progression of the creation that endures. Furthermore, this decision occurred in an instant, while decision making of an omniscient deity in regards to a universe with a literal endless temporal progression would never take longer than an instant. For example, no amount of time and temporal experience could ever help an omniscient deity make a better decision. Given these assumptions, perhaps in some way the creation is in quasi-static time only in the perspective of God's transcendence while the creation is in dynamic time in the perspective of God's imminence. Granted that I need a lot of work on this, but at least I have a thesis statement. Anyway, as I asked above, Could you help to explain how God knows the outcome of probabilistic events in a universe with dynamic time?

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

James Goetz

P.S. Soon after I posted this, I realized that I misunderstood Molinism and never actually held to it (9/27/2023).

Conditional Futurism: New Perspective of End-Time Prophecy

Distribution and Review Links (Updated 4/27/2012)

Resource Publications (an imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers) released
Conditional Futurism: New Perspective of End-Time Prophecy on 1/11/2012.

Sample chapters in Kindle edition available at Amazon.com USA, Amazon.fr France, Amazon.de Germany, Amazon.it Italy, Amazon.es Spain, and Amazon.co.uk UK.

Book Description:

Conditional Futurism introduces a new perspective of end-time theology (eschatology). The book holds to Christian futurism while integrating the Apocalypse of John with the conditional dynamics of prophecy taught in Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and various other books throughout the Old Testament. The new paradigm concludes that the final antichrist (also known as the man of lawlessness, the beast, and the eighth king) may read the apocalyptic prophecy of his doom while deciding instead to repent of evil and turn to the Lord, which is a biblical option that would fulfill the divine purposes of the apocalypse. This cutting-edge scholarship also develops new biblical models of angels appearing as humans, the descent of Christ into hell, and the kings in Revelation that incorporate with this end-time theology that encourages hope in all circumstances.

Wipf and Stock sells Conditional Futurism to wholesalers, retailers, and consumers around the world. See the publishers brochure with reviews archived at Scribd:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/79717778/.

See the first post-publication review at The Christian Manifesto.

Pre-publication Endorsements and Review:

"James Goetz leads us on a tour of the whole Bible, from Genesis to Revelation, to explore what it has to say about future judgment and salvation. He well appreciates that biblical prophesies can have multiple fulfillments and takes this into account in his wide-ranging explorations. Concerning judgment, he argues that the many biblical texts relating to the future are not simply unconditional predictions of what will happen but are conditional outcomes. If we repent, we can avoid the consequences that God says will be our fate. Goetz even holds out hope for postmortem conversion, even from within the Lake of Fire itself. This is a perspective that warrants careful consideration and further exploration."
Robin Parry
author of The Evangelical Universalist

"James Goetz's thoughtful defense of 'Conditional Futurism' should have great appeal to any evangelical who yearns for a wider hope. He persuasively argues, first, that Bible prophecies concerning future punishment typically forecast what will happen unless (or until) certain conditions are met and, second, that a strong biblical warrant exists for the possibility of postmortem conversions. His interpretation of the New Jerusalem with gates that never close is especially powerful in this regard."
Thomas Talbott
Emeritus Professor of Philosophy
Willamette University

"James Goetz's Conditional Futurism surveys the Bible from Genesis through Revelation, focusing on predictions, especially predictions of judgment. He concludes that these predictions were always conditional; that God would always relent if the recipients would repent. This leads him to the conclusion that even the antichrist might repent and be reconciled to Christ, and to the conclusion that postmortem conversions are also probable."
Dale A. Brueggemann
Missionary-Educator

"Though never a credo of orthodoxy, the belief that not a single created being—even Lucifer himself—stands outside God's redemptive reach has a history nearly as long as the Church itself. In Conditional Futurism Goetz analyzes key biblical covenants and prophecies through this grid in a simple, straightforward presentation that suggests the Church rethink its position on postmortem conversions and end-time prophecy. All students of the Bible will find Goetz's selection and treatment of biblical passages both stimulating and challenging."
Rob Starner
Professor of Greek and New Testament
Southwestern A/G University

"Goetz has written a readable study suitable for lay readers interested in biblical end-times prophecies. Starting with a high view of Scripture, he challenges the idea that these prophecies depict what will happen, arguing that, instead, they can plausibly be seen as characterizing what would happen in the absence of repentance. Especially in the case of conservative evangelicals, this book may motivate needed reassessment of popular interpretations of end-times prophecies."
Eric Reitan
Oklahoma State University

Original Post (July 26, 2010)
Wipf and Stock Publishers contracted me to complete the working title Conditional Futurism: New Perspective of End-Time Prophecy. Prior to this contract, I already posted some blog articles related to the book. See below:

Conditional Futurism in Sum

The Conditional Apocalypse of King Nebuchadnezzar

Nebuchadnezzar and the Kings in Revelation

The Kings of the Earth in Heaven

See the Table of Contents below:

1: Conditional Futurism in Sum
2: Interpretation of End-Time Prophecy
3: Genesis and the Mosaic Covenant
4: The Davidic Dynasty and Psalms
5: Isaiah
6: Jeremiah
7: Prince Gog from the Land of Magog
8: Zechariah
9: Daniel
10: The Gospels
11: Acts
12: The Letters of Paul and Hebrews
13: The Letters of Peter, Jude, and John
14: The Eighth King in Revelation
15: Judgment, the Kings of the Earth, and the Nations in Revelation
Subject Index
Author Index
Ancient Document Index