Who ever heard of a clockwork orange?..."The attempt to
impose upon man, a creature of growth and capable of sweetness, to ooze juicily
at the last round the bearded lips of God, to attempt to impose, I say, laws and
to a mechanical creation, against this I raise my sword-pen." - Anthony
Eternal Principles versus Natural Law
One argumentative person wrote about the IFISEEU.com site:
"I notice a claim that God cannot be bound by any kind of a larger than God law..."
"As I see it , he has to be. What you view as indifference , I see
as the ordinary reality that God does not interfere with physical
reality directly. In my view , the universe would fall apart if
God were to start doing that sort of thing . It would never
end; he would end up having to do favors for Tom, Dick, Harry,
Sally, and all of the trillions or quadrillions or whatever of
people not only on this Earth but throughout the Universe, and
every one of those favors would amount to a violation of
physical laws. You would have a lawless universe."
The argument presented above seems to be predicated on 5 or more unworthy assumptions:
1. The existence of some transcendent to human, “Center-of-power-and-control”
God. The IFISEEU site is challenging that whole
paradigm, and presenting the Creator as the initial or original human being,
with his children being equality and service like any worthy parent would
2. That the CREATED system or protocol of “natural law” is comparable to the
eternal ethical principles that were NOT created but were part of the Creator’s
character. I cannot agree that this is valid. The eternal principles were
NOT designed but are part of God's character and soul, and thus cannot ever
be changed.. Natural law was DESIGNED by the creator, and can be changed or
There is no good and evil above God that even God is bound
to apply. - Jacques Ellul, The Subversion of Christianity, Wm.
B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., Grand Rapids, MI, p. 15.
3. That a system or protocol–“natural law”–cannot be changed or bypassed under
special circumstances. In your analogy below, Genghis Khan tried to encode
systematize ethical principles into fiat law, and he probably did a pretty good
job for his fallen subjects, but that empire did NOT continue without changing
its operating systems as conditions changed, or without overriding these protocols under
4. That both physical reality and the Creator with his children
operate under law. The Creator and the unfallen citizens of the universe
do NOT operate by laws or rules, but rather operate by purpose, principles and
values. Since freedom is operating by principles and values with which you
agree, this is what any spiritually mature human being would want to do.
5. That Genghis Khan’s “law” or code was delivered in whole at one point in time
rather that develop and and changed over time. Our legal code in the
Western world is still evolving, AND we have judges and juries to decide BOTH whether
or not “violations” were committed, and if so, whether or not they violated
the SPIRIT or intent of the law, whether or not the actions were JUSTIFIED
by higher purpose, principles and values..
The creator and his children are not clockwork oranges, and we were made to
live out of inspiration and principles, not “law” backed up by automatic damage or