Could Judas have chosen to not betray Jesus?

Sooo-ey!!! Pig!!!

Back to the argument!

Ed

 

Larry

Do you not feel "tangled in your own web" on this one??

To foreknow could either mean perfect foreknowledge of OUR choices -- or it could be God's determinism/control of every choice we make, right?

Though the ends are the same, foreknowledge allows free will but your determinism doesn't, correct? I mean, under free will, they could change their minds and God knowingly use their decisions to accomplish His purposes. They opposite cannot be said, can it? That they have free will if God predetermines their actions.

So are both free will and predestination scriptural? Then there has to be a difference in what they mean and how they are applied.

And you can't say free will and foreknowledge disallows sovereignty over the outcomes such that predetermination is the only viable option.

skypair

 

Yeah, but reformbelieve wants to make God the Author of Judas sin. Fits more with his characterizations of God than letting Judas choose to betray Jesus himself.

Or maybe rf still holds Judas responsible for the sin thus turning "God's foreknowledge" into "Calvin's permissive will" so as to get the blood off God's hands.

Just make sure that your construct doesn't give Judas "free will" and he's happy!

skypair

 

It was prophesied how could Judas behave in any other way and God knew it? Is this free will? Have I understood it?

john.

 

Not at all. In fact, in all my years of discussion, I have never seen a coherent answer to it.

Not really, but either way, it doesn't help. When the Greek word is used of God it speaks of an intimate knowledge, a choosing.

Well, loads of problems here. Let me just highlight a few. In your view of foreknowledge, you have not preserved man's free will because they cannot change their minds. If God knows everything eternally, then he knows what they will do. They can do nothing else than what he knows. They are bound by God's prescience.

In my view, they have free will. They can do whatever they want. I thought I have made that clear several times.

They fit together just fine. I have no problems with it.

I think your view doesn't accomplish what you need it to. You can't preserve your idea of free will without being an open theist.

 

i think Pastor Larry just gave one of the best clues to answer his own topic

this is fallacious approach. first is the assumption that God knew what Judas is going to decide - whatever Judas' final decision would be, God would have certainly known it. Judas changing his mind would only mean that God would have known that as well.

the statement is saying that God knew what Judas would decide, but quietly implies that He is not sure if Judas is going to change is mind after all.

the statement assumed that God know Judas' final decision. so to question if Judas would have changed his mind if God already knew his final decision is simply logically incorrect.

its approach was that the topic assumes God reading the future, and placed a problem that such reading from God is the cause of the future.

come on now. i am amazed why calvinists say such statement that could be said the same for them. assuming calvinist predestination, God could have not chosen to create humans whom He does not plan to elect in the first place. But He did, knowing that the person does not have the capacity to have faith in Christ.

i wander if this cannot be said to Calvinists as well?