A question for calvinists

[skypair]

James 5:17 Elijah was a man just like us. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years. 18Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops. 19My brothers, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, 20remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

One of my favorite, most treasured scripture, psa109!

First, Elijah was like us. Wow! What doubts he had! Half of getting your prayers answered is BELIEVING that He hears you and loves you! The other half is His will, IMO.

skypair

 

[skypair]

I was going to say that it is impossible for mere humans to understand the ways of God.
But I like your scripture better. :thumbs:

We understand all we 1) need to and 2) want to, Amy.

skypair

 

[Amy.G]

We understand all we 1) need to and 2) want to, Amy.

skypair

1) Absolutely

2) I don't know about you, but I definitely do not understand all that I want to.

 

[webdog]

You have raised some crucial issues.

Have you ever heard of open theism or process theism?

Open theism says that God is still open to the future and doesn't know the future, only general possibilities, nothing for sure.

Process theism says that God is becoming[edited for spelling] what He will eventually be.

Do you pray? What do you believe about the God who answers prayer?

Why does it have to be either open or process theism? Why can't we just admit that we are not God, and don't know the magnitude of how He deals with His creation?

We see much Scripture dealing with God changing His mind and responding to man. Remember when God told Moses to move out of the way as He was about to destroy the Israelites...and subsequently through His seed the covenant promise would be realized? Was He kidding when He said that? Lying? Truthful? The text sure seems to imply that AFTER listening to Moses' reasoning He then relented. Is that open theism? I say no...it's God being God, and man not knowing how an omniscient God could deal with man in that manner.

 

[TCGreek]

Why does it have to be either open or process theism? Why can't we just admit that we are not God, and don't know the magnitude of how He deals with His creation?

Because there are such things as open and process forms of theism. Some of the things expressed in this thread, maybe, can fit in either camp.

But I do agree with what you said. That is where I'm. That's why I quoted Psalm 139:1-6.

But I don't think open or process theism are viable options. They lead to heresies, IMO.

We see much Scripture dealing with God changing His mind and responding to man. Remember when God told Moses to move out of the way as He was about to destroy the Israelites...and subsequently through His seed the covenant promise would be realized? Was He kidding when He said that? Lying? Truthful? The text sure seems to imply that AFTER listening to Moses' reasoning He then relented. Is that open theism? I say no...it's God being God, and man not knowing how an omniscient God could deal with man in that manner.

Webdog, I accept wholeheartedly your use of Scripture on this matter: God has his place and man his.

 

[The Archangel]

Why does it have to be either open or process theism? Why can't we just admit that we are not God, and don't know the magnitude of how He deals with His creation?

We see much Scripture dealing with God changing His mind and responding to man. Remember when God told Moses to move out of the way as He was about to destroy the Israelites...and subsequently through His seed the covenant promise would be realized? Was He kidding when He said that? Lying? Truthful? The text sure seems to imply that AFTER listening to Moses' reasoning He then relented. Is that open theism? I say no...it's God being God, and man not knowing how an omniscient God could deal with man in that manner.

Webdog,

My friend, you could not be more wrong with this passage. First off, the structure of this passage shows that God was testing Moses in much the same way He tested Abraham.

Why? Because earlier, in Egypt, before Moses killed the Egyptian slave master, he thought through his might that he would deliver his kinsmen. Acts 7 says:

24 And seeing one of them being wronged, he defended the oppressed man and avenged him by striking down the Egyptian. 25 He [Moses] supposed that his brothers would understand that God was giving them salvation by his hand, but they did not understand.

​

What God was apparently offering Moses was an unfathomable honor. But, Moses didn't take it. Why? He was more interested in God's glory than his own (quite a change from the old days).

God and Moses both knew that God's promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob cold be fulfilled by God by bringing a new nation from Moses because Moses was an Israelite. So, that's not the issue.

What is the issue is God testing Moses in a way that Moses argues to God that His glory would be diminished, in the eyes of the Egyptians, if He destroyed the people. Also, we see, in Exodus 33, Moses pleading for God Himself to go with the people, again, quite a change in Moses from the old days.

So the point here is the testing of Moses, by God, and we see that Moses has become quite the intercessor for his kinsman rather than trying to set himself up as a the defacto-dictator. No longer is Moses interested in himself, he is interested in performing God's calling on his life to the absolute best of his abilities and he knows, beyond a doubt, that God must be present (physically) if that is to happen.

Moses passed his test with flying colors (yes, only to fail another later), just as Abraham passed his test of sacrificing Isaac.

Also, one of the truths that we see in scripture over and over and over is that God simply does not "Change his mind." Many times when the scripture uses that language it is a simple anthropomorphism. Otherwise, the scripture would contradict itself and, worse yet, God would contradict Himself.

Certainly, as you suggest, there is more than a bit of mystery when it comes to God--what He does and how He does it. But, the scriptures are sufficient, they contain what He wants us to know (not that the scriptures are exhaustive of the knowledge and practice of God). One thing He has stated repeatedly is that He does not change His mind.

Also, there is a biblical order of initiation and response and God is always the initiator and man is always the responder. God acts and man responds. False, pagan religions (such as seen in the episode of Elijah and the prophets of Baal) always, in some way, turn this order up-side-down. The prophets of Baal thought there acts of devotion would entice Baal to respond. This is not the biblical pattern for worship or dealing with God or His dealings with us.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[skypair]

1) Absolutely

2) I don't know about you, but I definitely do not understand all that I want to.

:thumbs: God's timing on 2). I admit what I wanted to know wasn't always at my fingertips. Often there was much praying and study. But I will say this -- scripture says that "when He [Holy Spirit] comes, He will lead you into ALL wisdom." I believe that.

I believe the lack of knowing is on our part. We don't want to know for our own reasons and Isaiah gives us a clue on this one. "...Every man of the house of Israel that setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to the prophet; I the LORD will answer him that cometh according to the multitude of his idols;... 7 For every one of the house of Israel, or of the stranger that sojourneth in Israel, which separateth himself from me, and setteth up his idols in his heart, and putteth the stumblingblock of his iniquity before his face, and cometh to a prophet to enquire of him concerning me; I the LORD will answer him by myself: 8 And I will set my face against that man, and will make him a sign and a proverb, and I will cut him off from the midst of my people; and ye shall know that I am the LORD. " Ezek 14:4, 7-8

Israel, God's former people, fell into this problem when they inquired of God, Ezek 20:3. God cannot speak to him while he holds onto false theology but God will put that idol in front of his face and, barring him putting away his idol, will cut him off from among his people (re: Catholics, Mormons, SDA's, etc. All of these are groups with false theologies whom God has warned and cut off from His true church).

skypair

 

[skypair]

Rubato --- are you there?

Rubato,

This is a very complex question you ask regarding prayer and it is part of a bigger issue -- What does God foreknow and what does He foreordain?

Does God foreknow your prayer and foreordain His answer? (Free will)

Does God foreordain your prayer and foreordain His answer? (Calvinism/determinsim)

Does God not even know about your prayer, it surprises Him, and He ordains how He will answer it when He knows it? (Open theism)

Does God foreknow all the possible prayers you might make under certain conditions, foreordain the necessary conditions so that He can answer as He wills, and thus brings all things to the conclusion that He has planned? (Molinism/middle knowledge)

Do you see what a "can of worms" you have opened up??? :laugh:

To me, it is quite obvious that if God doesn't have "foreknowledge" (whereas scripture says He does) then any matrix/system that denies foreknowledge to God denies His omniscience and is, therefore by deductive reasoning, wrong.

Know further that, according to Calvinism, foreknowledge = foreordination (God has chosen whom He has chosen). That is, there is really no such thing as foreknowledge.

Now you should be able to choose the correct view, no?

skypair

 

[psalms109:31]

God

God doesn't lie to us to test us.

What we learn from moses is God is going to do what His word say's deliever His people.

There is nothing wrong with using our free will that God gave to us to do things for God as long as we give Him the glory for giving us the right to do it.

 

[webdog]

Webdog,

My friend, you could not be more wrong with this passage. First off, the structure of this passage shows that God was testing Moses in much the same way He tested Abraham.

Why? Because earlier, in Egypt, before Moses killed the Egyptian slave master, he thought through his might that he would deliver his kinsmen. Acts 7 says:

24 And seeing one of them being wronged, he defended the oppressed man and avenged him by striking down the Egyptian. 25 He [Moses] supposed that his brothers would understand that God was giving them salvation by his hand, but they did not understand.



​

What God was apparently offering Moses was an unfathomable honor. But, Moses didn't take it. Why? He was more interested in God's glory than his own (quite a change from the old days).

God and Moses both knew that God's promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob cold be fulfilled by God by bringing a new nation from Moses because Moses was an Israelite. So, that's not the issue.

What is the issue is God testing Moses in a way that Moses argues to God that His glory would be diminished, in the eyes of the Egyptians, if He destroyed the people. Also, we see, in Exodus 33, Moses pleading for God Himself to go with the people, again, quite a change in Moses from the old days.

So the point here is the testing of Moses, by God, and we see that Moses has become quite the intercessor for his kinsman rather than trying to set himself up as a the defacto-dictator. No longer is Moses interested in himself, he is interested in performing God's calling on his life to the absolute best of his abilities and he knows, beyond a doubt, that God must be present (physically) if that is to happen.

Moses passed his test with flying colors (yes, only to fail another later), just as Abraham passed his test of sacrificing Isaac.

Also, one of the truths that we see in scripture over and over and over is that God simply does not "Change his mind." Many times when the scripture uses that language it is a simple anthropomorphism. Otherwise, the scripture would contradict itself and, worse yet, God would contradict Himself.

Certainly, as you suggest, there is more than a bit of mystery when it comes to God--what He does and how He does it. But, the scriptures are sufficient, they contain what He wants us to know (not that the scriptures are exhaustive of the knowledge and practice of God). One thing He has stated repeatedly is that He does not change His mind.

Also, there is a biblical order of initiation and response and God is always the initiator and man is always the responder. God acts and man responds. False, pagan religions (such as seen in the episode of Elijah and the prophets of Baal) always, in some way, turn this order up-side-down. The prophets of Baal thought there acts of devotion would entice Baal to respond. This is not the biblical pattern for worship or dealing with God or His dealings with us.

Blessings,

The Archangel

I'm sorry, but it is my belief your view is not consistant with the rest of Scripture, and takes presupposition and eisegesis to come to this conclusion. God doesn't lie to man in order to test man. He places us in circumstances or places circumstances in front of us...but never dishonesty. I understand your take on this passage, because it is the only one that will allow for a calvinistic stance...but I will just take it at face value that God said He was going to do something...Moses replied...God then decided to not go through with it. How this works with God being omniscient...who knows...but it He cannot be put into a theological box to explain how He worked in that situation.

 

[psalms109:31]

Paths

1 Samuel 15:29
He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind."

God word teaches us that God doesn't change His mind and He doesn't, but He will change our path by His word.

God will tell Abraham to go kill his son and that is the direction He wanted him to go, but when he got there to change Abraham direction for God to provide the sacrifice.

 

[The Archangel]

I'm sorry, but it is my belief your view is not consistant with the rest of Scripture, and takes presupposition and eisegesis to come to this conclusion. God doesn't lie to man in order to test man. He places us in circumstances or places circumstances in front of us...but never dishonesty. I understand your take on this passage, because it is the only one that will allow for a calvinistic stance...but I will just take it at face value that God said He was going to do something...Moses replied...God then decided to not go through with it. How this works with God being omniscient...who knows...but it He cannot be put into a theological box to explain how He worked in that situation.

Unfortunately, your take on the passage creates a contradiction in scripture.

Numbers 23:19

19 God is not man, that he should lie,
or a son of man, that he should change his mind.
Has he said, and will he not do it?
Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?

​

So, rather than create a contradiction with incomplete theology, I'll let scripture interpret scripture. Since God does not lie and since God does not change His mind, it must be that the Exodus 32 passage is dealing with a test. This is the only option that takes all the biblical data into consideration.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[webdog]

1 Samuel 15:29
He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a man, that he should change his mind."

God word teaches us that God doesn't change His mind and He doesn't, but He will change our path by His word.

God will tell Abraham to go kill his son and that is the direction He wanted him to go, but when he got there to change Abraham direction for God to provide the sacrifice.

...then you also have the contradiction it seems where God stated He wished that He would have never created man.

 

[webdog]

Unfortunately, your take on the passage creates a contradiction in scripture.

Numbers 23:19

19 God is not man, that he should lie,
or a son of man, that he should change his mind.
Has he said, and will he not do it?
Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?







​

So, rather than create a contradiction with incomplete theology, I'll let scripture interpret scripture. Since God does not lie and since God does not change His mind, it must be that the Exodus 32 passage is dealing with a test. This is the only option that takes all the biblical data into consideration.

Blessings,

The Archangel

I guess I don't understand what is wrong with having an "incomplete theology", considering only God is "complete", and every theological position is incomplete. Are you saying calvinism is a "complete theology"?
Why should the passage in Exodus be filtered through this, and not vice versa?

*edited...brain cramp

 

[Rubato 1]

Rubato,

This is a very complex question you ask regarding prayer and it is part of a bigger issue -- What does God foreknow and what does He foreordain?

Does God foreknow your prayer and foreordain His answer? (Free will)

Does God foreordain your prayer and foreordain His answer? (Calvinism/determinsim)

Does God not even know about your prayer, it surprises Him, and He ordains how He will answer it when He knows it? (Open theism)

Does God foreknow all the possible prayers you might make under certain conditions, foreordain the necessary conditions so that He can answer as He wills, and thus brings all things to the conclusion that He has planned? (Molinism/middle knowledge)

Do you see what a "can of worms" you have opened up??? :laugh:

To me, it is quite obvious that if God doesn't have "foreknowledge" (whereas scripture says He does) then any matrix/system that denies foreknowledge to God denies His omniscience and is, therefore by deductive reasoning, wrong.

Know further that, according to Calvinism, foreknowledge = foreordination (God has chosen whom He has chosen). That is, there is really no such thing as foreknowledge.

Now you should be able to choose the correct view, no?

skypair

OK, I'm here. Sorry, I've been pretty busy.
Skyp, without trying to differentiate foreknowledge and foreordination, I know that God knows all things. period. So it must be that there are some things which are not to be known yet. God does not know what my descision will be, because I have not made that descision yet. Therefore, the future is like a dotted line; God has predetermined certain things, but others are up to the individual. It is like driving to St. Louis: I know where I will end up, and I know certain things that will happen on the way, but I don't know all of the little details, because those details will be decided upon thier occurance. TCGreek helped me to see it this way.

What you describe as middle knowledge still shows that He does not know what our descision will be until we make it, and since he already knows all possibilities in his omniscience, I would say that this theory is superfluous to the others.

All I know is that it is unreasonable to think that God has made all of our descisions for us. It is equally unreasonable to think that God is suprised by turns of events like we are.

 

[Rubato 1]

Also, one of the truths that we see in scripture over and over and over is that God simply does not "Change his mind." Many times when the scripture uses that language it is a simple anthropomorphism. Otherwise, the scripture would contradict itself and, worse yet, God would contradict Himself.

But God clearly told Nineveh that he would destroy the city, and then did not for several generations. If this is not a 'change of mind,' It is a lie, a fear tactic, or something...

 

[webdog]

But God clearly told Nineveh that he would destroy the city, and then did not for several generations. If this is not a 'change of mind,' It is a lie, a fear tactic, or something...

...there are many more Scriptures along the same lines. I believe it is dangerous to take a majority of these Scriptures and filter them through a single verse. I believe the proper hermeuntetical approach is to take this verse and see how it applies to the majority in context.

 

[Rubato 1]

...there are many more Scriptures along the same lines. I believe it is dangerous to take a majority of these Scriptures and filter them through a single verse. I believe the proper hermeuntetical approach is to take this verse and see how it applies to the majority in context.

No. I think it is best to take this passage for exaclty what it says. God literally said He would destroy Nineveh in forty days. Either He deliberately lied, or he changed his mind like Jonah said, 'repented of the evil that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.'
Your 'hermaneutics' would only serve to say: 'God did not mean what he said.' Do we have to study to understand God because he is incapable of expressing his thoughts to us?

 

[webdog]

No. I think it is best to take this passage for exaclty what it says. God literally said He would destroy Nineveh in forty days. Either He deliberately lied, or he changed his mind like Jonah said, 'repented of the evil that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.'
Your 'hermaneutics' would only serve to say: 'God did not mean what he said.' Do we have to study to understand God because he is incapable of expressing his thoughts to us?

If you re-read my post (and last couple)...I am saying the exact same thing you are. I'm agreeing with you

 

[Rubato 1]

If you re-read my post (and last couple)...I am saying the exact same thing you are. I'm agreeing with you

Hee. Hee.
Oops. like I said, I've been out a couple days and pretty busy...
Oh, well. I'll just copy/paste that answer for someone else, then...