Featured What is "Sovereignty"??

Before the free agent exists? On what basis does God know it? Is the action independent of the agent, i.e., exists before the agent does? If so, then the agent isn't free, but dependent on the action.

Think of it this way. What if God's actions were known before He decided to do them? How independent would you consider God? Would God then still be a free agent? Of course not--He would be subservient to whatever power already knew what He would decide.

So if God knows the future but can't change it, He either creates the future at a particular time and is then bound by what He decided to create (Calvinism), or He is bound by the future created by some other means (Arminianism). These, as far as I can tell, are the only two options if the future is fixed, and neither is biblically sound.

Thus, the future is NOT fixed, and God's sovereignty does NOT depend on His knowing the future exhaustively.

Knowing what a free agent who exists is going to do is a lot easier than knowing what a non-existing free agent will do, I think.

 

On what basis do you define omniscience? Do you apply the word without caveat? Why?

Tell me this. Can God destroy a city before it is built? If not, then He's subject to time, in that sense. He's not subject to time in the sense that we are, where we get older and more decrepit.

Tell me about the second person of the Trinity. Was He always the "son of man"?

 

I assume you are referring to this verse:
Isaiah 46:10
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

But if you read that verse, God tells us on what basis He knows the end (not the "future", mind you, but the "end"). He's telling us the "things...not yet done", saying "I will do all my pleasure." This verse confirms what I was saying--that God knows based on what He plans to accomplish. Otherwise, it confirms what @1689Dave was saying, that God takes pleasure in sin, if you apply it to everything.

 

Of these things, Peter's denial is the hardest, so I'll save that til last.

Judas. There are two things to remember about this one. 1. Judas' betrayal was predicted long before Judas existed. But there was no name attached to it. 2. Jesus chose His disciples, and knew that one was a devil from the beginning.
[Jhn 6:64, 70 KJV] 64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. ... 70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?

I may be reading this wrong, but if Jesus knew from the beginning who would betray Him, yet still chose Judas, who betrayed Him, then Jesus' choice of Judas solidified the prophecy, just as Is 46:10 says.

The donkey. I don't see this as that hard a thing. We don't know the back-story. This might not have been anything outstanding. Maybe Jesus knew the guy, but the disciples did not. Maybe Jesus had arranged it with Him on a previous occasion. Maybe it was Joseph of Arimathea, or Nicodemus. Maybe it was a friend of Lazarus, Martha and Mary. There are lots of ways for this to work. Jesus knew where the donkey was tied up and knew the owner, so He said, "If anyone asks, tell him the Lord hath need of it." Notice that Jesus did not give the name of the person that would ask, nor did He even say for sure that someone would ask, but only "If anyone ask".

Peter. This is the hardest, because Jesus was so sure of the outcome. But we also know that Jesus knew Peter very well, He knew Peter's weaknesses, He knew the devil had asked permission to tempt Peter to deny Him. And He knows the wiles of the evil one. He also knows how to make a cock stay silent and how to make one crow, so this one doesn't seem too hard for Him.

 

[Isa 41:2-4 KJV] 2 Who raised up the righteous [man] from the east, called him to his foot, gave the nations before him, and made [him] rule over kings? he gave [them] as the dust to his sword, [and] as driven stubble to his bow. 3 He pursued them, [and] passed safely; [even] by the way [that] he had not gone with his feet. 4 Who hath wrought and done [it], calling the generations from the beginning? I the LORD, the first, and with the last; I [am] he.

[Isa 44:28 KJV] 28 That saith of Cyrus, [He is] my shepherd, and shall perform all my pleasure: even saying to Jerusalem, Thou shalt be built; and to the temple, Thy foundation shall be laid.

God knew what Cyrus was going to do because He was going to make sure it happened. And is it hard to find someone named Cyrus to do this? Cyrus was not the first ruler of that name. He was the second. Cyrus the second, grandson of Cyrus the first, I believe, is the one that let the Jews go home. He may have other Cyruses to choose from, but more likely He sent someone to tell them what to name him. It might be kind of like calling for a prophet named "John" to be the forerunner of Jesus. Those named "John" were plentiful in that time, it seems.

 

Shall we review a couple of those scriptures? Like when God told Hezekiah he was going to die of the sickness, and then said he would recover from the sickness? If God really knew Hezekiah's future (15 more years), why did it take Him 2 tries to get it right?

Are you saying that God is not awesome if He relates to people in time?

 

I answered those example of yours. Why won't you answer mine?

I've already had to move away from Calvinism and Arminianism, after trying to fit them into each other in a "Calminian" sort of fashion. Didn't work. The reason it didn't work is that they don't fit together at all, except for the exhaustive foreknowledge thing. And the Bible never claims exhaustive foreknowledge for God. Never.

 

I guess I have a similar question for you. Why does God's sovereignty need to depend on His knowing the future exhaustively, such that even you, apparently, are willing to say God is the author of sin, since He is ordaining events in response to things humans do, but the humans are not yet around to do them.

The only way that can work is if God is doing it in a general fashion, i.e., that he knows humans will sin, but not the exact sins they will commit. He knows some will repent, but He doesn't know which ones. He knows many will be saved, and many will be damned, but He doesn't write their name in heaven until He meets them and gets to know them.

And no, the prophets were giving the actual words of God. If it looks like guessing to you (it doesn't to me), then you are claiming God is guessing? The verses I pointed to were not written before the foundation of the world. Why would you assume they say that the events were all determined before the foundation of the world? That's a rather large leap in interpretation, don't you think?

God knows ME. Not something He dreamed up to follow a script before He created me. God knew Adam, but He didn't know what Adam would call the animals.
[Gen 2:19 KJV] 19 And out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought [them] unto Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that [was] the name thereof.

God made Adam to be a thinker, to be creative with the things God made, and God seemed to delight in watching him. Does God know what I'll eat for breakfast tomorrow? Maybe. He could make sure I eat a particular thing by fencing off the other choices in some way (like making them spoil before tomorrow). But does an omnipotent God really have to decide (ordain) before the foundation of the world what I'm going to have for breakfast every day of my life?

 

This is a nice caricature, but if it helps you avoid the contradictions of your theology, I guess you can use it. I don't reject the deity of Christ, nor do I think God is made in the image of man. But I do believe man is made in the image of God, and God is a creative and responsive and relational being. What part of man do you think is made in God's image, if everything man does was ordained before the foundation of the world?